Oh no wiki bros. How we will peddle our political propaganda now?

Oh no wiki bros. How we will peddle our political propaganda now?

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >muh neutrality
    Someone post the pic of the Evola wiki page.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I don't know what I'm looking for so I just took a screenshot

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Evola's thought is one of the most consistently "antiegalitarian, antiliberal, antidemocratic, and antipopular systems in the twentieth century".[10] Writings by Evola contain misogyny,[11] racism,[12] antisemitism,[13]
        >and attacks on Christianity and the Catholic Church.
        Chuds confused rn

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >>and attacks on Christianity and the Catholic Church.
          like nazi party? the frick are you even talking about

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            nazi party didn't give a frick about christians

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            holy moron

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            chud meltdown

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            god i love poltards

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            i dont care lol

            ahahaha

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            don't quote me with that guy ever again.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        [...]
        Never heard of this bloke but I mean it seems a reasonable summary. Clearly it's written to paint him as a has-been but that's because his side lost.

        It has been fixed now and it's okay, but when Steve Bannon started publicly quoting Evola normalgays had turned his page into a shitfest.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          How?
          This whole conversation is confusing as hell.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I don't know what I'm looking for so I just took a screenshot

      Never heard of this bloke but I mean it seems a reasonable summary. Clearly it's written to paint him as a has-been but that's because his side lost.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >muh muhness
      muh dick on yo face

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >not here to make a profit
      they say without an ounce of honesty, lying through their fricking teeth, knowing that most the moeny isn#t going to any of the server but higher ups
      >or to push a particular perspective
      LOL
      LMAO
      ROFL
      HAHAHAHAHAHA

      >or to push a particular perspective
      Uhm, yeah.
      But the "non-particular" perspective is common consensus, which actually translates to American sciences.

      Look up the Wikipedia article on "Circumcision".
      It reads like a fricking pro-circumcision pamphlet.
      The same few wiki warriors have been maintaining that page for YEARS to dismiss any and all research that points to circumcision affecting sexual pleasure, because they are trumped by the WHO/ American health associations.

      Isn't it because most of the Wikipedia contributors are left leaning, and essentially formed a "club" you have to be a part of to be able to have your contributions accepted?

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >40 MXN
    what third world country is this
    also they don't need money, 95% of it goes to supporting PMCs earning $400k a year to do nothing and travel the world
    also frick off in general

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >also frick off in general

      After you learn to write 🙂

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >what third world country is this
      spicland
      More proof that all /misc/shit spammers are disgusting beaners.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >I don't like this discussion, so it's "/pol/shit"

        You're not as civilized as you think.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      How do you even put a price on knowledge anyway?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Well, from observing the universities, it seems like they just come up with a random number, and tell young people that that's what it's worth.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          They find the absolute maximum the parents and creditors can afford and charge that.
          University is a dumb meme. Even if it were free it's an assembly line for intellectuals not philosophers. Want to get good at software engineering? Read the Bell Labs guys and Fowler and *go actually build things.* The first dozen or so projects are going to be unusable garbage but you'll learn way faster this way.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/defund-wikipedia/?utm_source=addons.mozilla.org&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=search

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      good morning sir

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      go back

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >botnet link
      >something ublock can do very easily

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If wikipedia dies which big tech corpo will start a similar site to control the narrative?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Google

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      ChatGPT or something like it will replace Wikipedia. Let me ask you something, Anon, two questions, actually. We pretty much know the answer to the first one: Do you expect any website, or service to last forever, and how many sites do you miss that vanished from the internet in the last 4-5 years?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Why wouldn't it last forever? Storage is cheaper than ever. Electricity is cheaper than ever. There is no reason for it to end.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >There is no reason for it to end.

          Just because you have the means to doesn't mean you will always be able to

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Cheaper than ever
          Please call my electric company and tell them that.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Elon Musk

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I imagine wikipedia will become a sort of product to be bought; it's too much valuable info to not be worth buying for any number of people, particularly if it's no longer available for free

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      id just set up a clone it cant be that hard

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If Wikipedia dies it will be replaced with ED.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >ED
        whats that?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Erectile dysfunction

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          ED is where I first came across furry porn (in 2008) and I'm in that rabbit hole to this day

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        We can only fricking hope

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Can you still download the whole 'pedia from around 2014?
    I think there was even an app for it

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      There was an app, but I forgot its name. I only remember it was on FDroid, it had an ostrich icon I think

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      There was an app, but I forgot its name. I only remember it was on FDroid, it had an ostrich icon I think

      Kiwix?
      https://www.f-droid.org/packages/org.kiwix.kiwixmobile/

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's the one.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why do they need hundreds of millions to serve some text and images? My server costs 5 bucks per month.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      how much clients does your server serve?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        200k requests daily, static pages only, running on an older gaming laptop, I should add that the entire site is stored in ram.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >not here to make a profit
    they say without an ounce of honesty, lying through their fricking teeth, knowing that most the moeny isn#t going to any of the server but higher ups
    >or to push a particular perspective
    LOL
    LMAO
    ROFL
    HAHAHAHAHAHA

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I lost an arbcom in 2007 to deletionists and never contributed to wikipedia again.
    Can't even fathom how bad it must be now with the article camping austists now also being political activists.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >political propaganda
    Go leave homosexual

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      moron.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This is why I don't donate to Wikipedia.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Letting the administrative class run things on their own was a mistake. If they'd remained in back offices not able to communicate with each other, while capitalist ceo founders remained firmly in control, society would likely be better off.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I hate Wikipedia so much

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I've noticed that the people who hate Wikipedia most have the most "interesting" takes. Often far-left or far-right but also just schizo stuff.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      ok troony

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        wat

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    why do so many people itt possess such vitriolic hate for wp? just don't use it for politics-related info if you think it's that biased. wikipedia has genuinely been irreplaceable for the continued survival of cultural, historical and other typically hereditary information in my community, as well as helped me learn a ton about other interesting cultures and topics like nature

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Irreplaceable for the continued survival of cultural, historical and other typically hereditary information
      If anything its highly destructive, this sole mantainer who had free reign just by virtue of being part of a troon clique basically killed the entire knowledge base of Scots and the Scot language, and this example is far from isolated.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Irreplaceable for the continued survival of cultural, historical and other typically hereditary information

        If they showed contrasting sources and information, sure, but that's not the case. Their approach to information is not scientific, but politically biased.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Irreplaceable for the continued survival of cultural, historical and other typically hereditary information

        If they showed contrasting sources and information, sure, but that's not the case. Their approach to information is not scientific, but politically biased.

        please read the entire sentence you are quoting, specifically the three words right afterwards
        having an easily accessible resource for learning about local history and traditions, especially when growing up in an environment where said topics aren't taught well or necessarily brought up much is really valuable, and wikipedia is one such resource (not to mention a hopping off point to find more related topics and sources)
        throwinf the baby out with the bathwater just because some political and politico-historical topics suffer from edit wars is silly

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You're not making any sense. Yes, it's a resource, yet it has room for improvement.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            sure, but in vast areas it is a trove of well-sourced and accurate info, yet some anons in this thread seem to think the entire site is a waste of disk space due to specific failings in (mainly) US-related areas, and don't seem to have any actual ideas for improvement
            wp's greatest problems likely exist due to its open contribution model (like in the scots wiki case), but said model has allowed it to have a massive library of connected articles, which is great for learning even when the individual articles have quality issues

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If I discover while reading on a topic that I know well that the information Wikipedia reports is wildly inaccurate, why would I then go on to trust it on matters I don't know enough about to tell if they're accurately representing them?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        not all subject matters are comparable. assuming your description comes a topic like nature or computing where the inaccurate information results from incompetence, that's an excellent argument, though even then you could opt to contribute and either fix or flag the issue.
        on the other hand, frequent and blatant disinformation in articles on certain subject matters like politics has an entirelt different root cause that doesn't apply to other fields like less politicized areas of history, technology and natural sciences, most of culture and tons of other subject matters. furthermore, anyone can detect inaccuracies in unfamiliar topics by comparing the article text to the cited source. (a process quite similar to comparing your own knowledge of familiar topics to claims seen on wikipedia and elsewhere)
        wikipedia is far from perfect, but with a touch of critical reading it's still one of the best resources of its kind, and, disregarding some future perfect AGI or whatever speculative scifi magic, possibly the best one we'll ever have, assuming people don't lose motivation to work on it

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          thanks chatgpt, very cool.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            trust me, a 100% authentic tired dumbass brain wrote this, i'm just verbose
            you can tell from the excellent spelling and multiple sentences with several words missing

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >whether you're able to give us 40 bucks
    >If everyone gave just 40 bucks
    >if we given you 40 bucks of knowledge why not give us back 40 bucks.

    Frick it's worse than a passive aggressive begging family member / friend. Frick off Wikipedia

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Jimmy Wales is a huge fricking homosexual and the wikimedia foundation are a bunch of gay wienersocking liberal shitpackers who snort each other's cum

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      He's a smut peddling israelite:
      https://web.archive.org/web/20170307122101/http://radioislam.org/islam/english/israelip/internet/jews_behind_internet.htm

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This guy has been begging me for money for 20 years already.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Kek

      >ED
      whats that?

      Encyclopedia Dramatica.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >or to push a particular perspective
    Uhm, yeah.
    But the "non-particular" perspective is common consensus, which actually translates to American sciences.

    Look up the Wikipedia article on "Circumcision".
    It reads like a fricking pro-circumcision pamphlet.
    The same few wiki warriors have been maintaining that page for YEARS to dismiss any and all research that points to circumcision affecting sexual pleasure, because they are trumped by the WHO/ American health associations.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      the israelite unironically harvests the foreskin of the american white man, for use in his satanic rituals.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        It is actually to make a face cream for rich israeliteesses, they also harvest SK foreskins.

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I'll give them money when they ban the israeli activists (liars) rewriting history on Wikipedia.

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    english wikipedia in pure US propaganda, they have been compromised for decades. it can only be trusted for technical topics, and AI is simply better for that purpose.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Never forget
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CANCER

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    i dont care lol

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *