Page 1 of 18

Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:03 am
by ericbarbour
Posted before but restarting:

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

Something any "reference encyclopedia" should have. But it's a sad little near-stub: only about 5k bytes and created in 2007.

On the other hand, there is this.

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

One of Wikipedia's oldest articles, dating from 2001. Cuerrently more than 43k bytes long. Why do Wikipedians think dumpster diving is more important that the dumpster one dives into? Is there any kind of sane explanation for this?

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 12:54 am
by ericbarbour
This is such VALUABLE INFORMATION!!

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

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:27 am
by Strelnikov
They had the moxie to put a "original research" tag on this one!

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

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2017 1:48 am
by Soham321
.

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:14 pm
by ericbarbour
The next time some Wiki-Fool wants to berate you about "proper referencing", show him this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac_V8_engine

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 6:51 am
by Kato
Soham321 wrote:WP article of a well known and well connected Indian lobbyist:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suhel_Seth
This doesn't belong here, it has been a balanced article since September 2016, and after Soham321's socking ultimately resulted in an indeff with WMF also approving secret suppression of Soham321's crap. The user Mannerheimo is a long term paid editor available for hire.

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:27 am
by ericbarbour
Why is there misinfo on WP? At least a few items can be blamed on Cris Shapan:

http://dangerousminds.net/comments/ever ... t_for_this

With your Photoshop skills you can “edit” the past—in a very Orwellian sense—and it’s frightening to see how fucking gullible people can be. I recall we posted one of your Alan Hale parody album covers and idiots on Facebook were commenting “I used to have this record!” “Me too!” and “I still have mine!” Ummm… no you don’t.

Cris Shapan: Yeah, it’s scary to see something I did purely to entertain friends become someone else’s reality. Some claim to remember or even own something that never existed. Others will repost a parody ad as real, especially if it reinforces some agenda they’re touting (sexism in advertising, the past was a horrible place, frankenfood, etc.). People read the fake ad copy and leap to the wildest interpretations, often expressing outrage at something that never actually happened. It’s just bizarre. Some people are so convinced these parody pieces are genuine that they’ve gone in and modified Wikipedia pages to reflect their existence, which of course compounds the stupidity.

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2017 5:10 pm
by suckadmin
This is a proverbial crap article.. :lol:

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

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:35 pm
by Flip Flopped
suckadmin wrote:This is a proverbial crap article.. :lol:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariko_Aoki_phenomenon
Indeed. :P

That article has been extensive edited for a year by User:Leaf of knowledge who seems to have only made four edits to other articles.

Drmies and Lady of Shallot touched the article earlier in its history, with Drmies having done more than Lady of Shallot. The article survived a AfD in 2014.

Re: Crap or questionable articles

Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 9:53 pm
by ericbarbour
A perfect, IDEAL example of Wikipedians acting like ADHD robot people. A long-and-still-growing article about a trivial news item.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ex ... 1_incident

Created on 10 April. Three days later it was 49k bytes with 92 references.

And in six months it will probably be totally forgotten.