this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
1075 points (90.8% liked)

Showerthoughts

29643 readers
907 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics (NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out)
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Yet if you ever try to edit a page, the "Talk" tab is filled with the most pretentious protectionist people. You can add helpful context or missing information with sources to the wiki, and it will get deleted simply because you haven't spent months cozying up to the greaseball who sits on that specific wiki entry as if they possess it.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

there is a bureaucratic machine for dealing with this kind of problem

[–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But what do we do if every level of that machine is completely controlled by those people?

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it's not. there are boards on Wikipedia specifically for calling in neutral editors.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

Yep, generally different editors focus on different subjects.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tbf the gamergate saga basically caused the infrastructure to have a rolling panic attack over how that such a large movement to insert misinformation against any effort to correct it.

[–] hightrix@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

All articles referencing this topic on Wikipedia are extremely biased.