Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 21:58:28 UTC No. 16251661

It has been a recent development to optimize language for achieving a particular goal on such a large and coordinated scale. Politics was for politicians but now everyone has become a politician.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:03:13 UTC No. 16251667

I distinctly remember being younger and the only real source of information being literally this fat stack of books called Encyclopedia. If you really wanted to dive deeper you could go to the library and check out some books. Its bizarre how much has changed in just 30 years.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:04:21 UTC No. 16251670

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:08:00 UTC No. 16251679

>>16251603
>how did we end up at leaving the closest thing to a real hitchhikers guide to the galaxy in the hands of a couple of powerdrunk basement dwellers?

Because they're the ones that actually wanted to do it.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:36:22 UTC No. 16251763

>>16251679
Lots of people stopped adding content to Wikipedia once the "power editors" arrived and ran everyone else off. I used to keep the article about our local transit system up to date but then one day an editor named Clyde started harassing me about all kinds of pedantic stylistic things that aren't even requirement, just suggested best practices. He'd deleted entire sections of data that were properly sourced just because he didn't like the way it was formatted. To him it was better for the data to not be on Wikipedia at all if it wasn't in the format he liked. After having this happen several times, I decided why bother? Doubt I'm the only one that has happened to.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:41:39 UTC No. 16251776

>>16251763
>once the "power editors" arrived

Can you say how / why / when this happened?

I've made edits or created articles since the early 2000s from time to time. They are also all still around.

I stopped editing after making a bad experience with creating a new article, and the admins there. This happened during covid.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:50:37 UTC No. 16251802

>>16251763

Literally noone has time for these fights.

Except for those in for political and financial gain - marketing offices of music industry, "influencers", the agricultural and the pharmaceutical industry.

I noticed it first with the Séralini affair. Suddenly discrediting pages-long articles with carefully chosen selective sources appeared out of nowhere. Now see the second half of the Talk section.

The propaganda around the covid vax was the worst most recent development. Any mild critic got the label "conspiracy theorist" on the same day. Neutrality my ass.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 03:04:31 UTC No. 16252076

>>16251603
>Ultra-autismo faggots ruin something good
I'm not surprised, just disappointed.
This is not what I expected when the Internet was new.

🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 04:32:08 UTC No. 16252161

>>16251667
That's nonsense. You used your brain instead of pulling out your phone and asking google.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 07:05:55 UTC No. 16252286

>>16252076
Linux software development was pretty comfy in the early 2000s, but the freaks have ruined that too. There's still some good work on kernel features (mostly to support the needs of data centres) but desktop linux plateaued, and normal people with talent do not want to deal with the turbo-autist trans freaks who gatekeep their little pet projects.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 10:13:06 UTC No. 16252456

>>16251670
that's OK is he can back it with proper references and sources.
You too can do so.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:41:33 UTC No. 16252623

>>16252456

I like this guy actually for his genuine dedication and doubt he is one of the sadistic admins.

He has mutated into having a big brain and Wikipedia is his natural habitat. That's fine with me. We need more people with big brains in this world.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:44:46 UTC No. 16252630

>>16252623
He is a janny, working for free.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:55:29 UTC No. 16252648

The politics and bickering on the talk pages of articles has always been pretty funny to me. Even small pages or non-politically-charged pages. In my limited experience I think the most prolific editors are more impartial, once you get to the middle management tier editors is where you get all the motivated reasoning and thinly veiled seething. The funniest ones are when some wikipedia mod is trying to defend clearly biased sources, such as an opinion piece news article, when the more solid evidence is against their position, they always seem to claim some sort of 'PoV' in order to delete entire segments

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:40:05 UTC No. 16252696

>>16251603
>a real hitchhikers guide to the galaxy
>in the hands of a couple of powerdrunk basement dwellers
That's exactly what the h2g2 was.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:42:21 UTC No. 16252699

>>16252648
>The politics and bickering on the talk pages of articles has always been pretty funny to me.
It's hilarious. Take the page for "dirt", surely one of the most anodyne topics available.
>Semi-protected edit request
>Delete? Just going downhill...
>I came here expecting the article which is actually under "soil"
>Is it alive?
>Western-Centric

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:43:34 UTC No. 16252702

>>16251603
>the closest thing to a real hitchhikers guide to the galaxy
https://h2g2.com/

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 16:49:03 UTC No. 16252925

The Wikipedia article on Leo Frank asserts that consensus is that he was wrongfully convicted. Consensus is backed by two sources. One is a book summary of a book which again just asserts the consensus, exemplifying it with a book written by one Dinnerstein.
The second is a CNN article also asserting that consensus is such and such, before listing a bunch of things wrong with the investigation (which doesn't really constitute consensus). Oh, and this article was written by one Jessica Ravitz, who now works as a Chief Strategy Officer (or something like that) for the ADL.
The talk pages are also hilarious.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Jun 2024 16:53:55 UTC No. 16252932

>>16252623
>I like this guy actually for his genuine dedication and doubt he is one of the sadistic admins.
same here.
I'm always on wikipedia editing and creating articles.

>working for free
it's not work, if it's fun, that's the payment

Anonymous at Wed, 26 Jun 2024 07:16:05 UTC No. 16254365

>>16252932

bump

Anonymous at Wed, 26 Jun 2024 07:58:56 UTC No. 16254408

The biggest editor at wikipedia is an american bureaucrat LOL


Steven Pruitt has made nearly 3 million edits on Wikipedia and written 35,000 original articles. It's earned him not only accolades but almost legendary status on the internet. The online encyclopedia now boasts more than 5.7 million articles in English and millions more translated into other languages -- all written by online volunteers. Pruitt was named one of the most influential people on the internet by Time magazine in part because one-third of all English language articles on Wikipedia have been edited by Steven. An incredible feat, ignited by a fascination with his own history.

How much money does he make from his work? None. "The idea of making it all free fascinates me. My mother grew up in the Soviet Union ... So I'm very conscious of what, what it can mean to make knowledge free, to make information free," he said. Pulling from books, academic journals and other sources, he spends more than three hours a day researching, editing and writing. Even his day job is research, working in records and information at U.S. Customs and Border Protection. He joked that his colleagues probably think he's nuts. To put in to perspective what it took for Pruitt to become the top editor, he's been dedicating his free time to the site for 13 years. The second-place editor is roughly 900,000 edits behind him, so his first place status seems safe, for now.

Anonymous at Wed, 26 Jun 2024 21:52:41 UTC No. 16255476

>>16254408
>one-third of all English language articles on Wikipedia have been edited by Steven
That is fuckin' wild, that would be touching 400 articles a day, continuously for 13 years.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 01:01:58 UTC No. 16255748

>>16254408
Of course he works at a US agency.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 01:27:06 UTC No. 16255798

>>16254408
>>16255476
Anons like to make fun of him on here, but that's actually incredibly based behavior.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 01:54:18 UTC No. 16255840

>>16251603
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wxkNxVIJEM

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 01:54:45 UTC No. 16255841

>>16251763
>>16251776
>>16251802
>>16252648

I'm just quietly reading this and I think slower boards on 4chan have this exact 'genre' of problem: an online community is essentially ruined, or compromised, because a handful of very vocal, extremely active, individuals just have the time and desire to strong-arm whatever niche thing they want out of that community.
-/tg/ for instance has a problem with content farming threads. I'm pretty sure some of these people are either friends/associates of the mods, if not the mods themselves, and they just make "how do you x" threads in order to generate content for Youtube videos. It's just scared and exhausted most creative people from the board.
-/x/ has an endless supply of inexhaustible homeless people mobile posting on their phones about gangstalking, flat-earth, and they literally have an infinite supply of time to do it.
-We don't even have to move off of /sci/ to see this: there's literally over 15 climate change denial threads (some of them bumped for over a month) going on right now where I assure you absolutely nobody has anything intelligent to say.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 02:06:21 UTC No. 16255846

>>16255476
Some of those are likely done by bots under his control. Most cities and towns have census data on their pages and that data is mostly put there by bots that pull from the US Census, format the data, and then post it to the appropriate Wikipedia page. That's about 20,000 articles right there.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 03:16:53 UTC No. 16255952

>>16252286
I get that technical fields like programming tend to attract autists, and that's fine, it takes an autist to do that kind of thing day in and day out.
What I don't get is why Linux dev attracts that specific kind of insufferable troonery.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 10:26:05 UTC No. 16256387

>>16255846
Oh, good point. That makes it more conceivable.

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 10:35:23 UTC No. 16256401

>>16251670
I probably dont agree with alot of what hes wrote
But that dude has one of my highest respects, a true role model, one who gets it, a true millenium man

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 10:39:40 UTC No. 16256404

>>16255841
Sounds like you aren't committed chump. Go to some place with censorship(and updoots) if you can't handle the mighty power of the schizo and their horde of brow-beaten idjits.

🗑️ Barkon at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 10:42:09 UTC No. 16256405

>>16256405
Knew this

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Jun 2024 22:38:20 UTC No. 16257373

>>16251802
If there is one group on Earth I trust, it's monsanto. Yep.

Anonymous at Fri, 28 Jun 2024 19:27:52 UTC No. 16258569

Anonymous at Sat, 29 Jun 2024 01:44:08 UTC No. 16259139

This thread was moved to >>>/pol/472520653