1995
Comments (69)
sorted by:
66
UkDeplorable 66 points ago +66 / -0

Wikipedia is a bunch of leftist saddos with nothing better to do with their lives than write bullshit on a “reputable” site and squee with the power to ban dissent [citation not needed]

23
deleted 23 points ago +23 / -0
17
UkDeplorable 17 points ago +17 / -0

Yeah the log out and close tab buttons are useful

10
Fozra_ 10 points ago +10 / -0

Yeah I mean it’s pretty good if you want to know the difference between X butterfly and Y butterfly, but I’d probably stay away from the political shit. Especially the more modern stuff.

4
fwgr 4 points ago +4 / -0

What about gay frogs?

1
Long_time_lurker 1 point ago +1 / -0

You have to look up studies on endocrine disruption instead of the article on Alex Jones, which will contradict each other.

1
Long_time_lurker 1 point ago +1 / -0

The Talk pages are useful when they discuss the information they're removing and forget to scrub it.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
Long_time_lurker 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's pretty inconsistent last I looked, but yes, they can if you're too obvious about things. Better to have short conversations like "should XYZ get addressed somehow?" "it shouldn't? well, ok, have a nice day then" and then it's still available to those in the know.

20
FLatinoKAG 20 points ago +20 / -0

I have seen evidence of foreign manipulation in wikipedia articles as well.

12
Gurren_Laggan 12 points ago +12 / -0

Our teachers were right all along...it really is a shitty source that has no basis in reality.

When they use huffpo, slate, salon, et. all for their sources you know weve broken them.

31
deleted 31 points ago +31 / -0
16
Isolated_Patriot 16 points ago +16 / -0

░█░▀█▀░▀░▄▀▀░░░██▄▒██▀▒██▀░█▄░█

░█░▒█▒░░▒▄██▒░▒█▄█░█▄▄░█▄▄░█▒▀█

░█▀▄▒██▀░██▄░▄▀▄░▄▀▄░█▄░█░█▄▀▒██▀░█▀▄░░

▒█▄▀░█▄▄▒█▄█░▀▄▀░▀▄▀░█▒▀█░█▒█░█▄▄▒█▄▀░▄

27
deleted 27 points ago +27 / -0
18
deleted 18 points ago +18 / -0
16
Ih8leftists 16 points ago +16 / -0

Imagine that.

14
WishdoctorsSong 14 points ago +14 / -0

Thank you Wikipedia, for very clearly making the case for why its important to never give up print media.

9
Bax101 9 points ago +9 / -0

Anyone who uses wikipedia's page as a source really needs a kick in the ass. The fact anyone can edit it shows how much its controlled.

8
AngryAsian 8 points ago +9 / -1

I mean, they've been doing this for years, they actually think CNN is a "credible source" along with mostly leftwing media whereas, if you get someone who does video content, say like Tim Pool, and he says, I am half Korean and half white or whatever, Wiki doesn't consider that a credible source despite the person who'd know the best saying it. I laugh every time I see them asking for money and hope they go down the shitter

4
just-a-pleb 4 points ago +4 / -0

They have enough money to run for at least 20 years, they're just milking stupid people.

8
clbrto 8 points ago +8 / -0

I only use Wikipedia to read about the plots of Hallmark movies

they're often wrong

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
7
AT_Finn 7 points ago +7 / -0

Never trusted them before. They've been doing this shit for years.

7
weisschild 7 points ago +7 / -0

Well, who's up for creating MAGApedia.win?

1
botknob 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is Uncyclopedia still a thing?

6
cryptoconservative 6 points ago +6 / -0

Cant you just edit it out or tag it controversial?

8
Metallicity 8 points ago +8 / -0

Wikipedia can lock editing on articles, so many times you can't edit out a falsehood. Even if that's not the case, any edits you, as an unwashed plebe, make will be instantly reverted by the circling asperger-vultures that "maintain" the site.

2
cryptoconservative 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wow, didn’t know that there was a dedicated community on Wikipedia. I just thought anyone could change anything at any time. Interesting

6
cucumbersandwich 6 points ago +6 / -0

And I donated to then twice in the past. ugh

9
TonsOfSalt 9 points ago +9 / -0

My dumbass gave them $10 one time before they went full retard.

4
tombombadil 4 points ago +4 / -0

Redditors would always talk about how you should donate to them lmao.

6
CannonballJunior 6 points ago +6 / -0

Leftists completely took over wikipedia 5+ years ago. It's still decent for info on mollusks, aardvarks, chemical engineering, etc, but almost anything that has any sort of political/ideological component or aspect has been rewritten by Leftists and ruined.

5
slimcoat 5 points ago +5 / -0

I like Infogalactic as an alternative, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be well up-kept.

5
BobbyTwoScoops 5 points ago +5 / -0

“Between 2016 and 2020, Hunter Biden began a humanitarian program. This program led to an incredible drop in the amount of crack available to citizens in the US.”

1
rwhankla 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lmao

4
koyima 4 points ago +4 / -0

I love wikipedia, during the Breanna case - which they have now forgotten - I had a fb discussion and when I explained that they don't actually know what they are talking about - the people on the other side of the discussion said: "there is a very good article on wikipedia about it"

To which I laughed and made my prediction: the cops will walk, there was no murder, they were investigated for drugs and the moron shot first and there are witnesses

They continued saying I was some fragile "Caucasian", but I explained I got all this from Officer Tatum and he has the docs, which I linked to them

They continued mocking me and Tatum as: "some black said it so it must be true, why do you have to look for the bad things black people do to excuse bad behavior"

Next day it all comes out, I laughed and laughed and posted every article that now had the facts - I was right, they were wrong and it has been this way since at least 2014, since Gamergate

It was doubly hilarious because the discussion started because a curfew was ordered and I said: understandable, BLM/Atnifa have said they will burn the city down - which of course happened and we even got the van people on video and on the phone to show them - good times

4
FLatinoKAG 4 points ago +5 / -1

Wikipedia, Twitter, FB, and YouTube need to be monitored and controlled by the FCC.

4
whippeat 4 points ago +4 / -0

I honestly wouldn't even mind if it WAS debunked. Problem is, they didn't even have the decency to actually investigate or look into it. The media saw it might hurt Biden, so they just ignored it completely.

4
HenkZeilstra 4 points ago +4 / -0

Have you seen that they have completely blocked the wikipedia for plausible deniability until after the day of the election? Fuck Wikipedia

3
QueMalaHarris 3 points ago +3 / -0

And they also protect these pages against “vandalism”. I think wikipedia should learn a hard lesson

3
crash7863 3 points ago +3 / -0

Wikipedia has been garbage for awhile now. Unless the info there is about something innocuous like puppies or how an air compressor works, it's essentially useless. I thought Wikipedia was pretty cool in the late 2000's and early 2010's. It became pretty obvious they were politically motivated in 2016 when they were pushing Killery.

3
Loiuzein 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't even use W for math.

3
Ivleeeg 3 points ago +3 / -0

I love that they think there is something terrible about a foreigners staying in trump hotels, paying the same rate as everyone else. But hunter getting a kush, no show, job making 183k a month is NBD.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
NvJohansson 3 points ago +3 / -0

He should sue for that. If you're going to slander somebody you better have the facts or pay the price.

3
793D 3 points ago +3 / -0

yeeeears ahead of you bro

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
joax 3 points ago +3 / -0

Wikipedia is our Ministry of Truth. Changing history and the past to align with the party.

3
rwhankla 3 points ago +3 / -0

d E b u N k E d

3
Kilroy 3 points ago +3 / -0

Would it be possible to sue them for defamation? This is just the tip of the iceberg of inaccurate Wikipedia articles.

3
majorpribluda 3 points ago +3 / -0

Larry Sanger agrees that Wikipedia is a biased failure. Who's that? Co-founder, with Jimmy Wales, of Wikipedia.

3
GS500 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep, use Infogalactic instead. It's a port of wikipedia but without all the left wing revisionist history.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Introduction

2
Based_psychologist 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hunter Biden:

Biden served on the board of Burisma Holdings, a major Ukrainian natural gas producer, from 2014 to 2019. In 2019, President Donald Trump claimed that Joe Biden had sought the dismissal of a Ukrainian prosecutor in order to protect Hunter Biden from investigation.[1][2][3] He and his father have been accused of corrupt business dealings and bribery in Ukraine and elsewhere.[4]

Checks out. Acknowledges claims made without asserting definitively, allowing reader to form their own conclusions.

2
Canadean 2 points ago +2 / -0

my high-school communist teachers were right, Wikipedia is compromised and unworthy as source material

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
Vivadiscordia 2 points ago +2 / -0

How do those on the right start a new project like Wikipedia, that is free from leftist revisionism? I’ve been trying to come up with ideas lately.

2
philandy 2 points ago +2 / -0

I only use the references sometimes.

2
bubbletea 2 points ago +2 / -0

I had contributed annually to wikipedia prior to Trump election. Stopped soon after, seeing all their bull shit.

2
LifeInsuranceCapital 2 points ago +3 / -1

Quit griping about Leftists being Leftists on their own property, and start using Truthful platforms like Infogalactic.

2
oriosmit 2 points ago +2 / -0

Honest question though...I do have lefty idiots who spout this nonsense. What is the best way to combat the Trump family claims?

1
Train_w_no_brakes 1 point ago +1 / -0

The site is community run. It is nothing more then a more informational version of reddit.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
thistlemitten 1 point ago +2 / -1

What in the actual Hell?

0
Fabius 0 points ago +1 / -1

Just go change it.

0
V_exodus 0 points ago +1 / -1

Wikipedia is biased. Yes, I know that. But still I hate being ordered on this site to not go here, not go there. It is disrespectful of people's intelligence and feels a tad "lefty".

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1