Wikipedia Sucks!

In your opinion, how do Wikipedia critics rank? What follows is my opinion. Feel free to share your own.

Senior Critics

1. TDA
The mighty TDA occupies the top slot because he seems to be the only serious Wikipedia critic right now with a publishing contract. His analysis is insightful and well-researched; his prose is smooth and easy on the eye.

CONS
Breitbart is perhaps not to everyone's taste.

PROS
The guy's published. He gets the credibility; he gets the green. No one else comes close. TDA is in a league of his own.

RATING
9/10

2. Eric Barbour
Eric's experience is legendary. Now that Peter Damian has quit Wikipedia criticism, it may be safe to say that Eric's knowledge exceeds anyone else's. He's certainly way ahead of Jake and Tarantino.

CONS
Sadly, Eric never found a publisher for his book. IMO, you're either published or you're not. It's for this reason that I rank Eric behind TDA.

PROS
Where to start? Eric is a veritable expert on almost all matters pertaining to Wikipedia and the WMF.

RATING
8/10


Mid-level Critics

1. Eric Corbett
Eric of course needs no introduction. He started hundreds of articles on Wikipedia and steered many others to FAC. Famed as a GA reviewer and purveyor of solid advice, he developed an almost cult-like following. Over on WPO he's now harnessing his vast experience and re-inventing himself as a serious critic.

CONS
Eric remains a controversial figure, and regrettably this dilutes much of his input. Given time, though, things may change.

PROS
There's simply no substitute for experience.

RATING
7/10

2. Mr Lomax
Mr Lomax is beginning to make a name for himself. Skilled in dispute resolution and recently published in a peer-reviewed academic journal, I think we can all agree Our Man in Massachusetts is a serious critic on the rise.

CONS
Verbosity. Prolixity. Long-windedness. Oh, and did I mention verbosity.

PROS
Mr Lomax did what no other critic has done -- he tried suing the WMF. Sure, he may lose, but at least he tried. Kudos.

RATING
5/10

3. Dysklever
Dysklever operates his own blog and recently set up the [unofficial] WPO Discord server. This shouts one word: AMBITION. I've been dealing with clients for the last 15 years and it now takes me less than one minute to separate winners from losers. Dysklever ain't no loser. End of.

CONS
As things stand, his blog is amateurish. The gentleman needs to work on his prose.

PROS
The guy's going places. It's that simple.

RATING
5/10


Junior Critics

1. Kumioko
A truly legendary Wikipedian. The gentleman amassed almost 1,000,000 edits and has the sort of experience most of us can only dream of. A great critic. But then he talks about his ban. And then he talks about his ban. And then ....

CONS
A tendency to self-destruct.

PROS
Kumioko is a serious critic. His approach is thoughtful and academic.

RATING
4/10

2. CrowsNest
If you're looking for traditional, old-school values, look no further than CrowsNest. The gentleman adopts a robust approach to his criticism and has a well-earned reputation for hitting hard. But serious doubts remain about his limited Wikipedia experience [especially his obvious competency issues], and many critics voice concern over his failures to correctly identify the causes of FramGate and accurately predict the outcome of Fram's RFA.

CONS
Mocked by just about everyone on WPO; scorned by the mighty TDA.

PROS
Highly regarded by Graaf Statler.

RATING
4/10

3. Graaf Statler
With careful mentoring, Graaf could grow and flourish. He could easily become a worthy critic. Everyone knows and likes Graaf!

CONS
A tendency to stray off topic and engage in personal attacks.

PROS
Creative use of color.

RATING
3/10

Graaf Statler wrote:Must I [foe] you now?

And how can I higher my level?

Anyway, you learned a lot on Dysk his Discord!

Yeah -- I remember Dysk now from Reddit. He and I once chatted on a thread about SEO. I vaguely remember him from WPO, too.

RE: And how can I higher my level?

Don't worry about it. You're still much higher than me!

PS. Please show more pics of your villa in Italy. The ones on Discord are a bit small.

And here's a couple more.

Junior Critics

Vigilant
Fired into action by an obvious obsessive disorder and motivated by a clear hatred for all and sundry, Vigilant has a reputation for pursuing his victims with relentless zeal and digging up the dirt. Like most keyboard warriors, he's about as threatening as a bowl of cold rice [I doubt he even owns a gun], but he's often quite entertaining and fun to watch.

CONS
Almost universally mocked.

PROS
Highly regarded by Jake.

RATING
4/10

Jake
Famed for his limp-wristedness and pretentious, pseudo-intellectual drivel, Jake is a prominent figure on WPO and appears to be a key player in the site's attempt to re-brand itself as a safe haven for Wikipedians rather than a venue for serious criticism.

CONS
Extremely effeminate. Some commentators have suggested he may even be a tranny.

PROS
The gentleman's prose is invariably free of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors.

RATING
3/10

Thanks, Anyone. It's Dysklyver, by the way.

Right, time for a couple more.

Mid-level Critics

Auggie
Auggie is a polite, easy-going Philadelphian who earns his living as a veterinary surgeon. He operated the ProBoards-hosted Wikipedia-Review forum and, until quite recently, wikirev.org. Sadly, both forums are now offline.

CONS
No analysis would be complete without mention of Auggie's disastrous foray into the free knowledge sector. His encyclopedia, https://encyc.org/, was simply awful.

PROS
Auggie was well-liked and his attempts to create viable alternatives to Wikipediocracy were much appreciated.

RATING
6/10


Junior Critics

Ritchie333
Mr Richard Swan -- an English gentleman from Ashford, Kent -- is an enormously experienced Wikipedian with a reputation for honesty and integrity. He recently joined Wikipediocracy and already is starting to make a name for himself. With careful mentoring, I have little doubt he will flourish and become a highly respected critic.

CONS
Regrettably, Mr Swan chooses his friends unwisely. It's known, for example, that he has a high regard for the likes of Cassianto and Blofeld. I find this both puzzling and troubling.

PROS
Ritchie is a prolific content creator with a string of well-earned GAs under his belt. Much of his oeuvre centers on London [where I used to live] and is generally quite good.

RATING
4/10

Any, what is the use of this who has his tree house the higest in the tree summery?

And why is Abd not on top?

A couple of heavyweights.

Senior Critics

Gregory Kohs
Mr Gregory Kohs was in many ways the definitive Wikipedia critic. Not only did he have an extremely well-paid job with a leading American company, he had the good looks, personality and charisma to woo TV audiences and entice dozens of journalists to learn more about Wikipedia's internal failings. Always articulate, always insightful and always well-dressed, Mr Kohs was the King of Wikipedia Criticism.

CONS
And then he vanished! I wonder why.

PROS
I honestly can't count how many TV appearances Mr Kohs made, nor can I count the number of reputable journalists who interviewed him.

RATING
9/10

Larry Sanger
One day Mr Sanger did something extraordinary. He pushed a few buttons, and then he pushed a few more. Unbeknown to him at the time, he created a website that for the next two decades would have a profound impact on the lives of billions of people across the globe. Mr Sanger invented Wikipedia.

CONS
Mr Sanger is an intellectual rather than a businessman, so regrettably his subsequent ventures haven't fared too well. But let's not dwell on the gentleman's failings.

PROS
These days Mr Sanger is one of Wikipedia's most vocal critics. His opinions have been published in countless online magazines, newspapers and academic journals. He's also the author of perhaps the most famous quote of all: "the inmates started running the asylum".

RATING
9/10

Graaf Statler wrote:Any, what is the use of this who has his tree house the higest in the tree summery?

And why is Abd not on top?

Graaf -- it's just a forum. Don't take it too seriously.

And try to do something about your internet addiction. As we discussed on Discord, you seem to be online 24/7 these days.

No, I simple can't get why Abt is not on top. And it was raining yesterday. (And I had/have a cold, no better amusement as this total nonsens.)

Graaf Statler wrote:No, I simple can't get why Abt is not on top. And it was raining yesterday. (And I had/have a cold, no better amusement as this total nonsens.)

Hey Graaf -- I'm sorry to hear it's raining in Italy. But I hope you're still having a great holiday!

Here in Bangkok we're having MONSTER thunder storms right now. MASSIVE thunder. HUGE bolts of lightning.