Dumb Shit on Wikipedia / Wikimedia Contributor General

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
DJ Grelle said:
I think the idea behind it has good intentions, but is hopelessly naive.
Click to expand...
It was better when it actually was naive. Now it's just cynical propaganda and the people running it openly admit they don't even care if what's on it is true.
 
AnOminous said:
It was better when it actually was naive. Now it's just cynical propaganda and the people running it openly admit they don't even care if what's on it is true.
Click to expand...
Larry Sanger is so hilariously autistic, I tried to commiserate with him on Twitter once and he lost his shit thinking I was making fun of him. He went on about how much of an asshole I am and blocked me before I could tell him I was trying to be supportive, lol.

I think the thing was that I used a double negative instead of a positive, and he couldn’t follow it
 
Rusty Metal Skull Gun said:
Look what's on Hacker News at the moment: https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...the-internet/FC3F7B9CBF951DD30C2648E7DEFB65EE, https://archive.is/GQ2PO
"Rule Ambiguity, Institutional Clashes, and Population Loss: How Wikipedia Became the Last Good Place on the Internet"

Sure, it's my go-to place for unbiased information on Trump, abortion, the Arab-Israeli conflicts, or anything to do with trannies.
Click to expand...

A qualitative content analysis shows that Wikipedia transformed from a dubious source of information in its early years to an increasingly reliable one over time. Process tracing shows that early outcomes of disputes over rule interpretations in different corners of the encyclopedia demobilized certain types of editors (while mobilizing others) and strengthened certain understandings of Wikipedia’s ambiguous rules (while weakening others). Over time, Wikipedians who supported fringe content departed or were ousted. Thus, population loss led to highly consequential institutional change.
Click to expand...

"We destroyed any opposition and made the place a homogenous status quo support tool. This is good and proves it is amazing."

I hate these people so goddamn much. Also TIL they banned The Daily Mail BEFORE they banned InfoWars which is fucking hilarious in showing how their first concern is political and has fuck all to do with reliability and trustworthiness.
 
Rusty Metal Skull Gun said:
Look what's on Hacker News at the moment: https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...the-internet/FC3F7B9CBF951DD30C2648E7DEFB65EE, https://archive.is/GQ2PO
"Rule Ambiguity, Institutional Clashes, and Population Loss: How Wikipedia Became the Last Good Place on the Internet"

Sure, it's my go-to place for unbiased information on Trump, abortion, the Arab-Israeli conflicts, or anything to do with trannies.
Click to expand...

From the article:
For example, Donald Trump’s 2016 election, the 2016 Brexit referendum, and the emergence of “fake news” websites may have caused Wikipedians to re-evaluate how they understand the rules of Wikipedia and the role of Wikipedia in society.
Click to expand...
"Re-evaluate how they understand the rules." That's one way of putting it.
 
Rusty Metal Skull Gun said:
Sure, it's my go-to place for unbiased information on Trump, abortion, the Arab-Israeli conflicts, or anything to do with trannies.
Click to expand...
Wikipedia can still be good for stuff that isn't political or "hot button", like the TRAPPIST-1 solar system, how electric motors work, or the diet of ants. But if it's something related to The Narrative™, expect wannabe commie "social justice" against the "far-right" "conspiracy theories" and Tumblr-esque insanity unbiased viewpoints.

(There was even some college that gave credit for "injecting feminist thinking" into Wikipedia, IIRC.)
 
Last edited:
ToroidalBoat said:
(There was even some college that gave credit for "injecting feminist thinking" into Wikipedia, IIRC.)
Click to expand...
There was. Most recently, I've seen a Jewish conference in Israel teaching the people there, probably some of the population on the dole, how to edit Wikipedia to favour Jews.
 
General Emílio Médici said:
I hate these people so goddamn much. Also TIL they banned The Daily Mail BEFORE they banned InfoWars which is fucking hilarious in showing how their first concern is political and has fuck all to do with reliability and trustworthiness.
Click to expand...
The fact they deprecate The Daily Mail and list the Grauniad as generally reliable really speaks for itself. I mean TDM sucks but tell me Grauniad's more objective.
 
ToroidalBoat said:
Wikipedia can still be good for stuff that isn't political or "hot button", like the TRAPPIST-1 solar system, how electric motors work, or the diet of ants.
Click to expand...
I can only assume because those subjects will cite sources from actual established papers and works, as opposed to CURRENT YEAR newspaper articles.
 
Go and look up killers on wikipedia. You will notice some do not have a picture, whilst some do. Search the killers name on the missing picture ones, notice a pattern on that?

I keep noticing things, noticing all day long.
 
whogoesthere said:
Go and look up killers on wikipedia. You will notice some do not have a picture, whilst some do. Search the killers name on the missing picture ones, notice a pattern on that?
Click to expand...
What's the point in pictures when they all look the same anyway?
 
There are no links to KF I could find in the "flightless bird fruit farm site bad" propaganda article (usually articles on websites have easy-to-find links to the sites). Japanese article has a link to the "RationalWiki" article on KF. Russian has KF links though.
 
Last edited:
Wikipedia on Japanophilia said:
Kim Morrissy of the media company Crunchyroll wrote that the use of the word otaku (person with consuming interests) in anime fandom can be hindered by the belief of some Westerners that its use constitutes cultural appropriation and that it can only refer to a Japanese person,[10] which the difference between of weeaboo and otaku could be similar compared to each other, the word otaku is a japanese word for nerd but with japanese culture, and the word "weeaboo" is techinally the non-japanese equilavent of otaku.
Click to expand...
1: おたく or オタク (otaku) pretty much means "geek" or "nerd" in Japanese. There's no "Japanese only" in the definition.

2: FFS SJW BS seems to be all over Wikipedia, like a roach infestation (like that mention of "cultural appropriation").
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom