18th May 2010, 1:31 AM
I fuck with wikipedia entries all the time, I made the entry for "Catholics" redirect to "self-hatred", but then I was banned. I turned the entry for scientology in to a subtle plot synopsis for Avatar and for a while I added the word 'penis' randomly to entries. Like "Several of these bird types are penis, though their relatives are blah blah" or "Abraham Lincoln's penis was 6 foot 4 inches tall" and it was on there for weeks before someone finally caught it.
As long as the data is cited it really doesn't matter, but it helps to check the websites it directs to. This was years ago, but I remember reading about the spanish civil war and there was a horrible mistake on it that the children were put in to death camps (the children and elderly were evacuated and protected). But it wasn't on there long. I rarely see mistakes any more, the grammar nazi's on wiki usually catch improper data before anyone and flag it for the scholars to find. Then the philosophers add in the commentary of what is believed or otherwise alluded to but never factually proven. The religious entries are the worst though... but now instead of arguing over the content, they argue over how much content to add finding a happy medium of "the less we say, the better". The entry for Jesus is just hilarious, it reads like a mad-lib.
edit - does anyone here remember all the arguments about whether or not "Christ" was actually his last name? And how his real name isn't even known but one use of his names that was found means it was loosely translated to "Joshua"? I put a thing at the end that said "...but "Josh" just didn't have the same ring to it." and I got chewed out. Aparrently you cant brighten someone's day with a little eduTAINMENT.
As long as the data is cited it really doesn't matter, but it helps to check the websites it directs to. This was years ago, but I remember reading about the spanish civil war and there was a horrible mistake on it that the children were put in to death camps (the children and elderly were evacuated and protected). But it wasn't on there long. I rarely see mistakes any more, the grammar nazi's on wiki usually catch improper data before anyone and flag it for the scholars to find. Then the philosophers add in the commentary of what is believed or otherwise alluded to but never factually proven. The religious entries are the worst though... but now instead of arguing over the content, they argue over how much content to add finding a happy medium of "the less we say, the better". The entry for Jesus is just hilarious, it reads like a mad-lib.
edit - does anyone here remember all the arguments about whether or not "Christ" was actually his last name? And how his real name isn't even known but one use of his names that was found means it was loosely translated to "Joshua"? I put a thing at the end that said "...but "Josh" just didn't have the same ring to it." and I got chewed out. Aparrently you cant brighten someone's day with a little eduTAINMENT.