My FAQ Write Up on Wikipedia

Good, bad, biased, paid or what-have-you. There's an endless supply.
Post Reply
User avatar
wexter
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 279 times

My FAQ Write Up on Wikipedia

Post by wexter » Fri Dec 04, 2020 8:04 pm

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zp3 ... p=drivesdk

Understanding Wikipedia (NPOV)
A Personal Position Paper


This “Personal Position Paper,” was developed in conclusion to my exploration to understand Wikipedia a bit better.. After finding a few serious concerns on Wikipedia I went full blown “Hunter S. Thompson” on the platform.

If you have an agenda you can impregnate Wikipedia with any content you want to it's simply a matter of approach. Obscurity, time-patience, number of posts, time on the platform, and incrementalism can sneak under the radar. If the “stuff” sticks long enough it will be enshrined into the data horde. After a few years you will be given the keys to the kingdom by becoming a Wikipedia administrator.

If you want to really understand Wikipedia, I would recommend that you go right to the jugular by finding and editing paid, morally abhorrent, or grossly incorrect content. Thereafter, you should try to edit something important to the Wikipedians.

What would make Wikipedia OK in my book?
-If it was not foisted upon me in every web search

Wikipedia was designed, poorly, to accumulate a large quantity of “stuff”
-Computer Zero, “finds things, and loses them, and confuses itself.” Rollerball 1975
-The “stuff” on Wikipedia is totally random in quality, organization, and importance
-“Stuff,” provides the confetti necessary to support mindless entertainment
-There is some really bad “stuff” that works its way into Wikipedia

Wikipedia is not an Encyclopedia
-it provides people looking for online content with “entertainment”
-It is a Social Network that “rewards” a closed group of participants
-can be easily misused to agenda
- it makes money for a whole lot of people

Wikipedia holds a monopoly on content
-Wikipedia has become the major destination that people are directed to from search engines. Wikipedia monopolizes search engine results in both priority, frequency, , and number of times mentioned per search
-There is no way to entirely opt-out of Wikipedia search results.
-Wikipedia has narrowed content choices on the Internet and creates barriers to content creators

Is there a better alternative
-Britannica, which “hears crickets” on the Internet, contains encyclopedic content. Unimportant articles are curated by staff while important articles are assembled by experts.
-Every Google search can be appended with -wikipedia.org, which is something I am actually doing.
-If you are a critical thinker find your own primary sources to organize and consider.

Is Wikipedia the Social Network For Me
-If you have autism you found a virtual place for yourself, at the time of this writing there are over 700+ self described people with autism getting rewarded to participate on Wikipedia.
-Wikipedia is a place to meet people including a rotund government contractor with three million edits.
-The platform itself is very concerned that there are not enough women involved and that they are doing something wrong in that regard. If you like women don’t join Wikipedia.
-If you like self-flagellation you will find that Wikipedia pages are frequently “owned” or “powned” by an interested party.
-If you want to be hazed by “The Geek Squad” go ahead
-You will have to lay low until the 1,118 insiders known as administrators are assured that you won’t vandalize the “stuff” they have taken ten to fifteen years to accumulate.

Should I use Wikipedia for Entertainment
-You can play jeopardy | Statement - “Wikipedia - A pink anthropomorphic cougar sporting an upturned collar, shirt cuffs, and bow tie” Question - “ What is Snagglepuss?”
-You can trigger Wikipedia long-timers by grounding them to reality via your edits.
There are many things to me that are more entertaining.


Should I edit Wikipedia
-I think you should edit Wikipedia to better understand it in overview. I would recommend that you go right to the jugular by finding paid, morally abhorrent, or grossly incorrect content. Thereafter, you should try to edit something important to the Wikipedians.
Last edited by wexter on Fri Dec 04, 2020 11:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Wikipedia - "Barely competent and paranoid. There’s a hell of a combination."

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: My FAQ Write Up on Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Fri Dec 04, 2020 11:36 pm

heh heh. Looks good. You should expand it and get it published somewhere. Maybe Medium or Vox.

User avatar
wexter
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 279 times

Re: My FAQ Write Up on Wikipedia

Post by wexter » Fri Dec 04, 2020 11:51 pm

If you have any additional talking points I will add em in!

Wikipedia is not an Encyclopedia
-it provides people looking for online content with “entertainment”
-It is a Social Network that “rewards” a closed group of participants
-can be easily misused to agenda
- it makes money for a whole lot of people
Wikipedia - "Barely competent and paranoid. There’s a hell of a combination."

Post Reply