Wikipedia Rant

I love how at Wikipedia you can spend hours contributing useful, relevant information to existing articles and make new articles just to have people come in and delete said information. It's good to know everyone's work is appreciated over at the free "encyclopedia". I'm not talking about myself specifically, but I've seen loads of people contribute at times thousands of words worth of information just to have some nerds come in saying it's not "notable" and throwing Wikipedia "policies" at them.I thought it was the "free encyclopedia that anyone could edit", not the so-called "encyclopedia" where you can contribute as long as others think your work is notable. All those stupid AFD (articles for deletion) debates where people spend hours arguing with each other citing policies (feels almost like a St. John's city council meeting), accumulating at times like 50 pages of the same things being repeated over and over; people acting as if they own the site and are under complete control over what and what not can be posted there.

we get that here to a lesser extent, I've seen a number of flame wars in the game comments, someone making a perfectly reasonable statement followed by about 4 or 5 people saying something along the lines of 'cockfag' or equivalent.

Off-topic: Cockfag... that's a new one.

Not just wikipedia, YouTube as well. There will always be 'cockfags' who never support others and always think they are always right.

For example:Message marked as spam
someuser (2 days ago) -6 +0
FAKE fake fake fake fake FAKE LOOOOSERRR dis is witchcraft i say! witchcraft!

the problem with wiki is how credible are you even with sources that you provide.xbox 360 is the best, etc....
ign.com [articlex25145682]
gamespot.com [article 65485645]
gamespy.com [article 623335266]i have provided 3 sources that says xbox 360 is the best. what evidence is there that provides the 360 is the best console. the problem is that there are biases as those articles are from people who maybe fans or supporters of the xbox 360 consoles. in addition, you yourself maybe one of those fans or supporters. your interpretation varies by other people.would you trust your doctor who has practice in medicine and has a history or would you trust a guy who has practice at knowing all about medicine but no history??

Yeah... there should be a Mod review form, so they do review what's really going on, and watch the stuff go up...not so that endless times of work could be messed up

ultra · #6the problem with wiki is how credible are you even with sources that you provide.xbox 360 is the best, etc....
ign.com [articlex25145682]
gamespot.com [article 65485645]
gamespy.com [article 623335266]i have provided 3 sources that says xbox 360 is the best. what evidence is there that provides the 360 is the best console. the problem is that there are biases as those articles are from people who maybe fans or supporters of the xbox 360 consoles. in addition, you yourself maybe one of those fans or supporters. your interpretation varies by other people.

OK firstly, lets not single out the Xbox 360 as I'm sure there are countless articles on the net
that has a PS3 or Wii bias...
And secondly, articles on various matters, consoles among them, are watched keenly, as they are
often subject to vandalism by fanboys...The problem with the "free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" ideal....
Is that it is too often abused...
Wikipedia needs to be strictly moderated....
Otherwise, whats to stop me creating a document saying
"PS3 will take all your money and give your children AIDS", uploading it on a server
and quoting it as a source on Wikipedia...The thing we have to remember is, mods are people too, and not beyond corruption...
Mods have their own beliefs and biases and their own agendas....and everybody likes to think they are right, right ?I don't know anything about your article, NeonFire...
But I don't think you are the type to be overly biased or to vandalize....
So I would say you have been the victim of a bastard mod...

Replying to #8

that is a great statement!

Replying to #9

If that is sarcasm, please remember to use the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags,
as unfortunately text doesn't convey tone of voice....If not....thank you

Replying to #10

it wasn't sarcasm, i wanted to say you really nailed it. sometimes you want to say something and you don't know how to say it so you just say it and it sounds like are you going for this direction or the other or that the tonality of the speech hints a negative direction or vice versa.