Dumb Shit on Wikipedia / Wikimedia Contributor General

[Troonos]

Larry Sanger has had his account blocked indefinitely (permabanned) on Wikipedia by people who politically disagreed with him:

Being banned from a far-left echo chamber for calling it a far-left echo chamber, then being told to heed the words of "Chaotic Enby" is peak 2026.

If MechaHitler finally rises to power, I hope Wiki Editors and Reddit Jannies are the first groups genocided.

 

[X Prime]

But there needs to be a new platform for growth, it doesn't mean any other part of the site needs to change, at all.

That is never how it works. That just leads to entryism where idiots go "wahhh why isn't the rest of the site like IBSERT_SECTION_HERE."

Some of us have been on the Internet before, we know how that sort of thing goes. Deep Thots already exists anyway, close enough.

 

[FloorPlanGreen]

That just leads to entryism where idiots go "wahhh why isn't the rest of the site like IBSERT_SECTION_HERE."

Its almost like we already had that happen with Gorl Tawk. Yet its still around.

But sure, yeah, you're right.

To ensure such a thing wouldn't happen you'd have to have the most stubborn man alive as forum master/host. Who out of pure spite would keep his site to his vision as often as possible.

Too bad we don't know anyone like that! It is a shame!

 

[Sayer of the N-Word]

Conservatives seething over Wikipedia for not affirming their delusions is always great. The site has its problems, but none of them would be fixed with an influx of painfully stupid X users who'll get angry and confused that they can't just write whatever they want like on social media.

 

[The Jerkmate Joker]

Sanger getting banned from Wikipedia is total bullshit that just goes to show how far that site has fallen. I can't believe I ever contributed to that tranny-run shithole.

Even reading all the various "rules" he allegedly broke made me nauseous. You can't encourage people to join Wikipedia in order to affect change at Wikipedia? You can't try to change Wikipedia if your desired changes run contrary to the current zeitgeist's ideals (thus making all changes inherently considered hostile)? You can't argue against their current ideals because it turns the website into a battleground?

That's just the start of it. If you look at what sources they consider "reliable" it's even worse. Not only are they almost all left-leaning, but they also don't allow you to cite primary sources. All the information on there is basically required to have first been run through a left-wing opinion filter.

 

[D_Tractor]

Inflation will eventually hit Gamergate until the official story is that Zoe Quinn fucked 6 million guys for good Depression Quest reviews.

Six million, six hundred, what's the difference?

 

[Jimjamflimflam]

You joke but Null was saying he believed the forum had zero long term room for growth after the Gorl Tawk drama.

Tell me more

 

[Exegesis]

Conservatives seething over Wikipedia for not affirming their delusions is always great. The site has its problems, but none of them would be fixed with an influx of painfully stupid X users who'll get angry and confused that they can't just write whatever they want like on social media.

We're talking about the same website that still thinks we're responsible for some retarded trannies committing suicide and has articles that defend pedophilia.
Come on, you're in an almost 500 page thread that has thousands of screenshots of the asinine shit put into wikipedo and you think they don't have any major problems?

 

[FloorPlanGreen]

Spoiler: Sorry for derailing and shitting up your thread as much as I have frens

Tell me more
Wyświetl załącznik 9184685

I won’t majorly paraphrase his words but if you want to get an idea of where he is coming from despite me not 100% agreeing that the site is as damaged as he thinks. (Not that my opinion really matters)

I also don’t want to bother him with a quote.

Starts hereish

Page 8

Wątek 'Now that Lidl Drip has left the site, can we remove the option to private one's profile?'

9 Cze 2026

• NuII's Clitty💦
• Odpowiedzi: 690
• Forum: Q&A

Reakcje: x 68 x 11 x 9 x 4 x 2 x 3 x 2 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 5 x 2 x 1

 

[Noble Redditor]

The controversy about the Cultural Marxism page is what made me give up on Wikipedia

Yes, anytime the subject of cultural marxism comes up it serves as a reminder to never debate those people. It's funny how much it triggers them, but at the same time it's pathetic and kind of scary how they will never cede ground about it. You'd sooner get the Pope to denounce the existence of Jesus before you'd get a redditor to admit that cultural marxism is a thing. I'm not even talking about the term in a literal sense - even as an abstract concept, they deny its existence. Even though colleges all over the world teach "critical theory" as a required course every semester and have for the last 50 years there is no evidence that cultural analysis through a Marxist lens has ever been a thing. You'd have to be the dumbest Nazi on Earth to think otherwise.

But hopefully anyone who has crossed that path has learned the valuable lesson that you don't debate Marxists for the same reason you don't argue with a fool.

 

[Sicko Hunter]

Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

>Study done during the 1970s shows that black children adopted and raised by college educated white parents still consistently underperform on IQ tests compared to their white peers raised in near identical conditions
>Scientists point out it could prove a link between genetics being more important then environmental factors
>Wikipedia deboonks this with a Guardian article, a Vox article and two links to papers talking about "scientific racism" with no actual attempt at refuting the link

 

[MunsterCheeseJr]

I remember back when feminists were started to be given classes and assignments to edit wikipedia articles. Several people brought this up as a point of concern since they would have brought a bias to wikipedia. I can't remember which co-founder stood up for this and encouraged teaching feminists how to edit articles.

Was it Wales or Singer?

Whatever the case, that was the start of the end of wikipedia.

 

[crowabunga]

Conservatives seething over Wikipedia for not affirming their delusions is always great. The site has its problems, but none of them would be fixed with an influx of painfully stupid X users who'll get angry and confused that they can't just write whatever they want like on social media.

As much as it pains me to admit, I don't think there's any reasonable group both large and terminally online enough to "fix" Wikipedia; therefore, any "rightward" shift wouldn't be moderating, but a shift towards a different flavor of esoteric wingcuckery.

 

[SCV]

As for the linked discussion - well here it is in full - been trying to archive but it's gone to shit and can't access it, so if others can do it, all the better.

https://archive.ph/mBc1R

 

[Shadow the Niggerhog]

 

[wierfrost87]

The site has its problems, but none of them would be fixed with an influx of painfully stupid X users who'll get angry and confused that they can't just write whatever they want like on social media.

Just like it’s done so well with a bunch of liberal retards infecting it with left-wing bias?

If someone on Wikipedia wants to build interest in their project from people not on Wikipedia, how would they do that? If people on X see a project and are interested in contributing, why can’t they? Should they be going to the Bluesky instead because that’s totally where the intellectual powerhouses are?

That’s like saying that an individual doing academic research can’t go anywhere outside their own institution to look for collaborators, even though that kind of thing is normal, healthy, and tends to build better knowledge. Except in the echo chamber of feminist dance theory where they just like to hear themselves talk.

 

[Would]

Sanger is example #121312435324 why lolbert ideology will always fail.
"Do whatever, just leave me alone; I have no interest in power" is just a fancy way of saying "rape me".

 

[ConanTheVintarian]

jews

 

[Xarpho's Return]

Even reading all the various "rules" he allegedly broke made me nauseous. You can't encourage people to join Wikipedia in order to affect change at Wikipedia? You can't try to change Wikipedia if your desired changes run contrary to the current zeitgeist's ideals (thus making all changes inherently considered hostile)? You can't argue against their current ideals because it turns the website into a battleground?

This just sounds like an Ouroboros of "rules" designed to prevent anyone from changing anything. The website is already a battleground of narrative building troglodytes who don't want to make an encyclopedia, they want their own Ministry of Truth.

That's dumb. My account is over 20 years old (the number of recent edits in the past 12 months I can count on my fingers) and I joined because there were some articles that I wanted to be seen created. I don't know what caused me to quit, but there were a bunch of things I didn't like. Some of what I remember was and what caused me to distance myself:
* Weirdo who was in Wikipedia nearly 24-7 (like, you could go on her...I'm assuming natal female since this was around 2011...edit history and it was nearly 24 hours solid with like a three-hour window of no edits) kept squatting on the article on my local mall
* Fast and loose definition of what "notability" was
* Fast and loose definition of what counted as a reference

I'm also pretty sure I applied to be a moderator at one point, and I was rejected. At the time I didn't know why, but it was clear that even back then, there was a club, and I wasn't in it.

Even some of my more recent edits which were big overhauls to a few (non-political) updates just got trashed with less-experienced edits that ruined the prose and flow of the article. The bullshit on Wikipedia is one of the things that ultimately caused me to make my own website, where I could write without my work being changed or deleted. (Honestly, that was a problem in college group projects as well...I could submit my portion of the work and the final result was something that was clearly adapted from what I wrote but not my work, not even edited to make it flow together better).

 

[ZipDisk]

used to be you could find the most obscure television series which some autists had lovingly curated with basically the script for every episode and the pedos started deleting or truncating the articles

Spoiler culture, literally. "If you want to know the ending you have to buy the ticket"

Fuck that. Sometimes I gotta leave early and I want to know how the episode ends. I'm not "Ruining it" for anyone but myself, and fuck those rulemongers.

Did find out Law and Order bitched out on the Luigi episode though (They don't provide the verdict)