1246
Comments (28)
sorted by:
45
Unapologist 45 points ago +45 / -0

Nominate r/The_Donald be deleted instead, and a redirect placed to TheDonald.win, and add a history section covering r/The_Donald.

23
shadypollster 23 points ago +23 / -0

THIS

16
MakinBacon 16 points ago +16 / -0

history, with cause and origin pls

35
Lol_Garrus 35 points ago +35 / -0

We get more traffic than Huffington Post.

Huffington Post has a wiki page.

Just more evidence of tech bias.

23
Smurfection 23 points ago +23 / -0

The left will lose is the people are informed about what's really going on. That's why they fear TheDonald.win.

22
BadRonald13 22 points ago +22 / -0

==2020 Suppression== In August 2020, [Wikipedia] contributed to the suppression of conservative voices by attempting to delete The.Donald.win from its records.

18
Rucktoe 18 points ago +18 / -0

Wikipedia is a just another leftist shithole website.

They don't want to win.

16
blackestknight 16 points ago +16 / -0

I removed the alt-right tag they had on there, trying to tie this site to racism white nationalism (like all media always try to do).

The main person editing the page seems to have an agenda as he was ok with the tag, even though there's no actual basis to tie this site to any kind of ethno-nationalist movement. The justification being that somehow, Breitbart news is "racist" and people here post articles from Breitbart, which is ludicrous.

2
BoltBoltBoltBolt90 2 points ago +2 / -0

What did it exactly say about alt-right, I've been keeping up with the article since it was created but I missed it yesterday or earlier today. I wanna see what the leftists tried to push ontot he article.

2
blackestknight 2 points ago +2 / -0

Guy had reverted it, but there seems to be a few guys now contesting his edits. He's some anti-jewish guy with a Russian name, so it figures he would try to ties this site to the alt-right.

2
blackestknight 2 points ago +2 / -0

It was tagged in the alt-right category.

9
MakinBacon 9 points ago +9 / -0

so, if we add references (to td.win) in other wiki pages for other social media sites, won't that bolster our presence on wiki?

7
zoober_floober 7 points ago +7 / -0

"Rules" and "policies" are used as pretext when available, the end.

When the Left's position is obliterated by facts or outright contradiction, controlling the means of communication comes next.

Supporters of such behavior give not the slightest shit about hypocrisy, outright lies, honesty, consistency, or anything else. They're in it to win it, and those things are merely tools.

6
MAGA_4EVER 6 points ago +6 / -0

Makes me want to create my own Wikipedia.

Knowledge.win

Would patriots post stuff and share their expertise if we did that?

5
womp-womp-twice 5 points ago +5 / -0

The domain name certainly checks out!

Also, I was having a similar idea, tough not sure that would fare any better than, for example, Conservapedia

Conservapedia /kənˌsɜːrvəˈpiːdiə/ is an English-language wiki encyclopedia project written from a self-described American conservative and fundamentalist Christian point of view.[3][4] The website was established in 2006 by American homeschool teacher and attorney Andrew Schlafly, son of the conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly,[5][6] to counter what he perceived as a liberal bias in Wikipedia.[7][8] It uses editorials and a wiki-based system for content generation.

3
BoltBoltBoltBolt90 3 points ago +3 / -0

That site is ranked 128k worldwide and has an article, but we're in the 6,000s and ours is up for deletion.

IT'S CENSORSHIP!

2
MAGA_4EVER 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah - the main problem is traction.

Then again, conserva-anything is now "racist" so maybe the issue at hand is the name.

3
GerPlasma 3 points ago +3 / -0

Fuck Wikipedia.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
womp-womp-twice 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm wayyy more suprised that we even had a wikipedia article!!

Sauce: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TheDonald.win

3
aaafirefly123 3 points ago +3 / -0

Honestly I prefer it.

Believe it or not Wiki is relatively non biased in regards to non-political topics (ie history, most of science, math, etc.)

But they are supremely cucked about anything current and especially about anything having to do with Trump.

Practically every paragraph on his Presidency page contains “despite criticism from...” or “he was criticized by...” or “this is false because...” or “his response to _____ has been criticized as ______”.

According to Wikipedia Trump can do nothing right.

They don’t out right call him evil but they say things like “his opponents describe him as a fascist, racist, and corrupt dictator” without showing how the other side sees him.

Essentially it’s better that we don’t have a wiki page, it shows our history but only the Reddit Admin’s version of that history.

They don’t mention the shady stuff Reddit did to us and if they do they offer excuses for it.

To them our history is “they were a white supremacist subreddit that eventually got banned because they were racist”

1
BoltBoltBoltBolt90 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree, I love using wikipedia when I need historical knowledge on historical people, but when it comes to politics, it's very biased

2
Titan93 2 points ago +2 / -0

"Thedonald.win is a racist bigoted homophobic xenophobic transphobic anti science climate denying far right conspiracy theorist website. Keep your children from it by any means necessary!" - communists

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
rplgn 1 point ago +1 / -0

scumbag politics by biased Wikipedia. Soros has many implants in self-portraying "free" services. stop donating to them.

1
MakeFloridaRed 1 point ago +1 / -0

Next time wiki asks you for a donation to keep then running, make sure to remind them that BLM has plenty of corrupt money to support their leftist agenda.

1
stranchida82 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fuck wikipedia, use infogalactic!

1
chesterfields 1 point ago +1 / -0

Good. Fuck Wikipedia