Comments on: Wikipedia Sucks

By: fiend

fiend — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:23:13 +0000

agree, like i said on the comments here, i of course still use wikipedia from time to time, but for sure i wont trust it and wont comment/edit/add stuff, AND FOR FUCKING SURE WILL NEVER GIVE THEM A FUCKING CENT… they don’t respect the users, so fuck them…

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 15:45:40 +0000

Dead on about the power trips, bias, inaccuracies, and lack of journalistic integrity. Given the amount of money Wikipedia generates for the owners, I doubt anything will be done to make it a reputable site.

By: fiend

fiend — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 10:04:37 +0000

that’s my point, wikipedia has its uses, but the community and admins around it are as elitist and disgusting as the people running britanica or any other old school encyclopedia, they know what is best, and fuck the rest >_<

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:38:20 +0000

Wikipedia is ok for general research, but it SUCKS fucking ass to become a member of the fucking rat race people call wikipedia. The mods and admins always delete your shit that makes perfect logical sense and replace it with some stupid “biased” opion, then block you from editing anything for no reason at all. It’s kinda like a Canadian ran dictionary, pointless, conformist,pacifist,no bad nor good comments that conflicts with anything. When the assholes are confronted they respond to swearing or negative comments on a stupid edit made by someone who knows nothing about anything and responds to my pissed off comments with + only please.
By the way let the wars begin! Coloect the names of asshole mods and admins on a list and we spam them to death or give them super virus! The revolution has begun! Go forth!

By: fiend

fiend — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 08:16:26 +0000

one post at a time “wikipedia sucks” ^_^ or they will get deleted, the fact that we are all jerks might be right, but well just cause you say something doesn’t mean its true… you have to give evidence to claims, or else it just makes you look dumb ^_^

By: Wikipedia Sucks

Wikipedia Sucks — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 03:50:24 +0000

All guys say wikipedia sucks is a jerk! HAHAHAA you all is a jerk

By: fiend

fiend — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:55:44 +0000

first of all why the fuck are you putting fucking caps? putting caps its the equivalent in real life of making your point by shouting and not letting anyone else speak, that just makes you look like a fucking moron…

and to answer your moronic caps only comment, wikipedia makes money by donations and sponsorships, they fucking don’t care if you visit or not, besides they have loads of google love (millions of first spot results for keywords), so they have loads and loads of traffic regardless :\ and yes they still suck heheheh

By: john

john — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:41:19 +0000

I hate wikipedia. TELL EVERY ONE NOT TO VISIT THE WEBSITE, SO THEY WILL SHUT DOWN. IF NO ONE IS VISITING THE WEBSITE THEY LOSE MONEY AND THEY WILL SHUT DOWN. SPREAD THE WORD TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS. TELL THEM ABOUT ALL THE CORRUPT AND SELFISH THINGS THEY DO ON A DAILY BASIS. THEY ARE NOT PROFESSIONALS, OPEN TO CRITISM AND THE TRUTH.

By: fiend

fiend — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:25:03 +0000

i think everything in wikipedia is a bit broad…

By: DAC

DAC — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:07:26 +0000

Does anyone here find the Wikipedia category, “Living people” useful?

Seems a bit broad.

By: yankee

yankee — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:40:44 +0000

Yea they suck. I removed something that was not true and they fought hard with me.The subject is controversial so they posted it a a fringe theory. Maybe it is but there reasoning did not make any sense. They just make thing up to prove a point.I made a list of their arguments why it was a fringe theory.

Smiley face murder Theory

The majority were ruled as accidents- not true

Gannon wants a book deal-still no book

Pat Brown says Gannon’s theory is wrong because it does not fit her idea of what a typical serial killer will do-yea so?

No professional force is investigating them as murders-not true

They were drunk so blame it in the booze-many had a blood alcohol content that would make them legal to drive

smiley faces are common-smiley faces had horns and was not the only graffiti

cause I know more than the detectives that put a lot of time and effort working on the cases-oh really?

“No law enforcement agency believes that the drownings are linked in any way-false

because I just heard this stuff somewhere from some crackpot site-false

On a bigfoot article they used the opinion of an author of a book that debunked Bigfoot and a site called The Skeptics Dictionary as a citation.Now I don’t believe in bigfoot but to use someones biased opinion that bigfoot is a hoax with someone that has an agenda of debunking seems inappropiate. I added … according to the skeptics dictionary….so people would know the source. It was removed of course.I don’t like to be misled with false information even if something is a fringe theory. If you get fed up and throw one accusation back they don’t try to mediate, they just pick one person and threaten him.That would be me because most of the others are trying to sway people with their agenda.

By: fiend

fiend — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:24:22 +0000

what i like is the huge contribution “message from wales” shit, its beautiful… so “information is free” and “save wikipedia” like… if wikipedia is finished we would all kill ourselfs, noo someone would copy wikipedia, put some pub on the side and make a boat-load of money, ohhh wait that exists already ehheheh ^_^’