proxy70

Wikipedia

3 + 2 = 5^[citation_needed] --Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a "non-commercial", partially [1]free/open, highly
[2]censored ("child protecting", "ideology filtering", ...)
[3]pseudoleftist [4]online [5]encyclopedia of general knowledge and a
[6]social network written largely by volunteers, [7]corporations and
political activists, running on [8]free software, which used to be
editable by anyone but currently allows only politically approved members
of the public to edit a subset of its less visible non-locked articles
(i.e. it is a [9]wiki); it is the largest and perhaps most famous
encyclopedia created to date, now sadly already littered by propaganda and
countless other issues that make it not only inferior to other
encyclopedias, but harmful to whole society. It is licensed under
[10]CC-BY-SA and is run by the "[11]nonprofit" organization Wikimedia
Foundation. It is accessible at https://wikipedia.org. Wikipedia is a
mainstream information source and therefore extremely politically
censored^1234567891011121314151617181920. Wikipedia's claim of so called
"neutral point of view" (NPOV) has by now become a hilarious insult to
human intelligence. It got corrupted and turned from documenting and
recording truth to defining it -- for this [12]digdeeper aptly called
Wikipedia the Ministry of Truth.

WARNING: DO NOT DONATE TO WIKIPEDIA as the donations aren't used so much
for running the servers but rather for their political activities (which
are furthermore [13]unethical). See
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4458111/the-wiki-piggy-bank. Rather donate
to [14]Encyclopedia Dramatica. Also please go vandalize Wikipedia right
now, it's become too corrupt and needs to go down, vandalizing is [15]fun
and you'll get banned sooner or later anyway :) Some tips on vandalizing
Wikipedia can be found at
https://encyclopediadramatica.online/Wikipedia#Tips_On_Vandalizing_Wikpedia
or https://wiki.soyjaks.party/Vandalism.

{ Lol I'm banned at Wikipedia now (UPDATE: blocked globally on all their
sites now, can't even log in and defend on my talk page), reason being I
expressed unpopular opinions on my personal website OUTSIDE Wikipedia :D
UPDATE: one guy messaged me more people started to be banned and invited
me to an anti-wikipedia forum here https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/, check
it out. Also some more stuff on censorship and bias on Wikipedia:
https://www.serendipity.li/cda/censorship_at_wikipedia.htm. ~drummyfish }

Shortly after the project started in 2001, Wikipedia used to be a great
project -- it was very similar to how [16]LRS wiki looks right now; it was
relatively unbiased, objective, well readable and used plain [17]HTML and
[18]ASCII art (see it as https://nostalgia.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomePage),
however over the years it got corrupt and by 2020s it has become a
political battleground and kind of a [19]politically correct [20]joke. A
tragic and dangerous joke at that. It's still useful in many ways but it
just hardcore censors facts and even edits direct quotes to push a
[21]pseudoleftist propaganda. Do not trust Wikipedia, especially on
anything even remotely touching politics, always check facts elsewhere,
e.g. in old paper books, on Metapedia, Infogalactic etc. Also bear in mind
the extreme pseudoleftist bias in absolutely everything you read on
Wikipedia, every single sentence is shaped by evils of [22]feminism,
[23]gay fascism, black supremacy and so on -- for example wherever there
has a woman been even remotely involved in invention of something, she
will automatically be credited with that invention over a man, and
anything putting women in negative light (even in fiction) will be
obscured; for example the article (May 2024) about the book The Chrysalids
mentions that the work describes a place where people have bizarre habits,
it fails to mention these bizarre habits are women putting men in cages,
torturing them and abusing them only for reproduction. In reading anything
you will be strategically manipulated this way, existence of topic that
would be "dangerous" for you to research is strategically hidden from you
because Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia, it is a "safe space"
protecting children from "bad information" etc. Thankfully as old
Wikipedia is still accessible, you may also browse the older, less
censored version, to see how it deranged from a project seeking truth to
one abusing its popularity for propaganda.

Wikipedia exists in many (more than 200) versions differing mostly by the
[24]language used but also in other aspects; this includes e.g. Simple
English Wikipedia or Wikipedia in [25]Esperanto. In all versions combined
there are over 50 million articles and over 100 million users. English
Wikipedia is the largest with over 6 million articles.

There are also many sister projects of Wikipedia such as [26]Wikimedia
Commons that gathers [27]free as in freedom media for use on Wikipedia,
[28]WikiData, Wikinews or Wikisources.

Information about hardware and software used by Wikimedia Foundation can
be found at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers. As of 2022
Wikipedia runs of the traditional [29]LAMP framework and its website
doesn't require [30]JavaScript (amazing!). [31]Debian [32]GNU/[33]Linux is
used on web servers (switched from [34]Ubunatu in 2019). The foundation
uses its own [35]wiki engine called [36]MediaWiki that's written mainly in
[37]PHP. Database used is [38]MariaDB. The servers run on server clusters
in 6 different data centers around the world which are rented: 3 in the
[39]US, 3 in [40]Europe and 1 in [41]Asia.

Wikipedia was created by [42]Jimmy Wales and [43]Larry Sanger and was
launched on 15 January 2001. The basic idea actually came from Ben Kovitz,
a user of [44]wikiwikiweb, who proposed it to Sanger. Wikipedia was made
as a complementary project alongside [45]Nupedia, an earlier encyclopedia
by Wales and Sanger to which only verified experts could contribute.
Wikipedia of course has shown to be a much more successful project.

There exist [46]forks and alternatives to Wikipedia. Simple English
Wikipedia can offer a simpler alternative to sometimes overly complicated
articles on the main English Wikipedia. [47]Citizendium is a similar
online encyclopedia co-founded by [48]Larry Sanger, a co-founder of
Wikipedia itself, which is however [49]proprietary ([50]NC license).
Citizendium's goal is to improve on some weak points of Wikipedia such as
its reliability or quality of writing. GNU Collaborative International
Dictionary of English ([51]GCIDE) is a large dictionary made by the
[52]GNU project (forked from old Webster's dictionary with new terms
added). [53]Justapedia is a recently spawned Wikipedia fork. [54]Metapedia
and [55]Infogalactic are a Wikipedia forks that are written from a more
[56]rightist/neutral point of view. [57]Infogalactic is also a Wikipedia
fork that tries to remove the [58]pseudoleftist bullshit etc. Encyclopedia
Britannica can also be used as a nice resource: its older versions are
already [59]public domain and can be found e.g. at [60]Project Gutenberg,
and there is also a modern online version of Britannica which is
[61]proprietary (and littered with ads) but has pretty good articles even
on modern topics (of course facts you find there are in the public
domain). Practically for any specialized topic it is nowadays possible to
find its own wiki on the Internet.

Important thing to realize is that, like most mainstream projects do,
Wikipedia is not merely an [62]encyclopedia -- no, it's also a
self-proclaimed child protector, Internet state, a center for [63]fighting
for women rights, [64]language police, a community, an organization for
empowering black disabled lesbians and delivering [65]justice. Did you
ever wish your encyclopedia was your own private cop that told you which
books are approved and prevented you from reading the bad ones? That with
a book in your pocket you'd be actually constantly carrying around a
community of diverse black fat trans editors ready to rewrite your book
according to latest trends? That it would protect you from bad opinions,
snapped your fingers and yelled <CHILD PROTECT> whenever you looked at a
child picture for too long? Like your toothbrush is actually a
subscription software with internet browser and remote camera, Wikipedia
is a living, breathing entity that will decide what's best for you,
without you having to think. Books that just provide information are so
20th century bro.

Good And Bad Things About Wikipedia

Let's note a few positive and negative points about Wikipedia, as of 2022.
Some good things are:

* Despite its flaws Wikipedia is still a highly free, relatively high
quality noncommercial source of knowledge for everyone, without ads
and [66]bullshit. It is quite helpful, Wikipedia may e.g. be printed
out or saved in an offline version and used in the third world as a
completely free educational resource (see [67]Kiwix).
* Wikipedia helped prove the point of [68]free culture and showed that a
quite decentralized, "[69]bazaar style" collaboration of volunteers
can far surpass the best efforts of corporations.
* UPDATE: this is no longer true. Wikipedia's website is (/used to be)
pretty nice (at least as of 2022), kind of minimalist, lightweight and
works without [70]Javascript. { Indeed as of 2023 they fucked it up :D
It is still not as bad as other sites but it's shit now. ~drummyfish }
* Wikipedia is very friendly to computer analysis, it provides all its
data publicly, in simple and open formats, and doesn't implement any
[71]DRM. This allows to make a lot of research, in depth searching,
collection of statistics etc.
* Wikipedia drives the sister projects, some of which are extremely
useful, e.g. Wikimedia Commons, Wikidata or [72]MediaWiki.
* Even if politically biased, Wikipedia may serve as a basis for
[73]forks that fix the political bias ([74]Metapedia,
[75]InfoGalactic, ...).
* Wikipedia presents itself as free encyclopedia (as of 2023), i.e. it
uses the word "free" instead of "open", which is a good thing (see
[76]free software vs [77]open source).
* Though it became corrupt and censored lately, the project managed to
create a relatively good encyclopedia in the past, which is still
completely accessible and free, e.g. at
https://nostalgia.wikipedia.org or internet archive.

And the bad things are (see also this site:
http://digdeeper.club/articles/wikipedia.xhtml):

* Wikipedia is [78]censored, [79]politically correct, biased, pushes a
harmful political propaganda and often just pure lies, even though it
[80]proclaims the opposite (which makes it much worse by added
deception). A typical example is for example the force pushed image of
a trans "woman" as the main image for [81]woman in the "woman"
article, i.e. even if it was already universally accepted trans women
are "women" (which objectively it's still not, large number of
population rejects this), a trans woman certainly does not represent a
TYPICAL woman, i.e. something you'd want to see in a main picture of
an article -- this is just purely political propaganda trying to
promote an idea of what women should look like. This pseudoleftist
subtext is by now not occasional, you will find it virtually in every
paragraph on Wikipedia is some form. Of course, "offensive" material
and material not aligned with [82]pseudoleftist propaganda is removed
as well as material connected to some controversial resources (e.g the
link to 8chan, https://8kun.top, is censored, as well as [83]Nina
Paley's Jenndra Identitty comics and much more). There is a heavy
[84]pseudoleft, [85]pseudoskeptic and [86]soyence bias in the
articles. It creates a list of banned sources ([87]archive) which just
removes all non-[88]pseudoleftist sources -- so much for their
"neutral point of view". It wasn't always this way, browsing pre 2010
Wikipedia provides a less censored experience.
* Wikipedia includes material under [89]fair use, such as screenshots
from proprietary games, which makes it partially [90]proprietary, i.e.
Wikipedia is technically NOT 100% free. Material under fair use is
still proprietary and can put remixers to legal trouble (e.g. if they
put material from Wikipedia to a commercial context), even if the use
on Wikipedia itself is legal (remember, proprietary software is legal
too).
* Wikipedia is intentionally deceptive -- it supports its claims by
"citations" ("race is a social
construct"^1234567891011121314151617181920) to make things look as
objective facts, but the citations are firstly cherry picked (there is
a list of banned sources), self-made (articles of Wikipedians
themselves) and secondly the sources often don't even support the
claim, they're literally there just for "good look". Not only do they
practice censorship, they claim they do NOT practice censorship and
then write article on censorship so as to define censorship in their
own convenient way :) Furthermore their articles intentionally omit
points of view of their political opponents.
* "verifiability, not truth"
* Wikipedia often suffers from writing inconsistency, bad structure of
text and poor writing in general. In a long article you sometimes find
repeating paragraphs, sometimes a lot of stress is put on one thing
while mentioning more important things only briefly, the level of
explanation expertness fluctuates etc. This is because in many
articles most people make small contributions without reading the
whole article and without having any visions of the whole. And of
course there are many contributors without any writing skills.
* Wikipedia is too popular which has the negative side effect of
becoming a political battlefield. This is one of the reasons why there
has to be a lot of bureaucracy, including things such as locking of
articles and the inability to edit everything. Even if an article can
technically be edited by anyone, there are many times people watching
and reverting changes on specific articles. So Wikipedia can't fully
proclaim it can be "edited by anyone".
* Wikipedia is hard to read. The articles go to great depth and mostly
even simple topics are explained with a great deal of highly technical
terms so that they can't be well understood by people outside the
specific field, even if the topic could be explained simply (Simple
English Wikipedia tries to fix this a little bit at least). Editors
try to include as much information as possible which too often makes
the main point of a topic drown in the blablabla. Wikipedia's style is
also very formal and "not [91]fun" to read, which isn't bad in itself
but it just is boring to read. Some alternative encyclopedias such as
[92]Citizendium try to offer a more friendly reading style. Back in
the day Wikipedia used to be written pretty well, check it out e.g. at
https://nostalgia.wikipedia.org.
* Wikipedia is not [93]public domain. It is licensed under [94]CC-BY-SA
which is a [95]free license, but has a few burdening conditions. We
belive knowledge shouldn't be owned or burdened by any conditions.
* Even though there are no commercial ads (yet), there regularly appears
political propaganda, main page just hard pushes [96]feminist shit as
featured images and articles, there appear popups and banners for
LGBT/feminist activism and of course all articles are littered with
[97]pseudoleftist propaganda etc. The issues is it's not just an
encyclopedia anymore where you go get your information, it's a group
with opinions that's trying to drag you somewhere -- you just go look
up some mathematical formula and suddenly you see something like "YAY,
LET'S CELEBRATE WOMEN IN AFRICA TODAY", even if it was something you
agree with (which it isn't) it's just as annoying and out of place in
an encyclopedia as capitalist ads. UPDATE: In 2024 Wikipedia finally
put on highly intrusive pop ups and in-text messages begging for money
-- basically like what you see on any porn site -- this means the
project is basically dead at this point and they're just milking the
corpse -- that's good, Wikipedia certainly won't be missed.
* Many articles are bought, there exist companies that offer editing and
maintaining certain articles in a way the client desires and of course
corporations and politicians take this opportunity -- of course
Wikipedia somewhat tries to prevent it but no prevention ever works
100%, so a lot of information on Wikipedia is either highly
misleading, untrue, censored or downright fabricated.
* Wikipedia is written by children and its content has to be child
friendly, i.e. anything that you'd want to hide from children you
won't find on Wikipedia. This is an issue if you are an adult looking
for complete facts. Wikipedia openly admits its editors and readers
may be children and that it wants to "protect" them -- this of course
comes for the price of making the encyclopedia a child safespace, a
kind of kindergarden where no bad things or words can appear.

.-------------------------------------------------------------.
| |
| <3 PLEASE DON'T SKIP THIS 10 MINUTE READ <3 |
| |
| RESPONSIBILITY, children and life environment now more than |
| ever, we are live in times when SCIENCE VERIFIED FIGHT |
| RIGHTS to freedom and safe PRIVACY, PROTECTION and EXPERTS |
| DEFEND, MUSTN'T STOP READ! time to ACT like LINCOLN, must |
| have RESPONSIBILITY. Children and Earth are magical. |
| |
| Give us 20 bucks please. |
| |
| -- your encyclopedia that protects from bad information |
| |
| this box was personally seen and signed and approved by |
| dear C.E.O. of the encyclopedia of peer reviewed truth |
'-------------------------------------------------------------'

Fun And Interesting Pages

There are many interesting and entertaining pages and articles on
Wikipedia, some of them are:

* unusual articles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Unusual_articles
* don't delete the main page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Don%27t_delete_the_main_page
* Wikipedia records:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_records
* longest pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:LongPages
* special pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:SpecialPages
* list of lists of lists:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lists_of_lists
* current events: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events

Alternatives

Due to the corruption and increasing censorship of Wikipedia it is
important to look for alternatives that are important especially when
researching anything connected to politics, but also when you just want a
simpler, more condensed or simply better written explanation of some
topic. There exist other similar online encyclopedias like [98]Metapedia,
[99]Infogalactic, [100]Citizendium, [101]Leftypedia, [102]GCIDE, New World
Encyclopedia, [103]Justapedia, HandWiki or Britannica online, as well as
dozens of printed encyclopedias and old digitized encyclopedias like
Britannica 11th edition. Then there is another type of very notable
encyclopedias, sometimes called [104]memopedias, among which are for
example [105]Encyclopedia Dramatica or Russian [106]Lurkmore wiki and its
forks (e.g. https://neolurk.org, calling itself the "people's Wikipedia",
hinting at the fact that Wikipedia doesn't really belong to the people
anymore) -- these are not so serious in tone, they're often called a
satire, meme or parody by the "serious" ones, they're greatly uncensored
and although being usually more focused on internet culture, they do to a
great degree document knowledge at wide and sometimes manage to explain
difficult topic very simply by going to the point and using humor and
plain language. These encyclopedias are typically the most objective,
uncensored and least politically infected and so they're a much better
source on anything relating to society or politics -- where Wikipedia will
strategically obscure and downplay "inconvenient facts", Dramatica will
simply highlight anything that's of importance. Anyway, for a more
comprehensive list of Wikipedia alternatives see the article on
[107]encyclopedias. Many people are actively criticizing Wikipedia and
want to diminish its power, among whom is one of Wikipedia's founders,
[108]Larry Sanger, who established [109]encyclosphere, a project that
tries to connect together various Internet encyclopedias -- this may be
another place to look for Wikipedia alternatives. Anyway the moral of the
story here is probably to not rely on a single encyclopedia, as we see
where that leads. Read more sources and different points of view.

{ See also old Wikipedia at https://nostalgia.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race.
~drummyfish }