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
scathefire said:
“Several experts”. Not even most experts. Just “several”. Sounds good enough to put on Wikipedia as an undisputed, certified fact. Lmao
Click to expand...
Good enough for journoscum (Who incestuously cite each other for their articles) it is good for Wikipedos.
 
Screenshot_20250314_030437.jpg
 
Bri*ish Wikipedian Quinnnnnby (he/him) is trying to delete the article for the UK's Homeland Party (archive) – which has been nipping at the heels of Reform after the latter group expressed its intent to commit suicide with Nigel Farage kicking out the party's main pro-remigration figure.

I'm not sure if it's a dunk of Wikipedia to call the Homeland Party "ethno-nationalist", given that a great many of the party's members and prospective members really want them to be this.

Maybe that's why he's trying to sweep it under the rug now that it's getting quasi-popular (recently crossing 1000 members in the wake of Reform UK's self-sabotage).
Note that the redlinks in my screenshots are generated by the Shinigami Eyes extension for Chrome/Brave, which highlights transphobic links in menstrual blood red. Because real women bleed.

This includes links, not only to the wiki pages of "far right" groups and politicians but, amusingly, the left-wing Guardian and Times newspapers as well.

screencapture-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Homeland-Party-United-Kingdom-2025-03-14-17_33_25_.webp

On the article's deletion discussion, Wikipedian JMWt expresses the article meets the notability guidelines, but qualifies it with "unfortunately". Why? Because he has "no affection for their politics". At least he admits it?

screencapture-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Wikipedia-Articles-for-deletion-Homeland-Party-United-Kin...webp

There is also an extremely autistic talk page (archive) on the Homeland Party.
screencapture-en-wikipedia-org-wiki-Talk-Homeland-Party-United-Kingdom-2025-03-14-18_54_39_.webp

There have also been recent edits by Quinnnnnby to remove a section on the party's environmentalism, and another one (since reverted) by Helper201 to remove the member count from the infobox, citing "WP:OR" (original research).
 
Last edited:
For a change, this isn't a dab on the tranny jannies. I've recently developed a hobby of reading declined unban requests. Sounds dry as fuck, right? But its fun to see wikipedos grovel like a beaten dog, and frequently the excuses are pretty funny. Too many to list here, but here's a morsel:

1742016353133.png


Wiki user said his sockpuppet was his partner, and they shouldn't have banned her because her mom just died, shame on you jannies. How wikiaddicted do you have to be to invent a dead mother? Just have some dignity, stop editing and touch grass.

@DoubleD Seems like its an unanimous keep for the article of the party so chalk that up as a W.
 
lolcow yoghurt said:
View attachment 7102542
Click to expand...
Is this the page for Skinny Puppy? The GITMO allegations section immediately gave it away. Huge fan of that band, political differences aside.

Anyways, Wikipedia is ruined by its overtly politically biased editors who are completely enabled by the actions of the equally-biased far-left admins such as that tranny Isabelle Belato as well as Daniel Case. It doesn't help either that a bunch of their featured articles display open, blatant favoritism in the selection process towards certain users and admins such as the admin Premeditated Chaos with her autistic obsession over Alexander McQueen, or Mike Christie with his equally-as autistic obsession over 1940s sci-fi magazines. Same goes for the amount of autistic leftist sperging in the "did you know" section. Yes, I'm throwing around the words "autistic" and "left" a lot, but that's just what Wikipedia is absolutely dominated by so I have no choice but to mention them repeatedly.

Apologies if this is politisperging, but I can't wait for the day the Wikimedia Foundation is taken over by an influential far-right figure and a bunch of the far-left staff and admins resign or are kicked out. I hate Elon with a burning passion and he is an absolute manchild, but that will be the only time I will support him aside from DOGE (partially) and Twitter to an extent: If he pulls what he did with either of those and buys out the Wikimedia Foundation and effectively Wikipedia, and then gradually, deservedly carves it all to bits and pieces.

Many of those Wikimedia websites are next to fucking useless anyways and could be closed or merged without anyone giving a single shit so that way the Foundation could save money and not relentlessly, annoyingly e-beg for money every single year (e.g. Wikispecies, Wikivoyage, Wikiquote, and Wikinews could be entirely closed down, and Wikisource, Wikibooks & Wikiversity could be effortlessly merged all into one single website). Wikipedia in itself is deeply functionally flawed and needs to be wiped clean in many ways aside from the articles, down to the editing policies and rules.

Larry Sanger was right about Wikipedia all along when he left the website because of Jimmy Wales being incredibly complicit with the leftists and not relying on purely factual information. It has lost its credibility on a vast majority of articles a number of years ago with the amount of bias towards the left, and is arguably almost as much of a leftist cesspool as Reddit with how a clear subset of users are autistic, terminally online faggots and trannies who spend much of their time bringing up "credible" left-biased sources to back up their faulty claims. May someone make Wikipedia great again.
 
Last edited:
TaimuRadiu said:
@Stocking Anarchy

Honestly Wikivoyage Wikiquote and Wikisource are all great.
Click to expand...
Wikivoyage is overshadowed by the fact that many other websites are far more recognized than it when it comes to travel guides, and therefore it's probably bleeding money from the Wikimedia Foundation's donors. I'm pretty sure the names Travelocity, Expedia, and Orbitz ring a bell to you.

Wikiquote is pretty much redundant when there's a ton of other quote websites online that can do just as good of a job as it if you search up anything on Jewgle.

That, along with the outdated, very expendable, and barely updated Wikispecies (everything on Wikispecies is on Wikipedia with far greater detail and information), Wikinews whose existence is pointless in itself, and the aforementioned Wikiquote & Wikivoyage, which I feel can all be closed down without almost anyone batting a single eye or caring.

And yes, Wikisource is extremely useful already as-is, and should be kept along with Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Commons, Wiktionary, Wikidata, Wikifunctions, and the Wikimedia Incubator, but I don't think it should coexist with Wikiversity and Wikibooks especially given how they all target the exact same demographic and are all extremely similar to each other. That is, without it seeming like the Wikimedia Foundation is effectively throwing all of the non-profit money into a pit to keep those three websites running, while relentlessly begging for even more donated money every single year in those annoying pop-ups at the top of each Wikipedia article. Much like a bunch of kikes at a company's shareholders' meeting.

So therefore, I'd say the best option is to merge Wikiversity and Wikibooks into Wikisource. You're going to kill three birds with one stone in that single move while saving a shitload of money and retaining info from those three websites into a combined single gigantic entity that can be an endless repository for free referential text & educational resources online. That, as well as Wikisource possibly becoming a leading authority online on the matter instead of just second rate which it always has been.
 
Last edited:
Stocking Anarchy said:
Is this the page for Skinny Puppy? The GITMO allegations section immediately gave it away. Huge fan of that band, political differences aside.
Click to expand...
Just looked them up, and holy shit that has to be the single most retarded publicity stunt I've ever seen a music act try to pull - and yes, I AM including all the niggers who've tried to have rap beefs with Weird Al in that ranking.
 
Corpun said:
Trump Meeting Word Count: 7,797 words

WW2 Word Count: 14,055 words

That article is just over half the length of the article on fucking World War II
Click to expand...

My absolute favorite that is my go-to whenever I need to make fun of wikipedia:

The Holocaust: 15k words, 100k characters, 128kbytes, 479 citations.

January 6th Capitol Attack: 48k words, 311k characters, 498kbytes, 636 citations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom