Dumb Shit on Wikipedia -

[AnOminous]

Seriously, wtf! You fags certainly know and have seen dumb shit on Wikipedia.

Look at what passes muster!

Here's an example, in an article called "Wound Licking." Seriously, this is encyclopedic!

"There are three different incidents in which Jesus uses saliva to cure (Mark 7:33, Mark 8:23, John 9:6).[44]"

This has an actual section devoted to it.

Jesus will cure you with his spit!

 

[Hellfire]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_Batman_franchise

 

[AnOminous]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_Batman_franchise

Encyclopedic as all fuck!

 

[Hellfire]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Insects_described_in_1929

 

[AnOminous]

This is almost beyond autism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Moths_described_in_1929

Moths! Fucking moths!

 

[Hellfire]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway–Pakistan_relations

Norway–Pakistan relations are warm.[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stratigraphic_units_with_ornithischian_tracks

Huge list tables with Description boxes that just say "Description" in them, to no surprise it was almost all created by a single autist.

https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-articleinfo/?article=List_of_stratigraphic_units_with_ornithischian_tracks&project=en.wikipedia.org

 

[DykesDykesChina]

Autism.

And to think there are people out there who think this rivals Brockhaus and Encyclopaedia Britannica... in fact most book-shaped encyclopaedias have gone out of print because of this -- probably due to not being sufficiently elaborate concerning the classes of Imperial blasters.

 

[Hellfire]

Autism.

And to think there are people out there who think this rivals Brockhaus and Encyclopaedia Britannica... in fact most book-shaped encyclopaedias have gone out of print because of this -- probably due to not being sufficiently elaborate concerning the classes of Imperial blasters.

https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-articleinfo/?article=Technology_in_Star_Wars&project=en.wikipedia.org

As with that one list I linked, a single autist is responsible for most of this, having made 603 edits to that page.

 

[millais]

https://archive.li/0crgI

Still up as of this week.

 

[ToroidalBoat]

Autism.

Why even have that article when there's already an entire wiki dedicated to Star Wars?

While I don't think excessive focus on specific topics is necessarily "dumb," it can make one marvel at the dedication some have.

 

[HarryHowler]

Why even have that article when there's already an entire wiki dedicated to Star Wars?

I'd guess it's just gone under the radar, and no-one's cared enough to put it up for deletion. Back in the early-mid 2000s Wikipedia was just swamped with Star Trek and Star Wars articles, which got nuked en masse when Memory Alpha and the Star Wars Wiki started up. In fact, a lot of these sci-fi/fantasy pages are probably stragglers from back before fandoms had their own wikis.

 

[Positron]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manspreading#/media/File:Manspreading_on_Stockholm_Metro.jpg

Frankly I'd rather see a list such as "chocolate brands marketed in 1968" than this shit.

 

[Staffy]

Spoiler: The image Wikipedia uses for the article "grinding" back then

Spoiler: A gross example image they currently have for "twerking"

They changed the former because they realized it looks awkward as hell.

 

[AnOminous]

https://archive.li/0crgI

Still up as of this week.

There's actually Reliable Source for that shit, too. He was actually in it, and he really did say "That kid kicked sand in Cool Cat's face!"

ETA: One of my favorite aspects of Wikipedia exceptionalism is how there is this dude who has some kind of weird monopoly on fetish art in articles even though he draws like whatever fag draws every single wikihow.

Example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellatio

There's at least one other dude like this, who has an obsession with interracial porn and somehow managed to insert his pictures, 100% of them shit like a white dude getting blown by an Asian chick, into every fucking article where it was remotely relevant.

 

[Falcon Lord]

When there's literally five million articles it's inevitable most of them will be about shit no one cares about.

 

[Abethedemon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shipping_(fandom)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_meme (redirects from Dank Meme)

 

[RIck Sanchez]

I like that they insist that this picture is to show "body diversity" and that the fat kid is totally not the subject.

Also lol:

 

[Loxiozzz]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-fat_bias

"One dangerous effect of anti-fat bias is the presence of this bias in healthcare professionals, whose biases could result in a lower quality of treatment for overweight patients."

"(PE) teachers were more likely to display implicit anti-fat attitudes."
...

 

[Segue]

found this on the page for an old obscure movie

 

[Xerxes IX]

ETA: One of my favorite aspects of Wikipedia exceptionalism is how there is this dude who has some kind of weird monopoly on fetish art in articles even though he draws like whatever fag draws every single wikihow.

So THERE'S the guy who drew the picture of tribbing that Chris indadvertedly posted on his Facebook.