From Encyclopedia Dramatica

Jump to: navigation, search
Indeed, it is an indispensable haven for trolling. What would we do without it?
Average Wikipedia users trying to gain knowledges.
Why wikipedia is full of shit.
Why the rest of the internet is full of shit.
Mychael Styne will boom us all.
Anonymous loves Wikipedia.
Anonymous is also a wasted idiot.
Finally, Anonymous bonk.
Classic. Wikipedia controls Google.
MJ trolled Wikipedia
Wikipedia is closed due DDoS
Flaming fagpedia since -03.

The People's Communist Republic of Wikipedia, commonly shortened to simply Wikipedia, is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) in which participants play editors of a hypothetical online encyclopedia. The goal is to try to insert misinformation as well as pushing a point of view that is randomly assigned at signup, while preventing any contrary information from being entered by others. Players with similar misinformation will generally form guilds in order to aid one another. You can find most trolls of ED there, too.

Wikipedia players gain more authority as they progress, with "Administrator" and "Double-O Licensed" rankings granting them access to game processes not available to others. While the rules for winning the game are a tightly-kept secret, it is believed that the winner is treated to a night of ass sex with Wikipedia creator/overlord, the wikipedo Jimbo Wales (lube not included).

The encyclopedia aspect of the Wikipedia game is a fairly obvious rip-off of Encyclopedia Dramatica, except that the Wikipedia version tends to have terminally boring entries on useless topics like the lives of 17th century rabbis, characteristics of the 57th termite chromosome, and Hollywood films including one or more of the Sesame Street Muppets - in other words, content with no real relevance to the internets or internet culture, and thus is shit. Wikipedia is the worst example of an open-source project in the world. It also functions limitedly as a medical journal and criminal resource for retards.

A common misconception is that "Wikipedia is never finished." Remember that whenever you come by a Wikipedia article that is boring or filled with poor English skills, that such a refined state of quality did not happen on its own. Each article was forged from the blood of thousands of angsty teenagers edit warring over shit nobody cares about. The only reason anyone ever visits the site is because it's free. Information on Wikipedia topics can generally be found through Google and other forms of reference material, like books.

TOW (The/That Other Wiki) likes to think of themselves as the 21st century's answer to the Library of Alexandria, but, in reality, they fall somewhere closer to the collective scribblings on a truck stop bathroom wall. Indeed, this holds to the standard modus operandi of Wikipedia (and of all pussies), that believes presenting obvious fact (e.g. "Wikipedia is never finished") as philosophy garners respect from people who don't fucking care. The alarming population of fucking failures in the world and on the Internet, however, allow this belief to propagate and thrive.


Progression through the Game

How the Game Typically Progresses

  1. You make edits to articles
  2. Your edits get reverted by aspie fucktards
  3. You revert them back and they in turn revert again
  4. You bicker on the talk page of the article
  5. You whine about the aspies on the administrator noticeboards accusing them of being uncivil, they in turn accuse you of assuming bad faith
  6. You open a Request for Comment on their behavior
  7. You take them to arbitration
  8. ???
  9. Jimbo profits

Gaining Experience Points

  • 1 vandal reversion = 1 exp (a vandal is defined as an editor with a different point of view than yours)
  • 1 legitimate edit to a page = 2 exp
  • 1 article created (assuming it stays) = 20 exp
  • 1 Good Article = 100 exp
  • 1 Featured Article = 200 exp
  • 1 report to AIV or UAA = 5 exp
  • 1 page deleted via AfD = 20 exp
  • 1 page deleted via PROD or CSD = 10exp
  • 1 support for an Rfa = 20 exp
  • 1 article with POV or misinformation inserted into = 100 exp
  • 1 user blocked as a result of drama created = 50 exp

TOW Ranks

  • Rollback > 10,000 exp
  • Administrator > 100,000 exp
  • Bureaucrat > 500,000 exp
  • Checkuser or Oversight > 500,000 exp

Power Words

Employ the following words to increase your wiki credibility:

  • CamelCase[1] - Sticking two words together to form the sillhouette of a vagina.
  • Canard[2] - some sort of jewish bird that eats fetuses and desecrates churches.
  • Good faith - A codeword for the 13 year old boys for which wikipedians are on the prowl.
  • Portmanteau - A sexual device used by wikipedians to have sex regardless of gender or disability.
  • Schism - A euphemism for a catfight.
  • Shoa - a mythical tale of an effeminate mustachioed hero who defeats a horde of greedy beasts

How It Could Hypothetically Improve

White people complain of all sorts of problems with Wikipedia, the blame wrongly falls on technical or organizational issues; the real problem with Wikipedia is the Wikipedians. From players to sysops, every member of its community is the scum of the internets - worse than spammers, worse than virus writers and Nigerian scammers, worse than IRCers, and even worse than you. An average Wikipedia user has the intelligence of a seal, as seen here and they only bathe or shower once a month as seen here.

Wikipedia (more like Wikipedophile, amirite???) is full of people with no desire to improve what it is intended for, information. Instead, they want to obstruct it, and delete all the shit they think isn't worthy of being on the pages so they can grow their e-penis and one day become a mod. These people do not deserve to be on a website dedicated to information and should be fucked in the ass on a daily basis, as that may make them less bored. Additionally, EDiots could use this information to become a mod within a week so they can cause a major shitstorm with their mod powers.

The only way to save the Wikipedia MMORPG is to delete all usernames and only allow two players to be its administrators: Grawp and Willy on Wheels. All other accounts will be reduced to powerless IP addresses, its users continuing their bitching and pedantic arguing amongst themselves.

Actually, the above is not enough. Wikipedia cannot be saved. It must be destroyed by massive attacks of lulzy vandalism and the castration of all wikipedos (if Jewbo Wales doesn't have their nutsacks already).

Use your computer for what it was designed for - looking at porn - and go buy some Encyclopedia Britannicas or something, you cheap bastard.


Wikipedia is known for having people that love to provide free-license images of their semen, feces, genitalia, self-made pictures, and other nasties. Rama, a well-known artist for, draws all the pornographic illustrations. Your family is proud, Rama.

Posting pictures of people on Wikipedia is serious business. Images of album covers and video games can be used after writing a tl;dr summary to Master Wales about how this image is fair use, despite the law saying that any image used for commentary is fair use, and by making the image so small that is unviewable. But to get pictures of people, you must take them yourself or get permission. Usually, 'free' pictures of people are either old as hell, painted, as if this were the 1700's or simply replaced by this placeholder, which people have tl;dr discussions about. It is only acceptable to post a copyrighted image of a person if they are dead and there are no free alternatives, but even then they still give you shit about it. Note that if you break the rules you will be arrested by the Web Sheriff.

A person called Boochan (on commons and en) has gynecomastia. That's Latin or some shit for "beyond manboobs," meaning guys get breasts larger than a Japanese chick's that even give milk! Damn. So of course, Boochan he likes to upload pictures of himself nekki. Image:Gynecomastia 001.jpg has somehow avoided being on the bad image list, so we encourage you to vandalize with it on WP.

Note: Wikipedia references to penis are also suitable for trolling.


See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Encyclopedia Dramatica

ED has tits, therefore TOW-fans are homosexual.
Wikipedia, not biased about ED at all.
We're back!
Even as a source, they still hate us.

It all started one day when Jameth, typing with only his penis, attempted to enter the mediacrat drama as a Wikipedia entry. It was discussed and denied. This act alone sparked the creation of the wiki you're reading right now.

Every year, Wikipedia pretends that they are going to delete the Encyclopedia Dramatica article. Occasionally they do for brief intervals, mostly on the grounds of hosting the previously-deleted Mediacrat entry, but usually they wuss out of it. Looks they were serious this time.

Wikipedia's steadfast refusal to host an Encyclopedia Dramatica article has been the source of a great deal of hilarious drama on the site. Yet TOW continues to cover up any controversy associated with the topic and deny the creation of the article, even one that is unoffensive, informative, and well written. Wikipedia has articles on Bukkake, Goatse, 2 Girls 1 Cup, an extensive disambiguation page on dongs (including a page on a male porn star named "Long Dong Silver"), and God knows what else. However, they still refuse to allow a page on ED simply out of spite.

Update: Last closing argument (aside from Sceptre's faggotry):

Encyclopedia Dramatica – Reclosing this for the second time. We have a consensus - i.e we want to see an extremely well written draft with impeccable sources before we touch this again.


—Spartaz Humbug! 19:54, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


An Encyclopedia Dramatica article is now up on Wikipedia, in all its lulztastic, properly sourced and cited glory.

As expected, it took only a few hours for many Wikipedos to go into childlike tantrums, thus forcing yet another deletion review, deletion review number 57 to be exact. The topic of this deletion review is to determine the validity of sources. When the article was created, the source list was actually larger than the article itself, but this has since been trimmed down for a number of arbitrary reasons, the most prevalent being that TOW's editors are unable to live up to their own retarded rules. Overall consensus, however, is that the article should stay and that anyone who says otherwise is a hypocrite who is simply butthurt over ED's treatment of TOW and its editors and fails to realize that this immature behavior will only further the problem.

What's with the œ?

The œ is the retarded sister of æ, instead of being created by Vikings like æ, she was originally created by the Romans to translate the shitty Greek οι diphthong. For being fail since birth œ is the most accurate symbol for TOW; if you don't think it is then go look for a French dictionary as œ it's a real letter in that language where is sometimes called the "e in o" used for example in phrases like "œufs dans l'eau" translated as "eggs in the water". In English she is sometimes used by grammar Nazis for beautiful words like fœtus, fœderal or diarrhœa.

TL;DR, œ = faggotry

What is a Wiki? An Example of Supreme Idiocy

Not-so-subtle racism on the facial page.
  • Edit war dispute. A full out tribunal complete with e-court and e-arbitration and extra special e-punishment. The users are serving their e-sentences with 1 month bans and Wikipedia-style "house arrests" in which they cannot edit certain articles and must behave in a certain way. The entire argument stems from the fact that Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln share a birthday. This resulted in huge lulz for everyone else but none for them, while Wikipedophiles got all emo.
  • People who think that Wikipedia can love them back are always easy to troll. Case in point: Vanboto, who discovered that a few people guarded the article on the song "Rock Lobster" with a passion, reverting all edits which tried to insert the fact that it was once played on Family Guy. His response: a brave and bold display of insanity, petty reverts, harassment, personal attacks, irrelevant responses, and trolling. In short, clearly admin material if not for the fact that he was obviously there to have fun and not contribute in any meaningful way, as evidenced by his constant references to The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Dungeons & Dragons, and Pokemon. End result: a permaban and much drama. That'll do, troll, that'll do... on the other hand, trolling wikipedos who think they're the "keymaster and gatekeeper" of articles is most necessary.

Please donate to pay for Wikipedia's bandwidth and hosting fees, paying off Grawp to not vandalize Wikipedia.

Why it's Generally a Huge Pile of Pelican Shit

Encyclopædia Dramatica once again breaking its balls to 1up Wikipedia.
All the good names are taken...
Articles about memes aren't allowed, but things like this are???
If I told you I had a bucket and showed you the bucket, would you ask for a newspaper article to prove I had a bucket?


—- (talk) 12:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Yes, we would. That's the way it works on Wikipedia.


FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Currently Wikipedia contains 2,809,950 articles, 2,809,951 of which are plagiarized from other sources. After edits from various admins, editors, trolls and vandals, only 343 of these remain more than 50% factually accurate. This leaves Wikipedia on an academic par with "Star Wars: Incredible Cross-Sections: The Ultimate Guide to Star Wars Vehicles and Spacecraft" and "My First Book of Animals from A to Z". All reputable universities and even high schools have permabanned the use of Wikipedia in academic citations.

Wikipedia has a concept called WikiLove and has a policy of "ass-u-me good faith" amongst its contributors. This is a vital policy as, in fact, there is no good faith amongst any of the members of Wikipedia, so it is necessary to at least pretend that the other guy isn't out there to be an asshole.

Wikipedia's new March 2007 rules demand that an administrator proves he/she has a higher ( PhD ) degree if he claims he has one. So far that bullshit lie to the public has not been enforced.

Wikipedia has very weak armor and only a level 3 shield. Thus, they are open to attack from pretty much anybody. And since they have about eighty updates per second, it's easy for a small but fatally incorrect change to slip through unnoticed. Also, Wikipedia is quite prone to hivemind, since everybody wants to be an admin, and disagreeing with Wikipedia admins is an easy way to not become one.

The administrators of Wikipedia are generally open-source advocates and therefore tend to have no knowledge of how to run a successful website. They are constantly arguing with each other over how often the GNAA Wikipedia article should be nominated for Articles for Deletion section, disregarding the existing rules which prevent multiple attempts. They delete the important sites, but keep the bullshit. Like this one.

Actually, the only thing in which Wikipedia beats ED is a higher percentage of vandal users. For a prime example, see Sceptre.

Contributors to Wikipedia are not valued. Bimbo Wales has said that editing is a privilege, so you are not really donating your time by editing articles. Most contributions (images, text, etc.) are actually deleted, and the users with the most power (Administrators, Bureaucrats, etc.) contribute the least content to the site. The site is so shitty that it is pointless to try to improve it, anyway. The best way to fix it would be to just delete it and start over.

Wikipedia is a stalking mill designed to stroke the egos of social reprobates and other fringe groups who don't belong in normal society. The people who are there long term and essentially live there for the most part fit the profiles of true sociopaths.

Wales developed a great gaming system on Wikipedia which he uses to attract the dregs of society -- people who don't have lives are who aspire to be "famous and great" are [h]is marks and he's come up with a rat maze to lure in the stupid, lonley, and ignorant.

I've been famous and in the public eye for what now -- 15 years? I have to say, power, fame, and attribution are overrated. There's a simple wisdom is simply accepting who you are and being happy about it. None of the psycho trolls on Wikipedia seem happy, it's a perpetual war zone and highly competitive. But what elludes all of them is the cheese at the end of the maze -- there is none -- just the smell of cheese.

Wales and his cronies just whore all of these idiots through their "Wikigame" (The site is an online gaming system essentially -- see who can get to the end as an "Admin" or "Arbitor"). Wikimedia then cashes in on everyone's hard work.

When was the last time Wales took one of his admins to get a massage as a russian house of ill repute on Wikimedia's dime? But HE DOES.

Bottom line, its a bunch of morons being used to run his business for free, while his cronies back at the Wikimedia offices cash in on everyones hard work and pay themselves 300K+ salaries per year, divert and misappropriate the funds and live the good life by living in fancy hotels and eating fancy meals while the rest of the stupid schmucks live in their mom's basement or their trailer parks in New Jersey and Alabama while Wales and his cronies cash in on YOUR HARD WORK.

It's got to be the second biggest scam after Linux development. Linus Torvalds has a similar model. Let people "contribute" so they feel good about themselves, while the project and site owners rake in the $$$.


—Jeff Merkey, [6]


Example of self-perceived reliability at Wikipedia.
The good people of wikipedia handle history's most complicated issues with an opened mind and detached objectivism.

In 2007, a variety of scandals began to surface from within Wikipedia. For the first time, mainstream news organizations began to openly discuss the common public perception of Wikipedia as "unreliable." In a sophisticated experiment, it was demonstrated that the terms "Wikipedia" and "unreliable," when entered into the Google, generated more than 502,000 "hits"; that is, 502,000 web pages on which Wikipedia is described as unreliable. In contrast, a similar search using "Encyclopedia Dramatica" and "unreliable" generated barely more than 300 hits, with most of these being self-deprecating jokes of humility on the part of Encyclopedia Dramatica editors. Thus, it was scientifically proven that Wikipedia is much, much more unreliable than Encyclopedia Dramatica (see graphic). Anyone in the world can edit Wikipedia, which means you know you are getting information from the best source possible. This comes in particularly handy if you want to learn different things to call nigras.

Recent Changes Patrolling (RC Patrolling)

Why the fuck would anyone want to patrol for recent changes on Wikipedia? The articles are usually dull. Patrolling edits on Wikipedia is boring as hell. The only reason that makes sense to RC Patrol on there is to harass people by reverting and giving no reason. Cuckolded fags like User:Ukexpat (Ukexpat, has a loser box fetish) cling to RC patrolling as a way to regain even the smallest shred of power in their lives after their wives have refused to touch their cocks. That and possibly selectively reverting to force your POV. Whenever you see someone on Wikipedia and they're an asshole, their userpage will always say they love RC patrol. If you actually attempt to post fact on Wikipedia and an RC patroller doesn't like it, they will use any sort of retarded excuses to revert what you posted or will just call it vandalism. Failing this, they will attempt to make your facts invalid through imaginary people.

RC Patrollers usually use scripts that search for specific things. They're actually very bad at catching vandalism in articles (this one went unnoticed for 17 days and this went unnoticed for two years!), but very effective at finding anyone criticizing admins in talk pages where such criticism is reverted and the person banned forever. Real vandalism lingers and festers until years later, that account pisses an admin off - and it is only through wikistalking that Wikipedophiles are able to find vandalism at all.

Some RC Patrollers are also huge hypocrites because they are vandals themselves. These fake editors include Konstable and Jew Aardvark, among others.


See also: Wikipedia Admin Gallery

RMS loves Wikipedia. No other commentary is needed.

Wikipedophiles, especially sysops and recent patrollers, share a hivemind. They all think alike, act alike, and no matter how abusive a member of the hivemind is, they always support it. Those of the hivemind look like they are sock puppets, but they actually communicate telepathically.

In 2005, like a colony of bees, the hivemind recognized that those outside the collective had their own individuality. Now they are a complete collective consciousness like the Borg and no longer believe identity exists outside the collective. To them, everyone is fake, an illusion; an actor who has no thoughts, emotions, viewpoints, etc. and must be eliminated. Because everyone outside their collective is a phony, anything they say is only an act, and by definition they are trolls. Any expression of individuality is banned as trolling or, to use a common wikipodadminism, "disruption." See Don't feed the trolls and Don't Feed the Divas, especially the last sentence, which crushes to oblivion the little self-esteem you may have:

"In some cases, the diva will stay retired, but the loss will be quickly filled by other editors who are not so high maintenance; editors for whom the goal is not self promotion and validation, but rather improvement of the project."

The hivemind extends outside Wikipedia as well, on those rare occasions that an admin strays onto another forum. A good way to start a flamewar with them is to hint, suggest, joke, outright state or otherwise insinuate that Wikipedia is anything less than the greatest academic achievement since the library of Alexandria.

Thus, because of the Hivemind, Wikipedia has immunized itself against any criticism. Of course, the corollary to this immunity, according to themselves, is because so many people are part of it, it can't be controlled. And, that because of so many participants, real criticism will come from inside. Yeah, that'll happen. Criticize the Hivemind at your own peril, because the Hivemind controls the power to delete your edits, to ban you, and to railroad you from social advancement (as SlimVirgin did to Gracenotes). When ED criticized Wikipedia, ED was site-banned in their blacklist. When Wikipedia Review criticizes Wikipedia, the Cabal removes all links under some kind of definition of "no personal attacks". Now real newspapers like the Register are criticizing and the chant goes out "Ban them, ban them, ban them..." [7]. Watch out New York Times, you're next. [8]

The Asperger Cancer

Any observant new user to wikipedia will soon ask themselves 'What's with all the running "lists" of inane bullshit?'. "I don't need to see a list of Russian deep fat fryer models built in 1963". Soon, they will also ask themselves "Why are the administrators such social misfits, with little sense of wisdom or good judgement? Does Jimbo know of this faggotry?". The answer to both questions is that wikipedia attracts Asperger zombies like flies to shit.

These basement dwelling virgins have alienated millions of normal people from wikipedia. They take out their asperger rage for their hundreds of school yard beatdowns and permanent sexual isolation on the rest of us. It is believed that many of these faggots cannot even talk in real life.

Asperger zombies are relatively easy to spot. They will be:

  • White, and male.
  • Will often have their photo on their user page. Asptards have little sense of what is socially appropriate, and don't realise how they come across. They mainly have blank, asperger stares.
  • A dead giveaway is their user page will be covered in checklists, 'to do' tables, programming code, (highly foolish) listing of personal details, and will generally look like a spreadsheet. Look at this fucknut.

Easy eBay Profits: Admin Farms

A wikipedophile put this up on Jimbo Wales's talk page to complain about admin abuse by furries in kangaroo suits (look nearly real, don't they?). Jimbo avoided the discussion with a banning.

While shouting "op me" is an easy way to become an op on IRC, in Wikipedia it takes a little more work (but only a little more). The purpose of becoming an admin is to sell your account on eBay. (source)

  1. Make a new account using dial-up or AOL, not proxies. These are the easiest ways to sock puppet and still use your other accounts for things like removing inaccuracies from Wikipedia.
  2. Create a user page so you look legit. The easy way is to fill it with userboxes until it looks like ribbons on a third-world military dictator. If you just copy somebody else's userpage, you will get caught. Then write up a fake bio that says, "Hi I'm only 12 and want to be an admin some day." Most admins on Wikipedia are too young to grow pubes, so you have to be in their age group. They never vote for anyone old enough to date.
  3. Don't question anything. Behave like a robot. Get one of those anti-vandal scripts and have it auto-revert while you sleep. Always revert: (1) Someone who reverts an admin--if you're lucky you'll occasionally beat somebody else to this (2) IP address users--because these are all vandals and sockpuppets (3) New contributors - because they don't understand Wikipedia (4) Anyone who has ever been banned before, even for an hour, because they're permanently shitlisted. Now don't worry about wrongly reverting any of these people, it happens all the time. Just say it was a mistake. No one in charge likes these people anyway. Learn the abbreviations for policy pages like WP:NPOV and WP:NOT and use them in your edit summaries. Nobody will care whether your usage makes sense. On talk pages, if someone asks a question, tell them that their statement is original research, speculation, and that Wikipedia is not a forum. Act like it is serious business, also.
  4. After a few hundred fake edits, go to the articles for deletion every day. # Next, go to votes for adminship; always vote to support, so those people will vote to support you. This should be obvious. Admins like people who support admins and hate those who are critical of admins.
  5. When you reach 4,000 edits, go to requests for adminship and nominate yourself: Poof! you're an admin!!!
  6. Then go to eBay and auction it. Make sure the reserve price is over $1,000 so you don't sell it cheap.
  7. Until the auction ends, don't just do nothing or they'll know it's an eBay sale. Use the account for things like POV-pushing, banning any of the four shitlisted types you used to only revert (by any, I mean every user you can find). But if you're too busy, just find someone complaining about admins and ban them forever and lock their talk page; actually you have to do this at least once every day, or else somebody will think the admin account was hacked.

If you want to keep your account and not sell it:

  1. Get a life.
  2. If that fails, do the most respected admin activity, encourage vandalism. Vandalism is the only way you can justify your job. If there weren't so many vandals, there would be 4 admins. So get your script out and just ban randomly. Be sure to lock the user's talk page. If you see the user come back on, hide what they write explaining they are a "sockpuppeting troll", ban them forever, and lock their talk page.
  3. Don't bother fighting vandals now. You've got the equivalent of a government job: you can't get fired, only transferred. Become a copycat Willy on Wheels and you only get a new account.

Fun activities to do as admin:

  1. Mess with the MediaWiki namespace.
  2. Ban other admins for lulz.
  3. Replace Wikipedia articles with ED ones. It improves accuracy.
  4. Unban all the Willy on Wheels accounts. Or just clear the entire ban list.
  5. Goatse the Main Page.


All over teh internets, people complain about the bad things of Wikipedia; that they're all child molesters, Homeland Security agents, Zionist propagandists, furries, and that Jimbo Wales' alter ego is GreenReaper the founder of WikiFur, how the official policy that admin abuse "is not a bug, it's a feature", and that there are news articles constantly on how they make snuff films with young boys. But nobody notices the heroes of the site:

  • Stephen Colbert.
  • Don Murphy
  • Willy on Wheels.
  • Señor Pelican Shit - Who found Wikipedia lacked information on Pelican Shit and was not afraid to add as much of it as possible.
  • Autofellatio Professor - Helped many people Autofellatio_2.jpg.
  • Publicgirluk uploaded some pictures of herself to illustrate relevant articles and got called a troll by the master wikipedo wealthy pornographer for her trouble.
  • THE MOTHERFUCKING JUGGERNAUT BITCH!! reputed for massive AOL autoblocks.
  • Jew Aardvark Wikipedia Jews masturbate to his photos.
  • Squidward, the fastest vandal west of the Mississippi, known for harvesting more open proxies, creatin more sockpuppets than Bomis has porn. He is king gypsy who lives in Chicago by the lake. He hates Antandrus, Avraham & others as proved by his crappy website. The Wikipedia Jews are always on the look out to rape him.
  • Mike Garcia - high class of vandalism since 2003 (get a life!)
    "He is currently one of Wikipedia's most promising vandals. He appears to be persistent, creative, and knows to vandalize pages that will be seen by many people. One day, he may even be considered in a class along with the great Willy on Wheels, but he will need to "diversify" his vandalism before this can happen. Almost all of his vandalism has been to the English Wikipedia; a good piece of advice to him would be to start attacking admins' user pages on some of the foreign language Wikis. His recent vandalism of the Wookieepedia shows that he has begun this diversification process already. Mike, you possess a great deal of talent; the sky's the limit for you!"
  • Cplot--500 sockpuppets and counting, clowns!
  • Professor Tim Pierce teaches his students how to make the most of a wiki.
  • Wikipedia Is Communism.
  • That guy who wrote Hyldenism.
  • Grawp
  • Avril Troll
  • Anybody who has earned a spot on this list.
  • Undercover users from here, allied sites.
  • Encyclopedia Dramatica
  • Hagger
  • ByAppointmentTo


The Wikipedia IRC chat is a fun place to watch Wikipedophiles discuss criticism of the project while banning the critics, although a more likely discussion will involve eating Christian babies, banning other users to get their rocks off. A fun way to troll #wikipedia is to announce that you are logging the channel. For some reason, Wikimediots raise strong objections to the publication of chat logs, so be sure to do it often. Just like this guy.


Lulzy IRC


<Slowking_Man> DCC SEND exploit = kline
<-- Slowking_Man has quit (Killed by Rez (This connection has violated network policy.))
<-- WikiTeke has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
<-- CXI has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
<-- CakeProphet has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))
<-- Poore5 has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))

The only thing remotely funny ever from #wikipedia

<VegaDark> what's that one disorder called when a person looks like a kid all their life
<mavhk> VegaDark: infant death

What Wikipedia is Not

Articles in Wikipedia are often deleted with a clever and witty message attached. These "joke deletions" are a fun activity that users play towards each other- whomever writes the cleverest message gets to delete someone else's article, and the author of said article checks up on it only to find it removed, and promptly dies in various fits of laughter. Uncle G, a particularly annoying admin, invented these colloquial sayings, known as "isnotisms", at least 100 days ago, which are presented in the following format:

  • Wikipedia is not the truth!
  • Wikipedia is not Wiccapedia.
  • Wikipedia is not about the size but how you use it.
  • Wikipedia is not a farking image repository (this is of course a lie; check Commons and Wikigraphy).
  • Wikipedia is not a place for master debaters but has lots of hot pics for 12-y.o. masturbators.
  • Wikipedia is not a dating service, unless you're NathanR, Snopake, Phaedriel, etc.
  • Wikipedia is not Uncyclopedia, but it does pwn Uncyclopedia.
  • Wikipedia is not headed by little green men but by a man with a little green dick.
  • Wikipedia is not a land of milk and honey.
  • Wikipedia is not part of a balanced breakfast.
  • Wikipedia is not a valid reference material.
  • Wikipedia is not a gender-confused horse but has attracted many gender-confused men.
  • Wikipedia is not a place for happy people.
  • Wikipedia is not above plagiarizing the crap out of everything.
  • Wikipedia is in no way wacky pedophilia.
  • Wikipedia is not man's best friend.
  • Wikipedia is not involved in the Kennedy cover-up (yeah, sure...).
  • Wikipedia is not an international crisis, but they like to think they are.
  • Wikipedia is not what I put on my toast.
  • Wikipedia is not able to endorse domestic violence.
  • Wikipedia is not 1337. Not in the least.
  • Wikipedia is not to be used under the influence of alcohol.
  • Wikipedia is not as tasty as sushi.
  • Wikipedia is not suitable for minors.
  • Wikipedia is not as hot as Hermione Granger Luna Lovegood.
  • Wikipedia is not a spell-checker but thinks it is.
  • Wikipedia did not inhale.
  • Wikipedia is not the answer.
  • Wikipedia is not dead nigger storage.
  • Wikipedia canNOT hold Grawp's GIANT dick
  • Wikipedia is not Wikipedia!.
  • Wikipedia is not a big truck.

Tellingly, obsessive listmaking is one of the most reliable symptoms of autism.


Lawlz. The child in Africa is broke

Wikipedia has recently released an extremely lulzy donations video on YouTube about Indians, Azns, being broke, exposing children to pr0n, and some other boring but lulzy shit. Enjoy.

Previous Video  |  Next Video


This is template you use to ask to be unblocked. After you've been blocked for no reason, you swallow your pride and ask that someone undo it. You then wait for an hour until some 15-year-old denies your request without even looking at it.

If you get banned by an admin don't even bother using this because no matter how well-reasoned the {{unblock}} request, it always gets declined. Like this one, "HOW DARE YOU CALL ME A TROLL M0RESCHI YOU STUPID BASTARD! AFTER WHAT YOU FUCKING DID YOU DESERVE TO BE SHOT!" Clearly the person has proved their point, but the bureaucratic fucks are immune to reason or logic. If your request is declined, you may get a lame reason like this one or this one.

Whenever you edit on Tor and the node is blocked, always put an unblock message on that IP claiming it's no longer Tor. Sometimes they even get fooled. Admin said, "First time I've seen such a request where the user was telling the truth."


So great is the amount of porn on Wikipedia it (almost) rivals ED - a fact made all the more pathetic by the fact ED is made by and for basement-dwellers and those with a disgusting sense of humour whereas Wikipedia is genuinely trying to educate people. Here is a list of the very full articles dedicating to proving that sad fact:


Generally speaking, Wikipedia is the compendium of all human knowledge, both true and false. Except of course where groups (i.e. Furluminati, The Wikipedia Jews) go around turning arrays of articles into propaganda and bullshit.


  • "Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit." - Wikipedia front page.
  • "[Wikipedia] is not a place where people have the inherent right to edit" - Jimbo Wales, October 29, 2007. (Source)


See also


External Links

WTF Wikipedia is part of a series on acronyms.

Wikipedia is part of a series on MMORPGs.

is part of a series on Wikis

Beeripedia | Boobpedia | Cheat Code Wiki | Christopedia | Citizendium | Conservapedia | Deletionpedia | Encyclopedia Dramatica | Encyclopedia of Stupid | IAmTheWalrusWiki | Illogicopedia | Inciclopedia | Insurgency Wiki | Kamelopedia | Know Your Meme / ROCKETBOOM | the LURKMORE wiki | MeatballWiki | MediaWiki | | OrthodoxWiki | | Russian Lurkmore | Sickipedia | Simple Wikipedia | Star Wars Fanon Wiki | Trendpedia | WhatPort80 | Wickerpedia | Wikia | Wikiality | Wikichan | WikiHow | Wikileaks | Wikimapia | Wikimedia Foundation | Wikinfo | Wikiporno | Wikitravel | Wikitruth | Wikiversity | WikiWikiWeb | Wiktionary | Wipipedia | Wookieepedia | Veropedia | Volapük

At "War" with Encyclopedia Dramatica:
Anti-Encyclopedia Dead | Failcyclopedia Dead | Ultraviolet News Network Dying
Uncyclopedia | WikiFur | Wikipedia

Wikipedia is part of a series on
Visit the Wikipedia Portal for complete coverage.
Personal tools