# More wikipedia wackiness **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 13, 2011, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297 "2011-04-13T23:04:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![wmfellows](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c2a13f/32.png) [@wmfellows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wmfellows)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2011, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/41 "2011-04-14T15:58:24Z")
Wikipedia is fine for fun reading, however very unreliable - the Brittanica response is quite crushing by the way. As for the tedious response of “if you see an error edit it”- I am not being paid to edit it, and from the idiotic edit wars I’ve observed on that thing, have absolutely no inclination to labour away from free to support the Wiki-Propaganda. ETA: I should clarify that I think it’s fine and great that Wikipedia exists, terribly useful for the sort of debates that go on here, which don’t really require as such one break out a Brittanica. But confusing it with any kind of proper research reference material, a terrible error. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2011, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/42 "2011-04-14T23:04:45Z")
“Oops” comes to mind. ☹ I sincerely thought that was for the actors in the Best Picture winner. Odd that nobody has gone through and fixed my good-faith edits… ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/43 "2011-04-15T13:08:23Z")
I don’t the Brittanica would have this sort of thing, from the Wikipedia entry for [Dan Quinn (fighter)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Quinn_%28fighter%29): “Quinn most recently suffered a loss at the hands of Rick Vardell, a beating that Dan wouldn’t be able to give to his own children if he in fact ever saw them.” (For those of you who are wondering, I was looking at the article for [Maitreya](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maitreya), and followed the link down the rabbit hole.) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/44 "2011-04-15T20:24:03Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Wikipedia certainly doesn’t and that’s why it’s utter shit when it comes to just about any remotely controversial topic. Exactly the opposite. The more controversial the topic, the more closely it is monitored and scrubbed for incorrect or non-neutral point of view. ---
**Author:** ![Rachellelogram](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rachellelogram/32/8689_2.png) [@Rachellelogram](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rachellelogram)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/45 "2011-04-15T20:24:27Z")
I am disappointed that I was beaten to the Whackipedia joke already. hrmph. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/46 "2011-04-15T20:33:26Z")
A terrible Wikipedia article is still a great source of sources. Even if idiots delete sources, you can still find them in the history. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/47 "2011-04-15T21:01:57Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > You want Wikipedia wackiness? Look at this thread of mine from last year: > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=541920&highlight=homeric+hymns](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=541920&highlight=homeric+hymns) Actually, a better thread is [this old one](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-465431.html). My contribution was about a Belgian fast food chain > [@](#): > > On July 5th, 2009, after a delicious July 4th feast the previous day at a Burger King franchise in Barcelona, Spain, an American youth ventured outside his comfort zone in order to try the European attempt at fast food. The outcome was neither fast nor delicious. The serving time was an indefensible 15 minutes. This tragedy was only exacerbated by a server who spoke only French (no English, the superior language of international business and commerce…and fast food) and a very, very small excuse for a milkshake. As a result of this experience the aforementioned youth reached the only viable conclusion: the full force of the American military industrial complex would be needed to forever wipe the Quick fast food chain from the face of the earth. After a brief, but indispensable, conference with his comrades, the youth determined that remote activated “briefcase” nuclear devices would be required in order to complete the mission. With the formula for destruction laid out, the plan was put into motion. In the early morning hours of July 6th every single franchise of the Quick fast food brand was vaporized in just over 400 three megaton nuclear explosions. The recovery effort was sponsored by McDonald’s in cooperation with Burger King and KFC. Americans at home and all around the world celebrated with a Big Mac and Coke ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/48 "2011-04-15T21:31:38Z")
> [@Arnold\_Winkelried](#): > > I don’t think this is a good response to a comment that Wikipedia has errors. If Wikipedia has errors, it doesn’t seem significant to me that I could edit the article and fix the errors. What about all the people who read the article and don’t know that there are errors? It’s also not a good point given that folks on here have posted about how they’ve had to give up on trying to fix Wikipedia because they are working professionals who don’t have the time to sit all day long and undo edits by trolls who win by default of not having a life? I’ve posted about my example of how I tried for a week to fix an egregious error in a Wiki article about coal, and got into a fight with some snot-nosed shitheel in Germany who fucked with me by undoing my edits, often within 1 minute after I made them. It didn’t matter if I provided 30 hard citations, it didn’t matter if I am myself an expert in a very small field, all that mattered was who can hit the edit button faster. I complained to admins there, I complained in the discussion pages, and I was flat-out ignored. It’s ironic that the fact that I’m a working non-parents-basement-dwelling adult professional counts against me for trying to make Wikipedia better, since I don’t have the time and fortitude to sit up 24/7 and undo vandalism. Huh. This is a serious and fatal flaw with Wikipedia that shows no signs of going away. Wikipedia is a great resource on the whole of it, and it’s a wealth of information on obscure topics, but when you focus on the fine print, it doesn’t look so good. I mean sure, it’s great to find something like the biography of an obscure TV show from the 1960’s in multi-page detail on Wikipedia - but then when I see all the errors and vandalism in other articles which I do know something about, I have to ask “well, sure, they have a giant page on this show - but is any of it real?” And the answer sadly is “I don’t know.” And even if I try to do the research myself or check sources - God damn, it seems like in some of the articles fully half or more of the “citations” don’t even exist, or exist but have dead links. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/49 "2011-04-15T22:10:01Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Exactly the opposite. > > The more controversial the topic, the more closely it is monitored and scrubbed for incorrect or non-neutral point of view. I’m sorry but anyone who trusts wikipedia on articles relating to controversial topics is a moron. Also, anyone who thinks articles on controversial issues, such as the Armenian Holocaust, Islam-related articles, and Israel related articles clearly doesn’t pay attention to those articles or what sources are used for them. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/50 "2011-04-15T22:55:39Z")
If I could nominate your post for some sort of award I would. Yeah, it’s that good. > [@Una\_Persson](#): > > It’s also not a good point given that folks on here have posted about how they’ve had to give up on trying to fix Wikipedia because they are working professionals who don’t have the time to sit all day long and undo edits by trolls who win by default of not having a life? I’ve posted about my example of how I tried for a week to fix an egregious error in a Wiki article about coal, and got into a fight with some snot-nosed shitheel in Germany who fucked with me by undoing my edits, often within 1 minute after I made them. It didn’t matter if I provided 30 hard citations, it didn’t matter if I am myself an expert in a very small field, all that mattered was who can hit the edit button faster. I complained to admins there, I complained in the discussion pages, and I was flat-out ignored Which probably matches almost every other smart educated person who doesn’t have all the time in the world to spend in idiotic battles. > [@Una\_Persson](#): > > This is a serious and fatal flaw with Wikipedia that shows no signs of going away. Wikipedia is a great resource on the whole of it, and it’s a wealth of information on obscure topics, but when you focus on the fine print, it doesn’t look so good. It’s also a flaw that most people recognize. The thing is, so far nobody has come up with anything better, or you can be sure that would be what we discuss. > [@Una\_Persson](#): > > And even if I try to do the research myself or check sources - God damn, it seems like in some of the articles fully half or more of the “citations” don’t even exist, or exist but have dead links. I’m know for fixing or killing off dead links, or updating little tiny bits of information like that, because you can at least contribute with out being drug into the wiki hole of death. I could completely bitch out about my experience with the half dozen fucktards who flat out ‘won’, because they had nothing but time, and nobody really gives a shit after some point. Their idea of ‘winning’ was to prevent the world from having easy access to valid information, backed up by reachable sources. Yeah, that is the real evil at work. Not ‘bad’ sources, (which anyone can check). The forces of evil want to delete sources. To delete information. If it doesn’t match their view of the world. And that sort of evil is another whole war, nothing like the trolls and vandals. Trolls fools and vandals can be easily dealt with. But a determined lunatic with an agenda, that’s a lot harder. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/51 "2011-04-15T23:06:29Z")
I must apologize for my foul language. I tried to edit it out but missed the time window. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2011, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/52 "2011-04-15T23:34:01Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > It’s also a flaw that most people recognize. The thing is, so far nobody has come up with anything better, or you can be sure that would be what we discuss. How about locking down a page as “accurate” when some percentage/raw number of users vote “This is good”. All new info would go in a new info box at the bottom of the page beyond the “accurate” section. As the “new stuff” fills up, a behind the scenes page (like old edited pages) would be discussed and edited by those who care with the updated info. Once X% of people agree that the new stuff is integrated, it gets moved to the front, replacking the old “accurate” page. Repeat as needed Still not perfect: a group of dedicated ideologues could still fill a page with garbage, but it’s much better (IMO) then the current system where pages can disappear while you’re reading them. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/53 "2011-04-16T01:18:21Z")
A lot of pages are locked so that only registered users can edit. And pages that are ‘vandalized’ or too contentious do get locked down. But that prevents any updates for new information. It’s all very chaotic, and yet so many articles are actually excellent. Go figure. ---
**Author:** ![srzss05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@srzss05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/srzss05)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/54 "2011-04-16T03:15:56Z")
> [@Una\_Persson](#): > > I complained to admins there, I complained in the discussion pages, and I was flat-out ignored. To be fair, they have no idea who you are. As far as the admins are concerned, you are just some Joe/Jane Blow who likes to whine, especially if the true vandals stay quiet. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/55 "2011-04-16T04:58:53Z")
> [@srzss05](#): > > To be fair, they have no idea who you are. As far as the admins are concerned, you are just some Joe/Jane Blow who likes to whine, especially if the true vandals stay quiet. To be fair, I was editing the article under my IRL named account, and linked to several peer-reviewed published papers I had done. ---
**Author:** ![srzss05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@srzss05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/srzss05)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/56 "2011-04-16T15:36:21Z")
> [@Una\_Persson](#): > > To be fair, I was editing the article under my IRL named account, and linked to several peer-reviewed published papers I had done. That may have been even worse. Let’s face it, the “admins” at Wikipedia aren’t experts\*, and they may have thought you were a bit biased. That is a no-no over there, and they may have wanted a “neutral” third party do the editing. \*and they do back down when confronted—I’ve won a few arguments with them when I cared to bother with it ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/57 "2011-04-16T18:06:16Z")
> [@srzss05](#): > > That may have been even worse. Let’s face it, the “admins” at Wikipedia aren’t experts\*, and they may have thought you were a bit biased. That is a no-no over there, and they may have wanted a “neutral” third party do the editing. > > \*and they do back down when confronted—I’ve won a few arguments with them when I cared to bother with it So since no neutral third party would get involved, the solution is to allow some teenaged troll to have the last word because he has no life and can type faster? 😕 I can’t speak for all Wikipedia admins, but the ones I’ve personally known have been immature power-hungry losers who are likely to be wearing a Cheetos-stained t-shirt which reads “enius at Work”, the “G” in “Genius” being missing due to their mom spilling bleach on it. I know there are some good ones who are smart and diligently hard-working and who care about their work, I just never happen to run into them. ---
**Author:** ![srzss05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@srzss05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/srzss05)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/58 "2011-04-16T18:56:26Z")
> [@Una\_Persson](#): > > I can’t speak for all Wikipedia admins, but the ones I’ve personally known have been immature power-hungry losers who are likely to be wearing a Cheetos-stained t-shirt which reads “enius at Work”, the “G” in “Genius” being missing due to their mom spilling bleach on it. I know there are some good ones who are smart and diligently hard-working and who care about their work, I just never happen to run into them. So it shouldn’t have surprised you that your situation didn’t work out. It is no wonder that Wikipedia is a joke. Edit—I’m agreeing with you, and was just playing Devil’s advocate. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [April 16, 2011, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297/59 "2011-04-16T19:02:48Z")
> **[The Straight Dope](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Straight_Dope)** > > "The Straight Dope" was a question-and-answer newspaper column written under the pseudonym Cecil Adams. Contributions were made by multiple authors, and it was illustrated (also pseudonymously) by Slug Signorino. It was first published in 1973 in the Chicago Reader as well as in print syndication nationally in the United States, and on a website with the same name. On more than one occasion, the authors (i.e. Cecil Adams) were forced to retract or modify an answer when confronted by the rea Follo... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/more-wikipedia-wackiness/578297.md?page=2)