Dumb Shit on Wikipedia / Wikimedia Contributor General

  • 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
Been looking for some Gumroad tax info today (for potential selling reasons) and happened upon its Wikipedia page, where someone’s been having a cry about MATI:
D939D858-4624-4710-87BA-B95B0FD9E730.png
Archive

More under the talk tab:
3E18DC5E-8E18-450E-909C-C90FC324CBC5.png
Archive
 
Fucking lunacy using that as the Farms being connected to the Chrisdtchurch shooting. EVen fellow wikipedos don't agree with it.
 
frap said:
Been looking for some Gumroad tax info today (for potential selling reasons) and happened upon its Wikipedia page, where someone’s been having a cry about MATI:
View attachment 2888887
Archive

More under the talk tab:
View attachment 2888892
Archive
Click to expand...
I agree that it's fucking stupid that Kiwifarms is in the opening of the article. It shouldn't even be in the article. The Gumroad article also mentions Sam Hyde and Boogie. Both of them are waaay more high profile and controversial than MATI, why aren't they in the opener?
 
Neigh said:
Created by a political wiki user.

View attachment 2890930
Click to expand...
Because making an article on someone who notably died during a certain event is not permitted but an unfunny Facebook group is totally fine because "Trend = Notable"

Also can I just point out how oddly worded this article is? I sounds more like a Wikia/Fandom article rather then a Wikipedia one "The group was created in May 2019 by two 20-year-olds. Membership of the group grew rapidly in late June 2019 following a tweet which went viral, and in July 2019, the group had roughly 10,000 posts per day. The majority of group members are millennials aged between 23 and 28 years old"

Or this is general Wikipedia stupidity and I'm just noticing.
 
Last edited:
dumb idiot said:
Bisexual lighting (archive)
The shitty skeleton render really adds to the article
View attachment 2892139
Click to expand...
dafuq.gif
Is this really as bad and unsourced and just plain autistic as it seemed to me? This is an article about some dumb shit that may not even exist, based on speculations from nobodies. Also if this would be true, vaporwave would be bisexual. But it isn't, it is 101% strict faggotry.
 
dumb idiot said:
Bisexual lighting (archive)
The shitty skeleton render really adds to the article
View attachment 2892139
Click to expand...
honestly the whole article is so fucking funny to me, because it's a subtle cope. bisexuals have the least clout of the LGBT crowd, much less now where trannies reign supreme and you need a new sexuality to describe liking chicks with blue eyes. so, they desperately latch on to a common color scheme being used in media, insisting it's a part of Bi Culture™ because they know nobody gives a fuck about bisexuals anymore.

(plus, you know a lot of zoomers who have been brainwashed into thinking that heterosexual = bad so they say they're "bisexual" because the straights are yucky)
 
I posted something similar (on the article for a Disney cartoon) awhile back in this thread, but I am starting to see more and more of these gay TV Tropes like essays on articles for movies/TV shows. Look at this essay in the middle of an article for a noir crime film:


Screenshot from 2022-01-18 23-51-45.png


...barely even attempts to connect it to the movie until the very end (you could put the same stupid essay in the article for any noir film, hence why its dumb to include this shit), and then starts to talk in some very unencyclopedic TV Tropes-speak.

The article then goes on to make a bunch of wrong observations about the movie being 'illegal to own' (its public domain you dumbass) and then some odd statements like this about the supposed availability or lack thereof of the book that the movie is based on:

Many websites that are known for selling antique titles no longer carry Chambers' "Once Too Often", and few copies exist in public and educational libraries. Private collectors make up the majority of ownership with this title, making it difficult for historians to track them all down or know the true total of books left in circulation.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
A random IP implies that a man in a picture is wearing a tie wrong, which starts a joke chain before someone admonishes the last person to do so. ( Diff )

1642614977202.png
 
Lol at Wiki pages "warning" you that it has been edited for undisclosed payments or advertising purposes. If you look at the edit history of the Canada Goose brand Wiki page, you'll notice an editing war circa December 2020 with users removing and re-adding content that is being accused of being "advertisement junk".
Canada goose wiki page.PNG

Editing war.PNG

EDIT: It seems like the user "Jiang612" created a Wiki account in 2020 with the only purpose of editing pages related to the Canada Goose company and its founder.
 
Last edited:
I decided to look up some more information about the music video for "Miserable" by Lit ( I had a playlist older music videos on in the background) because I was interested in the background of it since it was a rather weird video and to my absolute surprise (NOT REALLY), some giantess fetish weirdo summarized the entire video in extreme detail. Needless to say, I learned nothing expect that of course people jacked off to this video... for different reasons than the rest.
Miserable MV description.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom