Has anyone else noticed something strange about wikipedia today?
My job is boring as fuck but I sit at a computer in a room alone all day so I basically just click through wiki articles and shit that won't get me fired if anyone sees it in my history, but today I noticed, just strange changes. I don't know how to describe it beyond bad grammar and weird wording.
tl;dr is someone fucking with wikipedia?
I've noticed something similar, everything just feels less put together and authoritative. Like they're making poor writing choices. We could just be getting older and developing our sense of writing. Who knows.
Sometimes I'm noticing that I could phrase things better than they can
It's the influx of poos. Has to be. I've noticed it as well
you guys know wiki is crowd sourced, right? there is no staff writer. its all written and edited by volunteers. if you find problems, report it.
Wow your life must be exciting.
>Hey guys the wording on this public access website isn't 100%
FUCK dude.
That's next level shit, better inform the FBI.
I'm aware of that, but the thing that struck me as odd was the fact that it all happened within the last couple of days, and it's not blatant faggotry or trolling, it's just "odd"
KEK
Post some examples. I was on for a while at work today and i saw some dumb shit
If you want to see some shit, roll back a wikipedia entry a few years.
That's some Orwellian shit right there, my niggas. History being rewritten. Sources leading nowhere. Fuck wikipedia.
It is odd, wikipedia has usually been a very good source of info on basically everything. Despite the fact anyone can edit, pages were usually written to a high standard and low quality edits usually undone pretty quickly.
Pretty recently I was looking for info about future replacement tech for silicon chips once the theoretical 10nm limit is hit, and wikipedia didn't have pages for a majority of the already prototype tested technologies and very little info on the rest, though some of the sources on the other blank pages were useful.
It's like people in the know are just getting their info from the source where possible. Sucks because the wikipedia page was usually the first thing I'd check if I came across something I knew nothing about.
English is not my first language so I can't tell if something's wrong.
And I don't usually use wikipedia in my main language for some reasons so I really cannot tell.
So stop the faggotry and link to specific articles. Else fuck off, kind sir.
It's the dumbing down of language to make niggers and Arabs feel less excluded. The same thing is happening at schools. Haven't you noticed how many stupid people are in universities right now? These people don't qualify as janitors most of the time.
It's the jews, I tell you
Wasn't there Simple English wikipedia for that?
I've edited some articles myself and created others.. but honestly the Wiki community, their moderators and such, are complete, utter, royal CUNTS.
They don't really care about which information is accurate or objective, they care about being right.
This
...
Go click on sources if you want to have a laugh. They'll cite the word "the" in a contradictory legitimate source because no one will take the time to read it over. They just needed a fancy link.
Wikipedia is dead to me after the entry for "mansplaining" is longer than most philosophers' entries.
The entry for Mexican standoff implies that the term is derogatory because it could possibly come from the same intent as Mexican breakfast (water and a cigarette). Wikipedia has long ceased to be objective a long time ago and it definitely serves some agenda.
...
...
I once had a couple of weeks long argument with a moderator about changing the picture for a superheroine's article in which she looked like a transvestite.
I complied with every requirement of their list for acceptable images, cunts was just enjoying feeling "powerful" I guess.
Can anyone please post an example of what you people are claiming.
Otherwise conspiracy circle jerk belongs in x
I'm talking mostly about scientific pages which link directly to peer-reviewed journals. Of course the articles for stupid shit are going to be written by stupid people.
I don't know if anyone else will notice how the wording is strange here just because it's a very specific article, but it's kind of strange, along with the floating
D
in the middle of the page. That alone isn't too odd for a website anyone can edit but I've noticed a LOT of it in the last few days, it seems like.
I dont see anything there
Will of the D
Chemical Engineer
This is run of the mill jargon and see nothing out of place ? Please elaborate on the mistakes you found so they can be fixed
What is your daily job like? Im studying to become one , what do i have to look forward too?
A lot of chemical spectroscopy analysis looking for impurities. I work on catalytic reactors for powerplants. I mostly supervise. Chemical engineers have a lot of different specializations so youd need to be more specific