!!! Potential photosensitivity warning for mild flashing lights, forgot to put this in the video !!! also if you dont like the intro id recommend not watching the video 👍
My school has its own Wikipedia vandals story. One time a couple of students were suspended for making memes about the baldness of the chief administrator. Later that week, in an act of protest, his Wikipedia article was edited to include a "filmography" where he stared as famous bald characters such as Dominic Toreto and Mr Clean
Haha. My friends and I got our school banned from editing Wikipedia. Nothing came from it though as Wikipedia at the time was still a somewhat new concept, at least to teachers as the site was only like 4 or years old at that point. The rest of the time was spent trolling Yahoo answers, making accounts for a specific teacher we didn't like and asking questions like "Is it OK to kiss my students ?" Or "How can I get my students to really like me" The teacher was always giving the cute girls special treatment, he was kind of a creep.
One of my all time favourite internet stories is the drama of the Scots Wikipedia (a version of Wikipedia in the Scots language, a divergent language/dialect of English). It turned out that almost half of it, thousands and thousands of articles, had been written by one American teenager with no knowledge of the language by writing in his imagined version of it, which was basically American English phonetically spelled with a Scottish accent, mixed with a dose of gibberish and invented words.
I speak a particular dialect of Scots (not the one he was writing in) and seeing "also" represented as "an' aw" in every article made me want to spew everywhere
there's a woman similar to him who pops up infrequently to edit as many pages as she can to her preferred version of english, which is a combination of old english and grammatically incorrect modern english and welsh, and she insists that the correct spelling of things is via her own incorrect interpretation of how to read phonetic symbols
"Wikipedia is the last place you'd expect drama or conflict" this made me realize just how few people actually get involved with wikis beyond reading them lol.
I mean, I don't blame them, that's kinda the point of a wiki: easy to access information. But at the same time, I feel it should be non surprising to find that out, at the end of the day anyone can edit Wikipedia and even mods can have their biases.
People should read the talk pages on controversial political topics, such as articles on transgender issues or the Syrian civil war. You can tell some of the articles are guarded by very biased editors, usually but not always with a strong liberal bias, who will ignore reasonable suggestions, cite opinion articles which hold very little factual information, and generally act smug and condescending towards anyone who wants to improve the objectivity of these articles.
My favorite was some person who was always editing the wikipedia page for the city of Deer Park, WA. He made a whole fictional history of the town revolving around a giant baby born in the town named Farleif. Who grew up to be a great deer wrestler and the town would celebrate with the "running of farleif" and "deer kicking days". It was quite creative and was up for a long time. There are still a couple weird things that pop up on that page time to time and I'd like to think who ever did it is still out there trying. He even had a whole fake website about the town set up so he could use it as a reference. I really wish I had archived it.
> "I really wish I had archived it." It has been! Wikipedia keeps an Akashic record, and there's a "View history" button on the top of the page, and you can view past versions. The only exceptions to this are revisions that have been deleted due to libel, copyright violations, or sensitive information.
@@voltageesq. This is funny, it not only made it seem like he will eventually end up existing, but it also got the page semi-protected. I'll post the link in another comment. (oldid=856542416)
That's a site I haven't thought of in years. I found out about when my girlfriend at the time sent me "shitting dick nipples" and that was like in 2010 or 2011.
Genuinely, I did not think that was possible. Even my ass, at my spiciest, wouldn't be able to get banned from that place. People have called out specific users *and* dropped some pretty nasty IRL photos in there and not gotten the boot.
People are convinced that ED is a super far right wiki when in reality they simply mocked everything they could, if you looked up any ethnicity or country on ED, it's always an article mocking it
I'm surprised you didn't include the Scots kid, who essentially wrote half of the Scots language wikipedia for years, without ever actually knowing the language
Didn't he also try to guilt trip everyone after with saying like 'It hurts me most to know that the countless hours I spent trying to help people actually just made things worse' lol
If there was virtually nobody who spoke the language well enough to call it out for years i'd say the language was already good as dead in the first place. If I remember the story, the fucking government copypasted from it because even they didnt have ant Scots speaker.
There is one legendary long-term troll on Wiktionary (Wikipedia’s smaller sister project). Wonderfool has been editing from 2004 and is known for having become an administrator and deleting the main page twice. Funnily enough, everyone agrees that when not trolling he makes valuable edits, and the community is seriously considering unbanning him (we’ll see where that goes).
I only recently found out about this guy and I find his actions hilarious, my theory is that he's just building trust to be re-accepted and amnestied back onto the site tho, lol.
My favorite story was one of my teachers editing her sister's wiki page. Her sister was a paralympian athlete, and my teacher would add in random true but unimportant facts. Her sister couldn't edit them out bc you can't edit your own wiki page, so it would take a bit for any additions to be removed.
I'd do the same if I had a famous sibling lmao Like imagine the brother of a Nobel Prize in, idk physics, just adding "Oh yeah, he peed in his bed up until he was 17" and it being true, but also difficult to remove hahaha I'd do it
Sounds like a good example of an edge case that must be a pain in the ass to moderate/devise rules around. I mean, it's technically legit since such editors aren't the subject of the article in question, but they're so close to the subject and thus more prone to bias that functionally, they might as well be. I guess it's not a major issue if such edits fall under the (admittedly broad) umbrella of trivial/irrelevant info (unsure what term Wikipedia uses for this kinda thing), so that'd be grounds to remove such things. Then again, that same reason is what allows editors, most of whom with an obvious political leaning that's become much more apparent in recent years, to remove "irrelevant" info on certain political figures that happens to paint them in a negative light... but that's a whole other rabbit hole.
One of my favourite vandalizations of Wikipedia was "Wax house, baby". Someone after watching the 2005 remake of House of wax decided to deface its wiki page. They wrote that the working title of the film was "Wax house, baby" and that this was allegedly because it was iffy if the film could clear the rights to remake the original. This edit was up on Wikipedia for years. It was up for so long that people would quote it on horror movie podcasts as fact. This was until the mischievous editor wrote into a the important if true podcast, confessing to their wiki-crimes.
I think my favourite was how the ‘All Dogs Go To Heaven 2’ Wikipedia was temporarily locked due to the fact that many people kept editing it to say that Gordon Freeman from Half-Life had died in the film due to a web series making a joke about it.
The thing about this that bothers me is the Wikipedia mods for that article have a major stick up their asses and won’t add a “references in other media” tab or something to the movie page. Because every year the page gets unlocked and every year people are still vandalizing it, and it’d all be stopped if they mentioned that HLVRAI references the movie. LOTS of wikipedia pages have a tab where they list things the subject is referenced in, and I genuinely think the only reason the mods won’t add it is because they’re petty
This was posted in the morning and it may come off as sarcastic, but I love how you refer to things in the past terminology as if it's a dug up recording, "this evening", and "tonight". It feels as if I am watching a TV documentary paired with an informational youtube video. I love it.
KRB may have taken inspiration from Nexpo, a similar youtuber with very high production quality. He also uses retro themes in his videos. Or not. I don't know for sure.
I clicked on this video thinking that it was about actual cryptids, a subject which I have an interest in for the folklore aspects. That being said, this was a pretty fascinating subject, and I really enjoyed it. Thanks for making this video.
Same, but I figured it probably wasn't about cryptids because IDK how that relates to Wikipedia specifically. Like are we just gonna read pages about cryptids? Idk why they settled on that name. Even just "Wikipedia Vandals" or "article trolls" would've made 1000x more sense. If they went with "vandals," they even could've called false information "article graffiti," since that's what most of it amounts to. It's graffiti on a Wikipedia article.
@@gearandalthefirst7027 Technically they are heavily deranged and insane people but these therms are less and less being used with each year, because it's cool to be an idiot ... I guess, that is what I am being told so far ... So I guess people come up with new words for them ... I call them mutants for a long time now since they tend to be that. Most of these lies and sicknesses come from the west, their diet and cities are toxic so their brain is lacking development, nutrition, with other words they mutate into whatever media tells them they are. 20-10 years ago most kids were neglected, no life, grew up in front of a phone, or some sort of online screen being fed with garbage data, today they children on their own and the cicle repeats. They repeat mistakes live unhealthy, they are a burden to others, cause damage not only to themselves, later pull a victim card, many die from cancer or this so called Covid which also is connected to everything. Wikipedia and all these garbage data websites comes from the west too, all connected into a big bowl of mess ran by mutants.
I’d like to give a special mention to “Ananny”, an artist from Canada who, since late 2006, has repeatedly attempted to create an article on herself and force her inclusion in several lists of Canadian artists, also doing the same to _several_ more different-language Wikipedia versions.
I used to be an active user on a very niche fandom wiki back in 2020 about fake tornadoes. One of the most memorable incidents from that wiki was when Supreme Genghis Khan himself showed up and vandalized the wiki.
Actually I would say the silent majority of people who believe in reincarnation (Buddhists for example) believe they could be reincarnated from or to something as simple as a worm. Doing so comes with the understanding that all living things are valuable. Crazies on the other hand can’t see themselves as anything but the reincarnation of something stupendously important, probably coming from an unchecked ego.
Actual Buddhists and Hindus do believe that. It's just Western New Age idiots who use it to pretend they're something better than a modern peasant. The absolutr dumbest ones are "fictionkin" morons, who want to pretend they're the reincarnation of Naruto or whatever 😂😂😂
Wow, this is fascinating! As an active Wikipedia editor myself, I've come across my fair share of unusual incidents like one sockmaster who has an obsession with Croatia, COPPA, and supergiant stars. They keep parroting about letting underage children use social media in the articles they edit, it's honestly kinda scary.
Wikipedia's OK for ideologically-neutral topics, like "wild flowers of Northern Spain", or "induction of 2 stroke engines"... But for any topics even VAGUELY connected to politics (especially online politics/"culture wars"-related topics), or to obsessive fandoms... or basically ANY topic people have emotional investment in, more often than not it's just blatantly biased, and frequently filled with outright lies. Same as Reddit, Wikipedia is basically run by a small clique of ideologue "power-mods", who control contributions about any political/"controversial" topics, ensuring it only ever conforms to THEIR political biases (and manufacturing reasons to ban editors who DON'T push the "correct" politics). At least two founding editors of Wikipedia have written about this bias, concerned that the site's essentially become an organ of propaganda (on any topic that anyone cares about).
(“Underage children” as opposed to of age children…?) And I’m pretty sure kids already use social media constantly? So that doesn’t even make sense to say.
@@BaconLover100 Justin Whang has a whole ass video about this. Tldr a mod of the silent hill wiki kept trying to put any circumcision points into articles where they (quite obviously b/c it’s silent hill) don’t belong.
"wikis" and Wikipedia are two completely different things, keep in mind. Wikis are just collaborative fan sites that use a template reminiscent of Wikipedia, typically run through private hosting companies dedicated to that purpose, or rarely from a person's server. Wikipedia is a nonprofit organization dedicated specifically to the funding and maintenance of Wikipedia.
the weirdest part about this video is that you didnt know there was drama on wikipedia; any online community that takes itself even a little seriously has apocalyptic levels of disagreements
'Woman' is a page I recall getting extremely heated and convoluted over one group perceiving 'Woman' as a sociological viewpoint and another being completely biological. Both sides can't condede which extremely diminished the readability of the article. Seriously, when someone has to say 'If we're gonna discuss changing "adult female human" for the fifty-thousandth time', you know it's bad.
Currently watching this at my dead fast food job and I cannot express how much this has improved my day. Your content is so good and entertaining; thanks so much
Shame Willy on Wheels (who also sockpuppet under various other names) was never highlighted. When WP:LONGTERM was created around the start of 2005 as "Vandalism in progress/Long term alerts", WoW had already gained infamy on the wiki for its incessant renaming of articles to end with "on Wheels". No surprise WoW was among the first vandals to be listed on that page. Wikipedia was always been mired in editor drama in the undercurrent. Even in the early years in the 2000s, the arbitration and dispute resolution sections were constantly busy with cases of problem users and conflicts. The chaotic nature of the editor community was one of the reasons Larry Sanger left Wikipedia to form Citizendium, which died an unceremonious death when it couldn't attract editors with its far stringent approval process.
I remember at 1st when I started to use internet more, believing how people actually as being their job actually correct and check these pages but soon I less and less cared to give even 1% of belief to most pages since I kept seeing what is going on. Some pages are fully in control and kept in western bias while the rest kept to the insane to write whatever ... Especially my realization bloomed when my friend and me had a in-depth convo about it all, he told me that his page which btw someone else made on his behalf, sort of like a manager mod of his who took care of his community pages. Anyway he said that his page and people related to him got all deleted one day with a note left as explanation that it was a self made article and not legitimate or something along those lines ... Every time a dispute was present someone would just revert to a deletion with the same note. Imagine being the actual person from the article with 1st hand information provided and written off, labeled as a liar of sorts or something like that, even tho all info was legit. He was a artist and worked on all sorts of media and they be like nah you don't exist ... Image being famous and one day your IMDB or Wiki etc being deleted stating that you are fake or something along those lines, quite idiotic. And this comes from the times before the known "cancel culture". On a related note just last year same friend got banned from a Discord group for him stating how he doesn't buy games nor pays for subscription based services instead he donates all the money to charity, mostly to people in heavy medical need, to hospitals and institutions that cover dealing with illnesses etc. So yeah welcome to the age of "social media" where you are being banned for donating to charity and providing some child another hope to live ... The past 15 years were not fun online but the last 6 or so years and especially current online era really sickens me. Especially the west and western controlled entities are strait up evil and insane beyond explanation which most of these pages are.
"Drill is a subgenre of hip hop music that originated in Chicago in the early 2010s." I made an edit on the Drill Music wikipedia page. It said for many years that drill originated in the uk in 2018 (which pissed me off to no end) so I corrected the page to when it actually emerged, which was in Chicago in 2010. It stuck, and no one has changed it. Pretty awesome, greatest accomplishment of my life.
Props to the Alvin and the Chipmunk guy though. I respect the hell out of people with interests so specific that everyone else on the planet takes for granted. There's that ONE GUY that knows every detail of every Alvin and the Chipmunks album covers though, and that is fantastic!
Yeah honestly let them make a page for a list of if Alvin and the chimp muni covers or something like someone will care at some point. I doubt wikipidea can’t spare the server space or anything.
Anyone else think the chipmunks one is just genuinely hilarious? Honestly if I was a Wikipedia admin I would want to let them keep doing it. They weren't really hurting anything even if the information they were adding is probably not even mildly useful to anyone.
I thought so too! It wasn't disinformation, it was just extra information, so it wasn't doing any actual harm! Finding out that there is a chipmunks cover of a song you like might make you smile!
While I agree with this sentiment, the main problem was that the information was non-notable and unsourced, there was technically nothing wrong with the edits in concept.
I would have just genuinely given the topic of Chipmunks covers its own page, have a little table at the bottom of each artists/album/song's page that directs to places where a cover of them is mentioned and you have a good system right there.
My favorite Wikipedia story is the whole croatian pro-ustashe takeover where the whole croation speaking wikipedia was taken over by the alt-right to promote anti-serbian and pro-ustashe sentiment. I first got to know about it over a conversation on a project in school I worked on with a girl from croatia who was confused why I used the german wikipedia to find some sources for the project. In turn I was confused by her suddenly talking about the far right. lol.
I stopped going on most social media and these information based pages only to 2020 or so register again at Reddit, Quorra, Wiki etc and all the places are one and the same Nazi glorified mess most pages outright spam hate articles towards Russia and Serbia so as the same people. I reported many but soon as you report 50, 200 pops up, I am not joking it feels like these people are strait up insane or spam-bots ... Safe to say I stopped going back to all of that. It's not healthy at all ... Serbs are one of the oldest people in Europe, they been slaughtered for centuries, like the typical Vatican slaughtering their elders then brainwashing their children into different religion and fake nations, their Orthodox culture spat on etc, half of the world speaks one form of butchered Serbian language and have Serbian history ties one way or another yet Serbs are treated as pests. Like look at what is Vatican, NATO, USA, EU doing all the nazi glorifications etc pillaging of the world yet Serbs are a problem, give me a break and leave Serbia alone, give them back their culture and lands. New information keeps popping up and resurfacing yet these western controlled entities are stuck in their political bubble, spamming their lies and delusions thinking how everyone will believe in them. Sooner or later truth comes out, same as how earth keeps spitting things out that is how truth keeps resurfacing too.
Anything Russia-related (history, politics etc) on Wikipedia-EN has for nearly a decade now been disfigured beyond all reason by one editor. No one knows who he is, no one has ever seen him, and at times he has edited at frequencies that would be impossible for a single human. Needless to say, the sources are non-existent or mostly propaganda-filled MSM. This wouldn't be allowed anywhere else on Wikipedia, but because it ties in neatly with the new Cold War, "he" is untouchable.
Id love to be able to watch him go about his daily life of banging out tunes on the xylophone and then going home to fuck with the Seven Seals article on Wikipedia
I got banned from Wikipedia for modifying my hometown's page to include the fact that the town council approving dove hunting along main street. I included links to several local newspapers' coverage of the event. During which, over zealous shooters "accidently" shot out several store windows, streets lights, stop lights and blasted away at numerous street signs. One newspaper reporter showed up to witness the event and put in his article that it "sounded like a war zone when the city mayor signalled the begin of the hunt". The footage from the master webcam on main street "couldn't be found" when store owners demanded that action be taken to hold the shooters responsible for the repairs to the damages to their stores.
@@kood995 No. I checked with Wikipedia and was told their page was sponsored by the city itself so they had the edits undone & then had the page locked to only allow them to make changes.
@@kood995 its a myth you've seen always but never bothered to check because almost noone does it coz theyre young and dont know about the topics. i thought so too until recently
Very true. A lot of productive editors are also neurodivergent, though. One of my personal favorite phenomena would be the many autistic people who are obsessed with changing release dates of movies, TV shows, music, etc.
@@happydolphin7696as an autistic person myself i've always been fascinated by the community on here dedicated to uploading hundreds of slightly modified versions of random logos. i don't understand it at all and yet... meanwhile i just get stuck with minecraft flavored autism
@@I_enjoy_some_thingsget some help ya piece of shit lmfao, bet you also think black people can't be respected until all black criminals are imprisoned, rather than looking at the criminals and their root issues themselves 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
in high school, we would get an automatic 0 on an assignment if we used wikipedia as a source, no matter what it was used for (a friend of mine got a 0 for using wikipedia as a source for someone’s date of birth). in college, when someone posted on the discussion board about struggling to find sources for a paper, my english professor was like “why don’t you guys just use wikipedia lol” and was shocked to learn we weren’t allowed to in high school so we assumed we couldn’t in college.
From what I remember in high school and college, we were taught that, yes, Wikipedia shouldn’t be depended on as a reliable source, but it was a great way to find leads to possible good sources (as long as we, of course, diligently evaluated the trustworthiness of those sources as well). It is also a good way to get an overview of a topic, at least for piquing one’s curiosity enough to pursue it as a topic of research.
27:28 "And as far as everyone knows, Brad remains active to this day. Back to his daily grind of fu***ng with the seven seals article as recently as January of this year." LOL, I wish I was even a quarter as determined as Brad Watson is.
I’m glad to see your channel getting the recognition it deserves. Learning the creepy parts of humanity/internet is just so nice to watch (plus your voice is very soothing, perfect for this content). Would you ever consider making a video about paintings made by serial killers (or something along those lines?)
I was a long-time editor for Wikipedia under the handle ACT, focusing mainly on refining articles for conciseness and challenging biases. The site, unfortunately, is plagued with excessive drama. At some point, factions indifferent to journalistic standards started dominating, pushing political agendas, and locking up pages, leaving even trusted editors to be demoted or banned over relevancy. This conflict resulted in the removal of crucial information across a swath of the wiki that would have offered readers a comprehensive understanding of events. The language of many pages have since been manipulated to foster a divisive "us vs them" mentality. Larry Sanger himself acknowledged in 2020 that the site has strayed from its values and is now riddled with politics. Though this video doesn't delve directly into that, I thought it worth mentioning. Over the years, Wikipedia has worsened as an information source, marred by significant backstage drama.
The only people who seriously question "bias" and impartiality on Wikipedia tend to be right-wing or even far right conservatives when it comes to LGBT rights and stuff like immigration and racial crime statistics. Or gun regulation. That's telling. (Ps. I'm European and I even voted for a far right party in the past.)
@@revsnowfox5798 Your comment seems to imply the False Clause fallacy, in that to question bias on Wikipedia indicates a right-wing or far-right political orientation. Although it's logical that the side of the political spectrum less represented on a platform would likely voice the majority of the complaints, that does not seem to be what you were noting. It's not just about who's complaining; it's about the bias itself, the integration of opinions presented as objective truths, deliberate omission of contextually important information, and the censorship of relevant sources, were all, and likely still are, present and tangible issues. What I find more intriguing here though is how readily some can discern which political faction has gained the majority status without my mention, yet instead of advocating for greater impartiality, many often remain complicit or seem to gleefully endorse the bias. That said, I'm not sure why you chose to cite your former political affiliations and geopolitical region, as it doesn't necessarily equate to a comprehensive understanding either right or left-wing politics. As a graduate in Digital Media Studies, I trained to understand and counteract bias, adhering to journalistic standards during my time as an editor. I am a registered independent who has never voted for a right-wing candidate; yet I can admit that neither my left nor right wing ideals have any place on Wikipedia. Political pendulum swings, from one extreme to another, like you seem to have undergone based on your ending remark, are in fact quite common among members of both (far) sides of the spectrum. Rather than proving a balanced perspective, or appeal across the aisle, it might just indicate you hold deeply ingrained ideological beliefs with intersections between two extremes, perhaps signaling an inclination towards suppression of dissent based upon topics you have chosen to identify with.
@@revsnowfox5798 I mean, I don't vote and am politically a pretty mixed-bag kind of person. The only bias complaint I've ever made was on an article about a right wing individual, specifically with regard to the first line of the article referring to him as being on the far right, while the body of the article only ever went so far as to refer to him as a paleoconservative (which was at the time not a subset of the "far right" *even on the wiki page dedicated to far right politics*, although that might have changed since). It conflicted with wikipedia's own classification of paleoconservatism. This initiated a discussion on the talk page for the article and a referendum on the exact wording. The argument against keeping it, I've laid out here. The argument for keeping it was that the headline of a news article had used that wording, so it was sufficiently well-sourced and grounds for it remaining. In the end, wiki contributors reached the conclusion that: yes, an article headline from the Guardian circa 2016, excoriating a person for their politics, does indeed trump wikipedia's own categorization of which political beliefs fall under the label of "far right". And believe it or not: I was happy with this result! Why? Because I genuinely feared that raising this issue in the first place was going to end in paleoconservatism getting added to the far right politics wiki page rather than a simple re-write removing the conflicting information. Maybe I shouldn't have been afraid of that - that'd probably require a substantial amount of sourcing from academia, and I underestimated the laziness of those involved - but I felt I *had* to be afraid of that outcome, because I definitely hadn't underestimated the community's bias (as evidenced by the fact that they still came down in favor of keeping the existing wording on such flimsy ass grounds).
To be fair, it would be kind of astonishing if Wikipedia had escaped this, given how scientific facts have now become political issues. Someone can be accused of having a liberal bias for reporting indisputable data, or the scientific consensus on climate change. Rather reminiscent of schools being labelled anti-Christian for not "teaching the controversy" about evolution in science class.
not sure how relevant this is to the topic at hand but this does bring up memories of the time that I turned my high school's wikipedia page into 'Obama High School' and kept it up for so long that I eventually got my school's ip banned from editing wikipedia
I wasn't familiar with your channel, but I gotta' say: excellently documented, edited, and the DNB really hits. Also, the title totally grabbed me: glad to see unique and well-done videos on topics like this. So many rabbit-hole UA-camrs tend to present a topic without a lot of production value and personality.
The spread of false information in the Geraldine Edwards hoax reminds me of when I added a false tidbit about a very minor fictional character to their wiki article as a joke back in 2011. I checked the page a few years later and not only was the false tidbit still there, someone had added a footnote sourcing it to the show's writer, which is BS because I had just made it up out of thin air. The tidbit showed up on fan wikis too, and a few fanfiction writers had referenced it in their stories. The show also got an official trading card game, and my false tidbit actually got referenced in the flavor text of the character's card.
This video is awesome. My younger brother was once banned from Wikipedia for SockPuppetting too. I can't think of how many alt accounts he made. He was obsessed with editing the COVID-19 Case numbers for Ontario (he has autism). I once read all of the drama about all of his bans, and lmao I have no idea how he just kept going.
I created a sockpuppet account in middle school. I built it up for years along with my actual profile. I purposefully only accessed it on public computers. All for the sole purpose of defacing Todd Howards wiki, a locked page. I still have my main account and do genuinely enjoy making edits, most just grammatical and mathematical errors
I haven't seen a video essay-type video with writing and production this compelling in a long time. Thought the format had gone totally stale but there could be more life in the genre yet. Well done mate!
and once again, I forget all about your channel, only to get this in my notifications and fall in love with your content all over again. Keep the top tier videos coming, man.
Man I love your stuff. The subject choice, the presentation style, the pacing, the impeccable diction. This is a pretty wild timeline, it's a relief to have folk like you in it.
Other comnenters have pointed out how this is a very interesting topic and it was exceptionally well covered, but I'd like to highlight how novel the editing style feels. I really like the superposition of subjects throughout the video. It's a breath of fresh air in the realm of video essays editing
this is what makes the internet really special. opening up all the world's information to all the world's people also opened Pandora's Box of Weaponised Schizophrenia and creates wonderful stories like this.
Somebody should absolutely set up a wiki-mafia. Imagine selling a similar service as wiki experts, except you make the company continually pay, similar to real world "protection" services. If they don't pay, you smear their name on Wikipedia and the internet in general. This may be illegal and immoral, but it would be funny as hell
I'm so glad you're putting song names in the description, the clicker that be song at 14:00 SLAPS and your music isnt half bad either, you should put yourself out there more!!
That last one reminds me a lot of this guy my Dad would tell me about. My Dad used to work at this dying electronics store and around the time Google Maps started to become a thing and we started having their cars driving around taking pictures, somebody showed up at the store trying to get my Dad's boss to pay to be put on Google Maps. They didn't pay, probably because they didn't think Google Maps would amount to anything, or maybe they couldn't afford whatever the guy was asking since they were already struggling.
The amount of steps I had to go through to change a tiny thing on Wikipedia now makes sense. I just wanted to change "Rattlers" to "Rattlesnakes" on the snake page
this is the first video i watched from you and i knew i immediately had a new favorite channel-- i've since been catching up on your other older ones and i absolutely love your work, the vibes are immaculate and you have great storytelling and editing skills, 100/10!!!!
Wikipedia as a whole can be described less as a rabbit hole and more as a bottomless pit leading straight to Tartarus. And it's because of things like Long Term Abuse, in addition to the scores of bizarre and out-there articles, that make that all the truer of an observation.
Wow this is one of the most impressive and well created and edited video and UA-cam channel I’ve seen in the 7 years I have consistently watched UA-cam. You give me hope for this website
the wiki drama that i found and then read as though it was a novel or perhaps a shakespeare play taking place solely on a wiki talk page was the eostrix request for admin thing. happened in october 2021 and has occupied a suite in my mind ever since.
Which was itself only a small part of the entire Icewhiz saga, of course, which I assume didn't come up here because it will need its own video to even come close to cover all the shenanigans
Happened with a lot of informal texts where authors were trying to hide instructions while seemingly writing on another topic(some alchemical texts were written as a series of poems) and as an attempt to mislead or weed out outsiders would also include encoded misinformation.
Great video! the editing and writing of this video is incredible and really stands out against the majority of content on youtube. The only little thing i have to say is that the intro is a bit long and takes a while to get to the main point of the video, this may cause the video to not reach as many people as it definitely should.
I do completely get that, and usually I'd avoid doing something like that, I just felt that for this one it'd help with the atmosphere to have a sort of framing with the intro and bumper segments. But either way I'm glad you liked it, and I'll keep that in mind for the future : )
Got this in my recommended and added it to my watch later for when I was doing a mindless activity that required some background noise. Needless to say, I was thoroughly entertained throughout this whole video. Very very well done, I almost wish I had 3 more hours of Wikipedia cryptid content! Thank you!!
I'd love to see you do a video on wiki pages owned by large corporations, who spend massive amounts of money to hire people to wipe the slate clean when anything they don't want known is put up.
I don’t really think that’s common, plenty of corporate pages have the evil things they’ve done, at least the stuff that’s accessible form reliable sources outside Wikipedia
That's actually a pretty good strategy. Let the minor issues and the commonly known issues prevail on your page. Then no one will suspect that there might be more. @@nicholasproductions237
Wow. When you said you were eating pretzels... I was ALSO eating pretzels. This means something!!!! New sub for this video. Outstanding research and I hope you consider continuing this wiki-based subject. I looked at that Long Term Abuse page and there are SO MANY! Would love for you to make this a series.
This is a genuinely entertaining and interesting video that you have put together. It’s a huge shame that this video doesnt have WAY more views. Please keep up the good work, I ADORED your style of editing and personality throughout the video.
I’m a little surprised you didn’t mention things like the NYPD deleting mentions of brutality and racism from their own page, or Scientology attempting to remove information on themselves from the site.
He probably doesn't want the highly litigious and vindictive CoS filing takedown requests with UA-cam and doing other various harassments. Same potentially with NYPD; they've got a very large and active "Intelligence Division ".
there are many cryptids even to this day, unless you're pretty much watching ANI (administrators noticeboard: incidents, where all of this stuff starts) daily you miss out on a lot of the really out there ones, like the deus ex guy who only speaks in incomprehensible gibberish and keeps rewriting the deus ex video game page to espouse his bizarre theories. the LTA list is just the tip of the iceberg. ltas like the bkfip are active pretty much daily while others operate on consistent or odd schedules
When I was an idiot kid in the 2000s I was a Wikipedia vandal. On the Wikipedia page for "cummerbund" there was a photo of a man wearing an orange cummerbund with the caption "orange cummerbund". And so I copied and pasted that photo and caption and would just paste it in tons of random Wikipedia pages. That photo is still on the Wikipedia page for cummerbund, though with a different caption now. I just found it hilarious to see it in all sorts of random serious articles about stuff. It'd just be there as a bizarre non sequitur. Like, the history of Goebbels or something, and there's just a random "orange cummerbund" photo in the middle of it. I found it hilarious. And honestly I still do although I'm in my mid 30s now. Back then it took longer for people to revert the edit. Sometimes it'd take days. So people would just be reading all sorts of articles and see the "orange cummerbund" non sequitur. I forgot I even did that, until I started watching this video and the memory came back. I can't stop laughing when I think about it. Maybe it's just me who finds it funny. It's just the fact it's a complete non sequitur and it appeared in articles that have nothing to do with it. And just that cummerbund is a funny word. I think I got the idea when I watched the wedding episode of Peep Show
Regarding the "anyone can edit!" objection of teachers. Multiple studies have concluded wikipedia is as accurate as a textbook, so the whole "anyone can edit" is a cheap and lazy excuse that devalues Wikipedia. The reason they're supposed to be discouraging Wikipedia is that they're supposed to be teaching you how to research & synthesize information from primary sources, but honestly given the declining quality of education America it wouldn't surprise me if that doesn't occur to them.
@@Slash0mega I think it's just that textbooks are often biased or flat out wrong so they really aren't much better than wikipedia. Some southern schools use textbooks that call the civil war the "war of northern aggression", some textbooks just set a pretty low bar to clear in terms of accuracy.
This heavily depends on the topic. There is very frequently outright false information in history articles, particularly military history or minor historical figures.
I like the aesthetic of this video! Also, I thought this was going to be about the Quazer beast and related stuff, or maybe the Cabal and its rouge admins. There's a lot of fun stuff hidden behind the factual facade of Wikipedia.
hey man first video ive seen from you, love the art style and the vibe you've nailed it :) there's some real strange ones on the internet. hope you uncover some more weirdness
You should do Wiktionary too. The story of the most prolific troll Wonderfool who got adminship 5 times is particularly interesting, especially since he's just about to be unbanned very soon.
Man I haven't heard Gene Ray's Timecube referenced in years. My friends and I used to read through those pages late at night cracking up. Amazing video, enjoyed every second!
If you ever make an update to this, it'd be interesting to hear you cover the Scientology-Wikipedia scandal. Wikipedia became a sort of battleground between editors (and their numerous sockpuppets) who edited Scientology-related articles and sought to defend the organization, and critics of Scientology. Edit warring based on a single issue is common on Wikipedia, but what makes this unique is that it was confirmed that many of the sockpuppets were operating from computers and networks owned by the church of Scientology, and it's likely that the pro-Scientology editors were receiving direct orders from the organization to protect its image.
Topics like this really interest me. The internet allows us to see deep into the minds of so many deeply strange individuals because they choose to broadcast that part of themselves to the world. It will never cease to fascinate me
I haven’t started this video yet and I don’t know a thing about the topic, but I wanted to say that this is one of the most creative and intriguing ideas for a video I’ve seen in a long time. Thanks for sharing your niche fascination with us!
!!! Potential photosensitivity warning for mild flashing lights, forgot to put this in the video !!!
also if you dont like the intro id recommend not watching the video 👍
What microphone do you use?
Thanks for the seizure Captain 👍
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse maybe a link as well? 🧐
I loved the video and editing!
Oof, thank God I read the comments before watching the video. But still thanks for the warning @CaptainKRB
My school has its own Wikipedia vandals story. One time a couple of students were suspended for making memes about the baldness of the chief administrator. Later that week, in an act of protest, his Wikipedia article was edited to include a "filmography" where he stared as famous bald characters such as Dominic Toreto and Mr Clean
That’s hilarious
love that
If I was the bald administrator I'd take the jokes and run with them. Bald people tend to be pretty cool
Our school had a similar thing where we edited about us shining a laser off of the VP's bald head like a disco ball for in school raves.
Haha. My friends and I got our school banned from editing Wikipedia. Nothing came from it though as Wikipedia at the time was still a somewhat new concept, at least to teachers as the site was only like 4 or years old at that point.
The rest of the time was spent trolling Yahoo answers, making accounts for a specific teacher we didn't like and asking questions like "Is it OK to kiss my students ?" Or "How can I get my students to really like me" The teacher was always giving the cute girls special treatment, he was kind of a creep.
One of my all time favourite internet stories is the drama of the Scots Wikipedia (a version of Wikipedia in the Scots language, a divergent language/dialect of English). It turned out that almost half of it, thousands and thousands of articles, had been written by one American teenager with no knowledge of the language by writing in his imagined version of it, which was basically American English phonetically spelled with a Scottish accent, mixed with a dose of gibberish and invented words.
I speak a particular dialect of Scots (not the one he was writing in) and seeing "also" represented as "an' aw" in every article made me want to spew everywhere
Is that where the ‘Frogge’ came from?
@ no, that's from the middle english wiki which is supposed to represent english from about 500-1000 years ago
@ no, we call frogs puddocks
there's a woman similar to him who pops up infrequently to edit as many pages as she can to her preferred version of english, which is a combination of old english and grammatically incorrect modern english and welsh, and she insists that the correct spelling of things is via her own incorrect interpretation of how to read phonetic symbols
"Wikipedia is the last place you'd expect drama or conflict" this made me realize just how few people actually get involved with wikis beyond reading them lol.
I mean, I don't blame them, that's kinda the point of a wiki: easy to access information.
But at the same time, I feel it should be non surprising to find that out, at the end of the day anyone can edit Wikipedia and even mods can have their biases.
i was literally planing to write something along these lines but like, as an amateur wikipedian, that line made me scoff.
Tbh, I don't see how anyone WOULDN'T expect drama from a place where everyone can write anything...
@@hyperion3145 well yeah but most of the drama comes from the average wikipedian's pursuit of easy access to information, not trolling.
People should read the talk pages on controversial political topics, such as articles on transgender issues or the Syrian civil war. You can tell some of the articles are guarded by very biased editors, usually but not always with a strong liberal bias, who will ignore reasonable suggestions, cite opinion articles which hold very little factual information, and generally act smug and condescending towards anyone who wants to improve the objectivity of these articles.
My favorite was some person who was always editing the wikipedia page for the city of Deer Park, WA. He made a whole fictional history of the town revolving around a giant baby born in the town named Farleif. Who grew up to be a great deer wrestler and the town would celebrate with the "running of farleif" and "deer kicking days". It was quite creative and was up for a long time. There are still a couple weird things that pop up on that page time to time and I'd like to think who ever did it is still out there trying. He even had a whole fake website about the town set up so he could use it as a reference. I really wish I had archived it.
> "I really wish I had archived it."
It has been! Wikipedia keeps an Akashic record, and there's a "View history" button on the top of the page, and you can view past versions.
The only exceptions to this are revisions that have been deleted due to libel, copyright violations, or sensitive information.
@@quokka_yt Oh I've gone back and seen the edits haha it's the fake website the kid had set up I wish I had archived.
Oh man so do I. That sounds ridiculous.
Was probably my history teacher to catch cheaters. He told us he did this frequently lol
It was between 2011 and 2015 I believe. just look for "Farleif" or something like that lol. @@Melody_Raventress
I love the one guy who edited Ray Romano's wiki page to make it seem like Ray may simply be a hypothetical person.
post a link to the diff
@@voltageesq. en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray_Romano&oldid=856542416
@@voltageesq. This is funny, it not only made it seem like he will eventually end up existing, but it also got the page semi-protected. I'll post the link in another comment. (oldid=856542416)
@@voltageesq. en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray_Romano&oldid=856542416
probably en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray_Romano&oldid=722344828
getting banned from encyclopedia dramatica is genuinely impressive
That's a site I haven't thought of in years.
I found out about when my girlfriend at the time sent me "shitting dick nipples" and that was like in 2010 or 2011.
News
Genuinely, I did not think that was possible. Even my ass, at my spiciest, wouldn't be able to get banned from that place. People have called out specific users *and* dropped some pretty nasty IRL photos in there and not gotten the boot.
People are convinced that ED is a super far right wiki when in reality they simply mocked everything they could, if you looked up any ethnicity or country on ED, it's always an article mocking it
Sounds rather dramatic of them.
I'm surprised you didn't include the Scots kid, who essentially wrote half of the Scots language wikipedia for years, without ever actually knowing the language
That's fucking hilarious
Yeah he legitimately disrupted the languages legacy because it’s already in decline and he sabotaged a major online resource for its speakers
That’s hilarious how was something so big not covered in this video
Didn't he also try to guilt trip everyone after with saying like 'It hurts me most to know that the countless hours I spent trying to help people actually just made things worse' lol
If there was virtually nobody who spoke the language well enough to call it out for years i'd say the language was already good as dead in the first place. If I remember the story, the fucking government copypasted from it because even they didnt have ant Scots speaker.
There is one legendary long-term troll on Wiktionary (Wikipedia’s smaller sister project). Wonderfool has been editing from 2004 and is known for having become an administrator and deleting the main page twice. Funnily enough, everyone agrees that when not trolling he makes valuable edits, and the community is seriously considering unbanning him (we’ll see where that goes).
dr.Jekyll mr Hyde
Idk, seems fair to troll a little if the changes are easily reversible, unban my man.
Definitely shouldn’t be unbanned, disruptive editors that evade blocks for years waste everybody’s time.
I only recently found out about this guy and I find his actions hilarious, my theory is that he's just building trust to be re-accepted and amnestied back onto the site tho, lol.
Lmao that's hilarious, just an upstanding little guy engaging in diminute amounts of tomfoolery
My favorite story was one of my teachers editing her sister's wiki page. Her sister was a paralympian athlete, and my teacher would add in random true but unimportant facts. Her sister couldn't edit them out bc you can't edit your own wiki page, so it would take a bit for any additions to be removed.
I'd do the same if I had a famous sibling lmao
Like imagine the brother of a Nobel Prize in, idk physics, just adding "Oh yeah, he peed in his bed up until he was 17" and it being true, but also difficult to remove hahaha
I'd do it
How did the website know it was her trying to edit her own page??
@@dg3734 She wasn't good at making sockpuppets, I suppose
Sounds like a good example of an edge case that must be a pain in the ass to moderate/devise rules around. I mean, it's technically legit since such editors aren't the subject of the article in question, but they're so close to the subject and thus more prone to bias that functionally, they might as well be. I guess it's not a major issue if such edits fall under the (admittedly broad) umbrella of trivial/irrelevant info (unsure what term Wikipedia uses for this kinda thing), so that'd be grounds to remove such things.
Then again, that same reason is what allows editors, most of whom with an obvious political leaning that's become much more apparent in recent years, to remove "irrelevant" info on certain political figures that happens to paint them in a negative light... but that's a whole other rabbit hole.
@@WK-47probably not allowed because there are no citations, but you could publish something on her and cite it to get around it
One of my favourite vandalizations of Wikipedia was "Wax house, baby". Someone after watching the 2005 remake of House of wax decided to deface its wiki page. They wrote that the working title of the film was "Wax house, baby" and that this was allegedly because it was iffy if the film could clear the rights to remake the original. This edit was up on Wikipedia for years. It was up for so long that people would quote it on horror movie podcasts as fact. This was until the mischievous editor wrote into a the important if true podcast, confessing to their wiki-crimes.
Is that supposed to be a reference or joke of some kind? Why add "baby" to the end of the title and not any other word?
@@oliverwilson11just read it outloud lol
@@kiwo579 I still don't get it
Yea me neither
i guess its an ice ice baby joke?
I think my favourite was how the ‘All Dogs Go To Heaven 2’ Wikipedia was temporarily locked due to the fact that many people kept editing it to say that Gordon Freeman from Half-Life had died in the film due to a web series making a joke about it.
“Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia anyone in black mesa can edit” (I don’t remember if that’s even correct or not I’m just guessing)
The thing about this that bothers me is the Wikipedia mods for that article have a major stick up their asses and won’t add a “references in other media” tab or something to the movie page. Because every year the page gets unlocked and every year people are still vandalizing it, and it’d all be stopped if they mentioned that HLVRAI references the movie. LOTS of wikipedia pages have a tab where they list things the subject is referenced in, and I genuinely think the only reason the mods won’t add it is because they’re petty
This was posted in the morning and it may come off as sarcastic, but I love how you refer to things in the past terminology as if it's a dug up recording, "this evening", and "tonight". It feels as if I am watching a TV documentary paired with an informational youtube video. I love it.
KRB may have taken inspiration from Nexpo, a similar youtuber with very high production quality. He also uses retro themes in his videos.
Or not. I don't know for sure.
It might've been recorded at night then posted the next morning
@@May-gr8bp I was thinking maybe Disrupt
it gives me nightmind vibes in the best way
I KNOW I LOVE IT
I clicked on this video thinking that it was about actual cryptids, a subject which I have an interest in for the folklore aspects. That being said, this was a pretty fascinating subject, and I really enjoyed it. Thanks for making this video.
Yeah still not sure exactly how these trolls qualify as "cryptids" but oh well
Same
Same, but I figured it probably wasn't about cryptids because IDK how that relates to Wikipedia specifically. Like are we just gonna read pages about cryptids?
Idk why they settled on that name. Even just "Wikipedia Vandals" or "article trolls" would've made 1000x more sense. If they went with "vandals," they even could've called false information "article graffiti," since that's what most of it amounts to. It's graffiti on a Wikipedia article.
According to urban dictionary, it can also mean someone who's "introverted, unpredictable, and otherwise strange". It's mostly used by gen z.
@@gearandalthefirst7027 Technically they are heavily deranged and insane people but these therms are less and less being used with each year, because it's cool to be an idiot ... I guess, that is what I am being told so far ... So I guess people come up with new words for them ...
I call them mutants for a long time now since they tend to be that. Most of these lies and sicknesses come from the west, their diet and cities are toxic so their brain is lacking development, nutrition, with other words they mutate into whatever media tells them they are. 20-10 years ago most kids were neglected, no life, grew up in front of a phone, or some sort of online screen being fed with garbage data, today they children on their own and the cicle repeats.
They repeat mistakes live unhealthy, they are a burden to others, cause damage not only to themselves, later pull a victim card, many die from cancer or this so called Covid which also is connected to everything.
Wikipedia and all these garbage data websites comes from the west too, all connected into a big bowl of mess ran by mutants.
I’d like to give a special mention to “Ananny”, an artist from Canada who, since late 2006, has repeatedly attempted to create an article on herself and force her inclusion in several lists of Canadian artists, also doing the same to _several_ more different-language Wikipedia versions.
i looked up her art, and it's SHIT
I used to be an active user on a very niche fandom wiki back in 2020 about fake tornadoes. One of the most memorable incidents from that wiki was when Supreme Genghis Khan himself showed up and vandalized the wiki.
By fake tornadoes do you mean artificial man made tornadoes, or do you mean conspiracy of a reported tornado being fake?
Thr hypothetical hurricane wiki??
weird how nobody ever believes themselves to be the reincarnation of some normal guy who never achieved anything
well some do, but the normal guy who achieved nothing in question is often their greatgreatgrandpa or something like that
@@Julkabibulka Or probably some long lost people or culture. Can't be too normal or unremarkable.
I like to imagine I'm a reincarnated soul of a man who fought and died during Korean War. Hence my love for 50s and 60s tech
Actually I would say the silent majority of people who believe in reincarnation (Buddhists for example) believe they could be reincarnated from or to something as simple as a worm. Doing so comes with the understanding that all living things are valuable. Crazies on the other hand can’t see themselves as anything but the reincarnation of something stupendously important, probably coming from an unchecked ego.
Actual Buddhists and Hindus do believe that. It's just Western New Age idiots who use it to pretend they're something better than a modern peasant.
The absolutr dumbest ones are "fictionkin" morons, who want to pretend they're the reincarnation of Naruto or whatever 😂😂😂
Wow, this is fascinating! As an active Wikipedia editor myself, I've come across my fair share of unusual incidents like one sockmaster who has an obsession with Croatia, COPPA, and supergiant stars. They keep parroting about letting underage children use social media in the articles they edit, it's honestly kinda scary.
they are right about social networks being dangerous af...
Wikipedia's OK for ideologically-neutral topics, like "wild flowers of Northern Spain", or "induction of 2 stroke engines"... But for any topics even VAGUELY connected to politics (especially online politics/"culture wars"-related topics), or to obsessive fandoms... or basically ANY topic people have emotional investment in, more often than not it's just blatantly biased, and frequently filled with outright lies.
Same as Reddit, Wikipedia is basically run by a small clique of ideologue "power-mods", who control contributions about any political/"controversial" topics, ensuring it only ever conforms to THEIR political biases (and manufacturing reasons to ban editors who DON'T push the "correct" politics).
At least two founding editors of Wikipedia have written about this bias, concerned that the site's essentially become an organ of propaganda (on any topic that anyone cares about).
(“Underage children” as opposed to of age children…?)
And I’m pretty sure kids already use social media constantly? So that doesn’t even make sense to say.
@@Hollow_Timthe term is redundant but you are also in the UA-cam comments section so what do you expect
@@SlapShotTakes I mean it's not really a big deal, I just felt like pointing it out
Can't believe you left out the Squidward Vandal. He is an expert computer programmer who knows ALL the codes and cannot be stopped.
“Wikipedia is the last place you’d expect drama and conflict” someone isn’t familiar with fan wiki drama like the Silent Hill Circumcision Drama
wat
@@BaconLover100 Justin Whang has a whole ass video about this. Tldr a mod of the silent hill wiki kept trying to put any circumcision points into articles where they (quite obviously b/c it’s silent hill) don’t belong.
@JordyPordy10 I mean given some of the topics that series covers circumcision isn't too out of place, if done right
@@MisanthropicOcellus you see unfortunately in this case it has nothing to do with Silent Hill itself!
"wikis" and Wikipedia are two completely different things, keep in mind. Wikis are just collaborative fan sites that use a template reminiscent of Wikipedia, typically run through private hosting companies dedicated to that purpose, or rarely from a person's server. Wikipedia is a nonprofit organization dedicated specifically to the funding and maintenance of Wikipedia.
the weirdest part about this video is that you didnt know there was drama on wikipedia; any online community that takes itself even a little seriously has apocalyptic levels of disagreements
'Woman' is a page I recall getting extremely heated and convoluted over one group perceiving 'Woman' as a sociological viewpoint and another being completely biological. Both sides can't condede which extremely diminished the readability of the article.
Seriously, when someone has to say 'If we're gonna discuss changing "adult female human" for the fifty-thousandth time', you know it's bad.
Currently watching this at my dead fast food job and I cannot express how much this has improved my day. Your content is so good and entertaining; thanks so much
can I have some fries
Shame Willy on Wheels (who also sockpuppet under various other names) was never highlighted. When WP:LONGTERM was created around the start of 2005 as "Vandalism in progress/Long term alerts", WoW had already gained infamy on the wiki for its incessant renaming of articles to end with "on Wheels". No surprise WoW was among the first vandals to be listed on that page.
Wikipedia was always been mired in editor drama in the undercurrent. Even in the early years in the 2000s, the arbitration and dispute resolution sections were constantly busy with cases of problem users and conflicts. The chaotic nature of the editor community was one of the reasons Larry Sanger left Wikipedia to form Citizendium, which died an unceremonious death when it couldn't attract editors with its far stringent approval process.
I remember at 1st when I started to use internet more, believing how people actually as being their job actually correct and check these pages but soon I less and less cared to give even 1% of belief to most pages since I kept seeing what is going on. Some pages are fully in control and kept in western bias while the rest kept to the insane to write whatever ...
Especially my realization bloomed when my friend and me had a in-depth convo about it all, he told me that his page which btw someone else made on his behalf, sort of like a manager mod of his who took care of his community pages. Anyway he said that his page and people related to him got all deleted one day with a note left as explanation that it was a self made article and not legitimate or something along those lines ... Every time a dispute was present someone would just revert to a deletion with the same note.
Imagine being the actual person from the article with 1st hand information provided and written off, labeled as a liar of sorts or something like that, even tho all info was legit. He was a artist and worked on all sorts of media and they be like nah you don't exist ...
Image being famous and one day your IMDB or Wiki etc being deleted stating that you are fake or something along those lines, quite idiotic. And this comes from the times before the known "cancel culture".
On a related note just last year same friend got banned from a Discord group for him stating how he doesn't buy games nor pays for subscription based services instead he donates all the money to charity, mostly to people in heavy medical need, to hospitals and institutions that cover dealing with illnesses etc.
So yeah welcome to the age of "social media" where you are being banned for donating to charity and providing some child another hope to live ...
The past 15 years were not fun online but the last 6 or so years and especially current online era really sickens me.
Especially the west and western controlled entities are strait up evil and insane beyond explanation which most of these pages are.
@@minmogrovingstrongandhealthySee:
Wikipedia:No original research
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
Wikipedia:Notability (people)
@@Fhcghcg1 See:
WP:TNTTNT
Omg, I remember that! Shit was hilarious.
@@Fhcghcg1 Based.
"Drill is a subgenre of hip hop music that originated in Chicago in the early 2010s."
I made an edit on the Drill Music wikipedia page. It said for many years that drill originated in the uk in 2018 (which pissed me off to no end) so I corrected the page to when it actually emerged, which was in Chicago in 2010. It stuck, and no one has changed it. Pretty awesome, greatest accomplishment of my life.
if only it was a decent genre that anyone cared about
@@phutureproof grow up
Hip hop is trash who cares 🥱
You might not see this but I’ve read that exact sentence on the Wikipedia page multiple times. It is 🤌
@@phutureproofbro doesn't like sosa 😟
Props to the Alvin and the Chipmunk guy though. I respect the hell out of people with interests so specific that everyone else on the planet takes for granted. There's that ONE GUY that knows every detail of every Alvin and the Chipmunks album covers though, and that is fantastic!
Yeah honestly let them make a page for a list of if Alvin and the chimp muni covers or something like someone will care at some point. I doubt wikipidea can’t spare the server space or anything.
This whole thing feels like finding a group on facebook dedicated to making ornaments out of dead birds
straight outta r/suspiciouslyspecific
Anyone else think the chipmunks one is just genuinely hilarious? Honestly if I was a Wikipedia admin I would want to let them keep doing it. They weren't really hurting anything even if the information they were adding is probably not even mildly useful to anyone.
I thought so too! It wasn't disinformation, it was just extra information, so it wasn't doing any actual harm! Finding out that there is a chipmunks cover of a song you like might make you smile!
While I agree with this sentiment, the main problem was that the information was non-notable and unsourced, there was technically nothing wrong with the edits in concept.
I would have just genuinely given the topic of Chipmunks covers its own page, have a little table at the bottom of each artists/album/song's page that directs to places where a cover of them is mentioned and you have a good system right there.
Unedited, unnotable info is unneccessary
@@Nobody-zl3kk Maybe you can start it yourself, if it's notable enough!
Wow the story ab Mike is honestly heartbreaking. It’s so sad to see how quickly hatred can truly take over someone’s life
Racist views were the normalcy until a few decades ago, your understanding is superficial.
Made checkuser sound really intricate and complicated when it's just checking an IP, something any website can do with anyone who connects to it.
They didn't really say that, they just said what it does and how useful it is, and that only a few people have access to it
I respect that the intermission is just an actual intermission instead of an ad/sponsor break
One time when I was very young I almost accidentally edited the Wikipedia page for tigers... I was mortified for the rest of the week...
My favorite Wikipedia story is the whole croatian pro-ustashe takeover where the whole croation speaking wikipedia was taken over by the alt-right to promote anti-serbian and pro-ustashe sentiment.
I first got to know about it over a conversation on a project in school I worked on with a girl from croatia who was confused why I used the german wikipedia to find some sources for the project. In turn I was confused by her suddenly talking about the far right. lol.
Fredda has a great video on exactly that.
wow and I thoguht there couldn't be a better Wikipedia story than the whole scots fiasco
I stopped going on most social media and these information based pages only to 2020 or so register again at Reddit, Quorra, Wiki etc and all the places are one and the same Nazi glorified mess most pages outright spam hate articles towards Russia and Serbia so as the same people. I reported many but soon as you report 50, 200 pops up, I am not joking it feels like these people are strait up insane or spam-bots ...
Safe to say I stopped going back to all of that. It's not healthy at all ...
Serbs are one of the oldest people in Europe, they been slaughtered for centuries, like the typical Vatican slaughtering their elders then brainwashing their children into different religion and fake nations, their Orthodox culture spat on etc, half of the world speaks one form of butchered Serbian language and have Serbian history ties one way or another yet Serbs are treated as pests. Like look at what is Vatican, NATO, USA, EU doing all the nazi glorifications etc pillaging of the world yet Serbs are a problem, give me a break and leave Serbia alone, give them back their culture and lands.
New information keeps popping up and resurfacing yet these western controlled entities are stuck in their political bubble, spamming their lies and delusions thinking how everyone will believe in them. Sooner or later truth comes out, same as how earth keeps spitting things out that is how truth keeps resurfacing too.
Thats fuckin awesome lmao. Good on em.
Anything Russia-related (history, politics etc) on Wikipedia-EN has for nearly a decade now been disfigured beyond all reason by one editor. No one knows who he is, no one has ever seen him, and at times he has edited at frequencies that would be impossible for a single human. Needless to say, the sources are non-existent or mostly propaganda-filled MSM. This wouldn't be allowed anywhere else on Wikipedia, but because it ties in neatly with the new Cold War, "he" is untouchable.
Brad Watson seems like the perfect subject of a Down the Rabbit Hole episode
Hell why don't we make it ourselves
Id love to be able to watch him go about his daily life of banging out tunes on the xylophone and then going home to fuck with the Seven Seals article on Wikipedia
idk. it's just some random crazy guy. he's mostly harmless. I think making an entire episode around him is on the edge of being harassment.
He doesn't seem to have uploaded anything in ages though.
@@marienbad2 he's working on a ginormous 3hr+ star citizen project i think
I got banned from Wikipedia for modifying my hometown's page to include the fact that the town council approving dove hunting along main street. I included links to several local newspapers' coverage of the event. During which, over zealous shooters "accidently" shot out several store windows, streets lights, stop lights and blasted away at numerous street signs. One newspaper reporter showed up to witness the event and put in his article that it "sounded like a war zone when the city mayor signalled the begin of the hunt". The footage from the master webcam on main street "couldn't be found" when store owners demanded that action be taken to hold the shooters responsible for the repairs to the damages to their stores.
What was their reason for banning you? Did they think you made the whole thing up with some kind of super elaborate scheme?
@@kood995 No. I checked with Wikipedia and was told their page was sponsored by the city itself so they had the edits undone & then had the page locked to only allow them to make changes.
@@Estes705 Wtf happened to "anyone can edit?"
@@kood995 I guess if you're willing to pay for a particular page you have keen interest in, they lock it so there's no changes made.
@@kood995 its a myth you've seen always but never bothered to check because almost noone does it coz theyre young and dont know about the topics. i thought so too until recently
I often forget that autism is the main explanation for weird activity online.
Very true. A lot of productive editors are also neurodivergent, though. One of my personal favorite phenomena would be the many autistic people who are obsessed with changing release dates of movies, TV shows, music, etc.
That'd explain A LOT!😂
@@happydolphin7696as an autistic person myself i've always been fascinated by the community on here dedicated to uploading hundreds of slightly modified versions of random logos. i don't understand it at all and yet...
meanwhile i just get stuck with minecraft flavored autism
If you guys don’t want to keep getting made fun of, you need to go after those idiots.
@@I_enjoy_some_thingsget some help ya piece of shit lmfao, bet you also think black people can't be respected until all black criminals are imprisoned, rather than looking at the criminals and their root issues themselves 🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
in high school, we would get an automatic 0 on an assignment if we used wikipedia as a source, no matter what it was used for (a friend of mine got a 0 for using wikipedia as a source for someone’s date of birth). in college, when someone posted on the discussion board about struggling to find sources for a paper, my english professor was like “why don’t you guys just use wikipedia lol” and was shocked to learn we weren’t allowed to in high school so we assumed we couldn’t in college.
From what I remember in high school and college, we were taught that, yes, Wikipedia shouldn’t be depended on as a reliable source, but it was a great way to find leads to possible good sources (as long as we, of course, diligently evaluated the trustworthiness of those sources as well). It is also a good way to get an overview of a topic, at least for piquing one’s curiosity enough to pursue it as a topic of research.
In high school if I used Wikipedia I sourced their sources instead of Wikipedia lol
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a source. There is Wikisource for making source material accessible.
27:28
"And as far as everyone knows, Brad remains active to this day. Back to his daily grind of fu***ng with the seven seals article as recently as January of this year."
LOL, I wish I was even a quarter as determined as Brad Watson is.
I’m glad to see your channel getting the recognition it deserves. Learning the creepy parts of humanity/internet is just so nice to watch (plus your voice is very soothing, perfect for this content).
Would you ever consider making a video about paintings made by serial killers (or something along those lines?)
I was a long-time editor for Wikipedia under the handle ACT, focusing mainly on refining articles for conciseness and challenging biases. The site, unfortunately, is plagued with excessive drama. At some point, factions indifferent to journalistic standards started dominating, pushing political agendas, and locking up pages, leaving even trusted editors to be demoted or banned over relevancy. This conflict resulted in the removal of crucial information across a swath of the wiki that would have offered readers a comprehensive understanding of events. The language of many pages have since been manipulated to foster a divisive "us vs them" mentality. Larry Sanger himself acknowledged in 2020 that the site has strayed from its values and is now riddled with politics. Though this video doesn't delve directly into that, I thought it worth mentioning. Over the years, Wikipedia has worsened as an information source, marred by significant backstage drama.
The only people who seriously question "bias" and impartiality on Wikipedia tend to be right-wing or even far right conservatives when it comes to LGBT rights and stuff like immigration and racial crime statistics. Or gun regulation. That's telling. (Ps. I'm European and I even voted for a far right party in the past.)
@@revsnowfox5798
Your comment seems to imply the False Clause fallacy, in that to question bias on Wikipedia indicates a right-wing or far-right political orientation. Although it's logical that the side of the political spectrum less represented on a platform would likely voice the majority of the complaints, that does not seem to be what you were noting. It's not just about who's complaining; it's about the bias itself, the integration of opinions presented as objective truths, deliberate omission of contextually important information, and the censorship of relevant sources, were all, and likely still are, present and tangible issues. What I find more intriguing here though is how readily some can discern which political faction has gained the majority status without my mention, yet instead of advocating for greater impartiality, many often remain complicit or seem to gleefully endorse the bias.
That said, I'm not sure why you chose to cite your former political affiliations and geopolitical region, as it doesn't necessarily equate to a comprehensive understanding either right or left-wing politics. As a graduate in Digital Media Studies, I trained to understand and counteract bias, adhering to journalistic standards during my time as an editor. I am a registered independent who has never voted for a right-wing candidate; yet I can admit that neither my left nor right wing ideals have any place on Wikipedia. Political pendulum swings, from one extreme to another, like you seem to have undergone based on your ending remark, are in fact quite common among members of both (far) sides of the spectrum. Rather than proving a balanced perspective, or appeal across the aisle, it might just indicate you hold deeply ingrained ideological beliefs with intersections between two extremes, perhaps signaling an inclination towards suppression of dissent based upon topics you have chosen to identify with.
@@revsnowfox5798 I mean, I don't vote and am politically a pretty mixed-bag kind of person. The only bias complaint I've ever made was on an article about a right wing individual, specifically with regard to the first line of the article referring to him as being on the far right, while the body of the article only ever went so far as to refer to him as a paleoconservative (which was at the time not a subset of the "far right" *even on the wiki page dedicated to far right politics*, although that might have changed since). It conflicted with wikipedia's own classification of paleoconservatism.
This initiated a discussion on the talk page for the article and a referendum on the exact wording. The argument against keeping it, I've laid out here. The argument for keeping it was that the headline of a news article had used that wording, so it was sufficiently well-sourced and grounds for it remaining. In the end, wiki contributors reached the conclusion that: yes, an article headline from the Guardian circa 2016, excoriating a person for their politics, does indeed trump wikipedia's own categorization of which political beliefs fall under the label of "far right".
And believe it or not: I was happy with this result!
Why? Because I genuinely feared that raising this issue in the first place was going to end in paleoconservatism getting added to the far right politics wiki page rather than a simple re-write removing the conflicting information. Maybe I shouldn't have been afraid of that - that'd probably require a substantial amount of sourcing from academia, and I underestimated the laziness of those involved - but I felt I *had* to be afraid of that outcome, because I definitely hadn't underestimated the community's bias (as evidenced by the fact that they still came down in favor of keeping the existing wording on such flimsy ass grounds).
@@AbyssalSoda I am left-wing and have had significant issue with conservative bias on history pages on Wikipedia, especially colonial bias.
To be fair, it would be kind of astonishing if Wikipedia had escaped this, given how scientific facts have now become political issues. Someone can be accused of having a liberal bias for reporting indisputable data, or the scientific consensus on climate change. Rather reminiscent of schools being labelled anti-Christian for not "teaching the controversy" about evolution in science class.
not sure how relevant this is to the topic at hand but this does bring up memories of the time that I turned my high school's wikipedia page into 'Obama High School' and kept it up for so long that I eventually got my school's ip banned from editing wikipedia
I wasn't familiar with your channel, but I gotta' say: excellently documented, edited, and the DNB really hits. Also, the title totally grabbed me: glad to see unique and well-done videos on topics like this. So many rabbit-hole UA-camrs tend to present a topic without a lot of production value and personality.
The spread of false information in the Geraldine Edwards hoax reminds me of when I added a false tidbit about a very minor fictional character to their wiki article as a joke back in 2011. I checked the page a few years later and not only was the false tidbit still there, someone had added a footnote sourcing it to the show's writer, which is BS because I had just made it up out of thin air. The tidbit showed up on fan wikis too, and a few fanfiction writers had referenced it in their stories. The show also got an official trading card game, and my false tidbit actually got referenced in the flavor text of the character's card.
What was it?
What character? Aint no reason to keep it secret
spill the beans man
Citogenesis!!!
pics or didn't happen
"Wikipedia is probably the last place you'd expect to see drama or conflict" is not a phrase I ever thought would be seriously uttered
This video is awesome. My younger brother was once banned from Wikipedia for SockPuppetting too. I can't think of how many alt accounts he made. He was obsessed with editing the COVID-19 Case numbers for Ontario (he has autism). I once read all of the drama about all of his bans, and lmao I have no idea how he just kept going.
I’d love to see more Wikipedia content. It’s really a goldmine for videos like this, but I can’t think of anyone else who’s done anything with it!
Wikipedia is literally the first place I'd expect drama online
this would make a great series. it could be titled “Wikipedia’s Most Wanted”
I created a sockpuppet account in middle school. I built it up for years along with my actual profile. I purposefully only accessed it on public computers. All for the sole purpose of defacing Todd Howards wiki, a locked page. I still have my main account and do genuinely enjoy making edits, most just grammatical and mathematical errors
This video is truly great. There was never a moment where I wished to spend my time elsewhere. The view count is downright criminal. Great work man!
I haven't seen a video essay-type video with writing and production this compelling in a long time. Thought the format had gone totally stale but there could be more life in the genre yet. Well done mate!
I love, love, looove your script, aesthetics, editing, and bgm choices! Please never stop making content that looks and sounds this good.
and once again, I forget all about your channel, only to get this in my notifications and fall in love with your content all over again. Keep the top tier videos coming, man.
Same. I saw this in my feed and was like, "who is Captain KRB and why did I subscribe to him?" Then I clicked I remembered how awesome his stuff is.
This channel is so underated. The editing, the writing, everything is so good
Right??
it's quite over produced and eyeroll inducing
@@mrossknethe transitions are hilariously low budget looking as well
@@mrosskne its a bit overly quirky zoomerish.
@@happygofishing I think it its pretty funny.
I actually recall a review of that obscure Japanese video game complaining that the wiki article was wrong about the number of levels lol
Man I love your stuff. The subject choice, the presentation style, the pacing, the impeccable diction. This is a pretty wild timeline, it's a relief to have folk like you in it.
Other comnenters have pointed out how this is a very interesting topic and it was exceptionally well covered, but I'd like to highlight how novel the editing style feels. I really like the superposition of subjects throughout the video. It's a breath of fresh air in the realm of video essays editing
I absolutly love that you have a built in intermission, more people need to do that in there video essays
this is what makes the internet really special. opening up all the world's information to all the world's people also opened Pandora's Box of Weaponised Schizophrenia and creates wonderful stories like this.
Somebody should absolutely set up a wiki-mafia. Imagine selling a similar service as wiki experts, except you make the company continually pay, similar to real world "protection" services. If they don't pay, you smear their name on Wikipedia and the internet in general.
This may be illegal and immoral, but it would be funny as hell
"Ey! Fat Tony! Vandalize that Wikipedia article!"
I'm so glad you're putting song names in the description, the clicker that be song at 14:00 SLAPS and your music isnt half bad either, you should put yourself out there more!!
Chipmunk vandal didn’t do nothin free my mans
[[Wikipedia:NOTINDESCRIMINATE]]
That last one reminds me a lot of this guy my Dad would tell me about. My Dad used to work at this dying electronics store and around the time Google Maps started to become a thing and we started having their cars driving around taking pictures, somebody showed up at the store trying to get my Dad's boss to pay to be put on Google Maps. They didn't pay, probably because they didn't think Google Maps would amount to anything, or maybe they couldn't afford whatever the guy was asking since they were already struggling.
Can I just say I really appreciate the intermission that wasn't an ad read. It was really refreshing thanks 😊
The amount of steps I had to go through to change a tiny thing on Wikipedia now makes sense. I just wanted to change "Rattlers" to "Rattlesnakes" on the snake page
Sad how quickly humans destroyed the internet.
this is the first video i watched from you and i knew i immediately had a new favorite channel-- i've since been catching up on your other older ones and i absolutely love your work, the vibes are immaculate and you have great storytelling and editing skills, 100/10!!!!
Wikipedia as a whole can be described less as a rabbit hole and more as a bottomless pit leading straight to Tartarus. And it's because of things like Long Term Abuse, in addition to the scores of bizarre and out-there articles, that make that all the truer of an observation.
Wow this is one of the most impressive and well created and edited video and UA-cam channel I’ve seen in the 7 years I have consistently watched UA-cam.
You give me hope for this website
This is a really fun video, narration and editing are on point! I hope this blows up.
This was great, first video I’ve seen of yours, already excited to see more
Your channel has filled the Fredrik Knudsen shaped hole in my brain, in the best way. You deserve much more viewership and recognition sir.
the wiki drama that i found and then read as though it was a novel or perhaps a shakespeare play taking place solely on a wiki talk page was the eostrix request for admin thing. happened in october 2021 and has occupied a suite in my mind ever since.
Which was itself only a small part of the entire Icewhiz saga, of course, which I assume didn't come up here because it will need its own video to even come close to cover all the shenanigans
trolls are just normal man imagine how much this happened with real books for centuries. classic
Happened with a lot of informal texts where authors were trying to hide instructions while seemingly writing on another topic(some alchemical texts were written as a series of poems) and as an attempt to mislead or weed out outsiders would also include encoded misinformation.
Going to be interesting to see how ChatGPT and the like get used in this regard, could make wikipedia an absolute hell scape :/
Great video! the editing and writing of this video is incredible and really stands out against the majority of content on youtube. The only little thing i have to say is that the intro is a bit long and takes a while to get to the main point of the video, this may cause the video to not reach as many people as it definitely should.
I do completely get that, and usually I'd avoid doing something like that, I just felt that for this one it'd help with the atmosphere to have a sort of framing with the intro and bumper segments. But either way I'm glad you liked it, and I'll keep that in mind for the future : )
Got this in my recommended and added it to my watch later for when I was doing a mindless activity that required some background noise. Needless to say, I was thoroughly entertained throughout this whole video. Very very well done, I almost wish I had 3 more hours of Wikipedia cryptid content! Thank you!!
I'd love to see you do a video on wiki pages owned by large corporations, who spend massive amounts of money to hire people to wipe the slate clean when anything they don't want known is put up.
Will never be substantiated by Wikipedia staff because donations.
@@davidaustin6962 Source: my ass
I don’t really think that’s common, plenty of corporate pages have the evil things they’ve done, at least the stuff that’s accessible form reliable sources outside Wikipedia
That's actually a pretty good strategy.
Let the minor issues and the commonly known issues prevail on your page. Then no one will suspect that there might be more.
@@nicholasproductions237
Wow. When you said you were eating pretzels... I was ALSO eating pretzels. This means something!!!! New sub for this video. Outstanding research and I hope you consider continuing this wiki-based subject. I looked at that Long Term Abuse page and there are SO MANY! Would love for you to make this a series.
Heck, there were cases of trolls who made their way up the ladder into administrative roles within wikipedia itself.
This is a genuinely entertaining and interesting video that you have put together. It’s a huge shame that this video doesnt have WAY more views.
Please keep up the good work, I ADORED your style of editing and personality throughout the video.
I’m a little surprised you didn’t mention things like the NYPD deleting mentions of brutality and racism from their own page, or Scientology attempting to remove information on themselves from the site.
He probably doesn't want the highly litigious and vindictive CoS filing takedown requests with UA-cam and doing other various harassments. Same potentially with NYPD; they've got a very large and active "Intelligence Division ".
Probably not long term enough to land on long term abuse.
Probably not long term enough to land on the long term abuse list covered by the video.
@@jannikheidemann3805 I assure you, these were long term things.
there are many cryptids even to this day, unless you're pretty much watching ANI (administrators noticeboard: incidents, where all of this stuff starts) daily you miss out on a lot of the really out there ones, like the deus ex guy who only speaks in incomprehensible gibberish and keeps rewriting the deus ex video game page to espouse his bizarre theories. the LTA list is just the tip of the iceberg. ltas like the bkfip are active pretty much daily while others operate on consistent or odd schedules
the bkfip was just banned again yesterday only this time for trying to report someone else.
the quality of your videos is amazing
A rare instance of a good youtube reccomendation
Lassi time doing different personalities for 200+ accounts is incredibly impressive….
Once in probably 2009 me and my friend made it a goal to change as many wikipedia pages as possible to a copied version of the wiki page for spoons
When I was an idiot kid in the 2000s I was a Wikipedia vandal. On the Wikipedia page for "cummerbund" there was a photo of a man wearing an orange cummerbund with the caption "orange cummerbund". And so I copied and pasted that photo and caption and would just paste it in tons of random Wikipedia pages. That photo is still on the Wikipedia page for cummerbund, though with a different caption now.
I just found it hilarious to see it in all sorts of random serious articles about stuff. It'd just be there as a bizarre non sequitur. Like, the history of Goebbels or something, and there's just a random "orange cummerbund" photo in the middle of it. I found it hilarious. And honestly I still do although I'm in my mid 30s now. Back then it took longer for people to revert the edit. Sometimes it'd take days. So people would just be reading all sorts of articles and see the "orange cummerbund" non sequitur.
I forgot I even did that, until I started watching this video and the memory came back. I can't stop laughing when I think about it. Maybe it's just me who finds it funny. It's just the fact it's a complete non sequitur and it appeared in articles that have nothing to do with it. And just that cummerbund is a funny word. I think I got the idea when I watched the wedding episode of Peep Show
no this is hilarious thank you
Based.
Silly and simple trolling is my favorite.
Regarding the "anyone can edit!" objection of teachers. Multiple studies have concluded wikipedia is as accurate as a textbook, so the whole "anyone can edit" is a cheap and lazy excuse that devalues Wikipedia. The reason they're supposed to be discouraging Wikipedia is that they're supposed to be teaching you how to research & synthesize information from primary sources, but honestly given the declining quality of education America it wouldn't surprise me if that doesn't occur to them.
did you miss the part where the video said that false information stayed up for quite a while before being caught?
@@Slash0mega I think it's just that textbooks are often biased or flat out wrong so they really aren't much better than wikipedia. Some southern schools use textbooks that call the civil war the "war of northern aggression", some textbooks just set a pretty low bar to clear in terms of accuracy.
@@from_no_where The "war of northern aggression" is one of the many names for the US civil war, that isn't a good example of incorrect information.
This heavily depends on the topic. There is very frequently outright false information in history articles, particularly military history or minor historical figures.
I like the aesthetic of this video!
Also, I thought this was going to be about the Quazer beast and related stuff, or maybe the Cabal and its rouge admins. There's a lot of fun stuff hidden behind the factual facade of Wikipedia.
The editing is good but a bit masturbatory in my opinion
I love being a wiki editor and internet archiver! There’s SO MUCH drama, y’all have no idea!!
“Thank you for meeting with me today, Mr. Watson. Tell me a little bit about your work history.”
“Oh, I’m the second coming of Jesus Christ.”
“I see.”
hey man first video ive seen from you, love the art style and the vibe you've nailed it :) there's some real strange ones on the internet. hope you uncover some more weirdness
You should do Wiktionary too. The story of the most prolific troll Wonderfool who got adminship 5 times is particularly interesting, especially since he's just about to be unbanned very soon.
"Wikipedia is the last place you'd expect drama or conflict" more like the third.
Right after the Middle East and any given Parliament.
I love your editing style and aesthetic !! I'm surprised you're not more popular . Keep it up :^)
Man you deserve an immense amount of love and respect for this production. Keep up the great videos dude
holy shit top tier content, I love the way you talk, so articulate
Man I haven't heard Gene Ray's Timecube referenced in years. My friends and I used to read through those pages late at night cracking up. Amazing video, enjoyed every second!
If you ever make an update to this, it'd be interesting to hear you cover the Scientology-Wikipedia scandal. Wikipedia became a sort of battleground between editors (and their numerous sockpuppets) who edited Scientology-related articles and sought to defend the organization, and critics of Scientology. Edit warring based on a single issue is common on Wikipedia, but what makes this unique is that it was confirmed that many of the sockpuppets were operating from computers and networks owned by the church of Scientology, and it's likely that the pro-Scientology editors were receiving direct orders from the organization to protect its image.
Topics like this really interest me. The internet allows us to see deep into the minds of so many deeply strange individuals because they choose to broadcast that part of themselves to the world. It will never cease to fascinate me
I haven’t started this video yet and I don’t know a thing about the topic, but I wanted to say that this is one of the most creative and intriguing ideas for a video I’ve seen in a long time. Thanks for sharing your niche fascination with us!