drummyfish/less_retarded_wiki
5
1
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Update

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Miloslav Ciz 2024-06-28 13:51:48 +02:00
parent 03375916d0
commit 681319f2f2
24 changed files with 1903 additions and 1889 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
wikipedia.md
View file

@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ And the bad things are (see also this site: http://digdeeper.club/articles/wikip
- Wikipedia is **not [public domain](public_domain.md)**. It is licensed under [CC-BY-SA](cc_by_sa.md) which is a [free](free_culture.md) 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 [feminist](feminism.md) shit** as featured images and articles, there appear popups and banners for LGBT/feminist activism and of course all articles are littered with [pseudoleftist](pseudoleft.md) 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.
- **Wikiepdia is for children**, it openly admits it wants to "protect children" so the content is written for children, no information that could harm a child (for example something that could make a child sad) is included, so if you want an encyclopedia for adults, one that favors truth over safety, Wikipedia is not for you.
- **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.
```
.-------------------------------------------------------------.
@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ There are many interesting and entertaining pages and articles on Wikipedia, som
## 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 [Metapedia](metapedia.md), [Infogalactic](infogalactic.md), [Citizendium](citizendium.md), [Leftypedia](leftypedia.md), [GCIDE](gcide.md), New World Encyclopedia, [Justapedia](justapedia.md), HandWiki or Britannica online, as well as dozens of printed encyclopedias and old digitized encyclopedias like Britannica 11th edition. For a more comprehensive list of Wikipedia alternatives see the article on [encyclopedias](encyclopedia.md). Many people are actively criticizing Wikipedia and want to diminish its power, among whom is one of Wikipedia's founders, [Larry Sanger](larry_sanger.md), who established [encyclosphere](encyclosphere.md), 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.
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 [Metapedia](metapedia.md), [Infogalactic](infogalactic.md), [Citizendium](citizendium.md), [Leftypedia](leftypedia.md), [GCIDE](gcide.md), New World Encyclopedia, [Justapedia](justapedia.md), 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 among which are for example [Encyclopedia Dramatica](dramatica.md) or Russian [Lurkmore](lurkmore.md) wiki (currently at 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 [encyclopedias](encyclopedia.md). Many people are actively criticizing Wikipedia and want to diminish its power, among whom is one of Wikipedia's founders, [Larry Sanger](larry_sanger.md), who established [encyclosphere](encyclosphere.md), 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 }