The narwhal wikipedia talk page is an abyssal mess

[@HGModernism]

Just a reminder not to go bother anyone, especially Wolverine XI! In my personal experience, editing wikipedia has been a wonderful way to make a positive mark on the world -- especially valuable when I was young and struggled to find connection. I found meaning through bringing quality information together in one place for everyone to benefit from. The correct processes were eventually followed and I hope Wolverine XI can continue to edit in peace. 😊

[@jesipohl6717]

wolverine XI's behaviour is honestly just gatekeeping and the reason wikipedia is becoming worse.

[@bertsteinich]

​@@jesipohl6717while gatekeeping is bad, they still definitely put care and attention to the platform and the articles they are working on, which I would argue is a net positive

[@GhostIntoTheFog]

Unfortunately, it’s now extremely common on Wikipedia for editors to assert ownership over articles with impunity. Many editors do virtually nothing but revert others’ edits with flimsy explanations or none at all. Putting in supposed statistics or facts that aren’t supported by the cited sources is also extremely common.

[@GoldenPickaxe]

​@@GhostIntoTheFog as well as deleting as much information as you can about historical events like elections and adding as much false information as you can to articles that don't get read often

[@FFKonoko]

​@jesipohl6717 except it isn't just gatekeeping. It's difference in opinion based on writing style. They literally made the change later anyway. And likewise stopped arguing on the dive thing.

[@sicksock435446]

Poor citations are one of my greatest pet peeves. Especially when the citations are the one-two combo of: "A news article paraphrasing a scientific paper" and "a scientific paper which does not contain the alleged information". Grrrr

[@relo999]

Welcome to wikipedia, seriously this is the core issue of wikipedia their outright fetishization of secondary sources. This makes it so it isn't correct to cite a study directly but only a news source talking about it or another source that uses it and then only include their interpretation. This is also the case for pretty much any subject from historical, political, artistic, technological or scientific. And this makes factual accuracy drop of wikipedia and more so a bad case of "what the others think about a subject".

[@kaliyuga14surfer88]

Wikipedia is genuinely a bad source of information due to it's citation policy. the only thing its good for is hard science objective facts, think applied mathematics and STEM.

[@ThylineTheGay]

that and the _classic;_ wikipedia page for a horrible person: essay length, aggrandising them and minimising the awful things they did wikipedia page for an interesting person who has meaningfully improved the world: _half a paragraph_

[@dragonproductions236]

Incestious citation is practically a mainstay of wikipedia. That and just straight up lying about events.

[@SineN0mine3]

​@@relo999primary sources aren't necessarily accurate either though. I don't think it's secondary sources which are the problem, just the overall quality of sources.

[@walterk9916]

I know we have to "Assume good faith" but like who died and made this dude Wolverine the king of the narwals

[@gregariosity]

Wolverine X

[@oscaranderson5719]

@@gregariositywe should abolish this wolverine monarchy

[@mcgoo721]

They're on the spectrum. It happens with them.

[@sarmin8008]

Impossible, have you ever seen a wolverine? They're god's killing machine and we humans cannot stand up to them ​@@oscaranderson5719

[@NJ-wb1cz]

​@@mcgoo721 "They"¿? Dude.... you decided to delve into the comments section of a video about wikipedia coverage of narwhals, and somehow tie with psychology. It's more of textbook example of behavior of someone on the spectrum than trains because trains are too much of a meme at this point

[@vmp916]

I love the sub genre of deep dive explainers where the presenter A. Finds themselves in the position to correct the record on often quoted misinformation B. Discovers really low stakes niche internet beef C. Does both at the same time

[@qwopiretyu]

That's when the edit war REALLY started heating up. See narballs69 kept editing that narwhals were born gay but admin joe9999 would reverse the edits, sometimes within minutes, insisting that homosexuality in all species was not definable until sexual maturity

[@foreverpainful]

youd love the deepdive on CR6

[@connor8703]

you forgot D. shows their face

[@fossilfightersfanforever7243]

you'd love hbomberguy

[@jordanzish]

Wikipedia talk pages are ground zero for low stakes niche internet beef. I treasure them deeply.

[@consensuslphisk]

hearing this person claim YOU'RE the one biased on the matter of narwhals makes my blood boil lmao

[@MaybeBlackMesa]

Sadly trying to correct an obviously biased person and then hearing that from them is extremely common on the internet in general

[@lxjoe96]

She shot herself in the foot with that first edit. If she'd just removed the information, citing the lack of any supporting information in the source, it might have been accepted. But she replaced it with the unsupported theory that male narwhals rub horns together for pleasure, which made it seem like an attempt to push a personal belief or identity political agenda about narwhals being gay, which led to it being dismissed outright as pandering. I believe this to be the case because Wolverine in his edit log accuses her of trying to "push [her] opinion"

[@newp0rt]

@@lxjoe96 yeah she shot herself in the foot quoting the same guy that wolverine later quoted.

[@lxjoe96]

​@@newp0rt what are you talking about dude

[@dbteepo86]

​@@lxjoe96he's saying, go back and watch the video again, and possibly even pause and read for yourself the book she ordered just to get the citation Wolverine claimed "read the citation"

[@annaairahala9462]

The more I've interacted with wikipedia, the more I've realized that so many pages are plagued by misinformation just because of one person who took it upon themselves to monitor the page for anything they might disagree with. Nowadays, I only ever use wikipedia as an aggregated source page, like the many search sites for academic studies. It's so ridiculously common to see the wikipedia page say one thing but their source to say something completely different. I hope people do understand that wikipedia is not a source, but they can be good for finding sources

[@Trotoloko]

Political pages on Wikipedia are a NIGHTMARE.

[@PlatinumAltaria]

There's a Wikipedia article about medieval witches using hallucinogenic ointments on dildos. We live in dark times.

[@mauricestardddude8317]

I feel this. I do use Wikipedia as a source in some capacity, but add A LOT of salt on it, especially when a line feels weird or does not have a citation. That only works though because I don't do any serious research. If I were researching for a paper I would not do this. The good thing about Wikipedia is that I can atleast expect a citation and don't have to search through a 1000 word article just to find the only source is another 1000 word article which uses a tweet as a souce. I do sometimes jump into the Wikipedia sources when I am interested enough. Which often does lead to some very scary inconsistencies. Once when I was reading through the Touhou manga I just wanted to read a little more about a a japanese tale of a Horse Doctor treating a dragon. And there WAS a reference to that story somewhere on Wikipedia (dunno where anymore). But the source was a very old book, which did not have a translation of the tale, but just a reference to the story existing. It's not a bad source of course, this does prove in some capacity the story existing. And the Wikipedia article did not say anything that contradicted the source. But it is really sad to not have an ACTUAL source on hand in form of a translation. And that's just the issue with many things where we don't really have the information and kind of got to interpretate out of some minor source like that. In that article it was fine, but it scares me for other articles that are about more serious topics than some japanese folk tale. Though happily I don't care about serious topics and am more interested in japanese folk tales. So I'll just have to learn japanese and ask ZUN where exactly he gets his folk tales from.

[@ResonantFrequency]

Wikipedia editors self select for the people who have the time on their hands , the motivation to maintain it and navigate the terrible interface and byzantine rule structure. Those criteria dramatically shrink the odds of someone doing the work being well adjusted.

[@torukia]

@@ResonantFrequency So Wikipedia editors are Reddit mods? It all makes sense now.

[@MrJethroha]

Wikipedia editors tend to be odd folk as a rule, so I'm really not surprised so many articles have their own WolverineXI jealously editing and re-editing them everyday.

[@Barlie_]

Scots Wikipedia had an American editing everything for YEARS despite the fact he didn't speak scots he ruined thousands of hours worth of peoples work

[@insertnamehere9718]

@@Barlie_THANK YOU! I only ever see this talked about in a positive light, and we need to acknowledge that what he did was actually really awful and damaging

[@bugjams]

Some wiki editors spend so much time fixing/vandalizing pages, that I simply cannot imagine them as anything other than basement-dwelling goblins who never take a step outside. Also, the extensive history of "editing wars" and rivalries between well-known editors is comparable to a history course of an entire country. I'm sure not all of them are no-life freaks and actually mean well, but calling them "odd folk" is still certainly and understatement.

[@poodle101]

honestly the best way to make wikipedia better is to become a wiki editor as well. most of the editors on wikipedia actually do their due diligence when it comes to making pages, its unfortunate that the ones that get the most attention are usually the ones using it as a power trip or to spite others. The more genuinely helpful people there are there, the better honestly.

[@TheTetrapod]

@@insertnamehere9718 Where have you seen this talked about in a positive light? I've consumed multiple pieces of media that go over that story, and they normally emphasize the fact that the editor has probably permanently damaged efforts to preserve the Scots language.

[@Mrvideosandgames]

His talk page is glorious: "You've just done it again. 181 edits on 57 templates on the common ostrich page in the span of 141 minutes. That's 1.28 edits per minute, and I can count the ones in the double digits on two fingers. Come on man"

[@insertphrasehere15]

Clearly trying to pad their edit count… doing mostly good work though, so perhaps just a style, either way it’s not a big issue.

[@screwaccountnames]

@@insertphrasehere15 I don't even think it has to be about padding their edit count. It might be something like compulsively hitting Ctrl-S every ten seconds while editing a word document. Out of place on Wikipedia to be sure, but not necessarily malicious.

[@DownUnderTechReview]

@@screwaccountnames Well considering their user page contains this tidbit from them I think it is safe to say they are padding their edits for some self gratification. >In 2023, from June to December, I immersed myself in roughly 760,372 edits and 1,922 uploads. My performances in 2024 have been lackluster thus far, as I've only made circa. 239,628 edits.

[@screwaccountnames]

@@DownUnderTechReview Fair.

[@ApotheosisTK117]

@@DownUnderTechReview They probably take an unhealthy amount of pride in quantity over quality (since that's the only objective way to measure and consequently advertise one's edits/contributions), so they save after nearly every altered word or punctuation mark, scouring every millimeter of text for anything that one might argue isn't THE most proper way to structure a sentence or paragraph in English, right down to the "flow" of a sentence. That's not to say that they DON'T care about quality, as they clearly do, but that their massive amount of pride comes from the quantity. Either way, they need to chill for real.

[@arminreindl7742]

as a fellow editor, kudos to putting up with this, WolverineXI has sure been....erratic? they seem to have a habit of picking up articles they want to take to FA, don't really seem to care to implement the changes suggested by reviewers, then basically ignore their started FAs unless they are just promoted outright while making up excuses as to why they stopped working the countless minor edits clogging up page history tho are something else, they made about 210 edits to a mammoth as of late, each and every single one simply changing individual conversion formulas across the page one by one.

[@HGModernism]

Yeah! So I was SO sure at first it was a bot! It reminded me of those "subscription bomb" attacks where an attacker hides a real identity theft email alert by signing the target's email address up for massive amounts of spam. Like you open your inbox to 10,000 emails and are never going to find the one from your bank changing your address/email/password/etc.

[@HGModernism]

For I spent a LONG time assuming there was something super sneaky or insidious going on.

[@arminreindl7742]

@@HGModernism It might be that it inflates the edit count and makes it easier to claim the FA nomination while doing very little substantial work that contributes to the information of the page itself? Admittedly, thats pretty bad faith and I've seen plenty of people who simply do not know how to consolidate their edits or struggle with it due to their own writing/editing style. Thank god sandboxes exist for that.

[@TheTransporter007]

@@HGModernism They are not a bot. They just have questionable mental stability.

[@HGModernism]

@@arminreindl7742 Ohhhh... pumping the FA status metrics makes so much sense actually, I didn't think of that! I would *hope* that these metrics would check for number of accounts editing, but honestly that would probably just encourage more fake accounts so... huuuh. I need to look into exactly how FA nominations work. Good faith is only for how I treat and interact with other editors. My mystery solving instincts are too strong to be repressed given my own curiosity haha

[@SOOKIE42069]

People like Wolverine XI are so irritating that I have to just stop participating in spaces they're involved in lest I lose my mind.

[@budgetcommander4849]

it's on everyone else for not leaving tbh

[@m1k3y48]

Wikipedia is a trip. Someone did a video called "the criptids of Wikipedia" deep diving into Wikipedia's long term abuse page, which documents known trolls, vandals, etc. Wolverine reminded me a bit of that (though to a lesser severity)

[@keirfarnum6811]

There’s no article about the “bloodtids” of Wiki?”

[@BloodwyrmWildheart]

~77% of all Wiki articles are written by 1% of its editors. Major red flag.

[@duncanluciak5516]

​@@BloodwyrmWildheart That is generally the way knowledge is disseminated. A few people share it with many.

[@maksrambe3812]

​@@BloodwyrmWildheart90% of editors probably make one edit and stop so I would actually expect something like this.

[@I_Love_Learning]

@@BloodwyrmWildheart That is wrong and misleading. 1% of editors have edited on 77% of articles, and most articles are generated from city records and stuff shoved into a template, so there isn't really a human choosing what the Wikipedia article says to be biased towards whatever they believe or whatever.

[@Ringtail]

A similar thing is currently going on with the wiki page for the German state Schleswig-Holstein. Some guy is dumping massive amounts of uncited info into it (though he claims otherwise). He has been editing this page since April and is still not "finished". I noticed this going on because the lead for the page is eight paragraphs - very long articles usually have four at most. He keeps undoing every attempt to shorten or clean up the page, insisting he's still working on it and to just give him more time than the five months he's already had.

[@webbowser8834]

Tbh if it's taking that long for the page to be in an "acceptable" state, he really should consider writing the article first, reviewing and editing it locally until he is satisfied, and then publishing the article to Wikipedia.

[@1boldearth]

Wolverine XI 💀💀💀 Holy hell dude seems to have an ego

[@morgantseasrant1948]

Bout to say they are a dick, with documented evidence of being territorial about articles and making so many edits to have said ownership.

[@el_fucko]

His user page is an absolute riot: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wolverine_X-eye

[@thesunman]

11:10 maybe that narwhal's heart rate went up because he was strapped into some strange machine he didn't understand

[@klausnielsen1537]

All the while thinking: Not again!

[@geoffdavids7647]

Maybe the narwhal's heart rate went up because he enjoyed it

[@TheFyroPyro]

There would be a placebo control in this experiment, such as strapping the thing on an only running salt water through it. The heart rate isn't only measured once, it's based off a baseline that would necessarily include having the thing strapped on.

[@RickBrennan]

They do say alternating so personally I’m wondering instead if they controlled for water temperature (ie the fresh water maybe was warmer or different temp than the seawater used)

[@KarlBunker]

Great video. And yeah, Wikipedia editing-debates often become a cesspool of pompous acrimony that can drive one to madness. Considering the subject matter of this article in particular, sometimes all you can say is "[cetacean needed]". 😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁😁 Love your channel. I hope it gets the growth it deserves.

[@SeanCMonahan]

"[cetacean needed]" Now, I've got a -bone to pick- _tooth to pick_ with you.

[@quantumblauthor7300]

uuughhhh

[@fool4343]

my fav hobby is to read talk pages on the wiki. tho it sometimes infuriates me ok so there is a russian wiki page about volga bulgaria (im not sure the exact english name). its a controversial country - not whether it existed or smth but bc there is an "intellectual" war for its "inheritance". i, admit, have my own bias in this: i am chuvash and historians argue who is the truest of true cultural inheritors of that country, chuvash or tatar people? the evidence are such: -it was on the tatar republic soil -it has headstones which can feature either protochuvash or prototatar (im simplifying) language now, there is a simple answer for this: both are "the children" of the dead country. along a bunch of finno ugric people around middle povolzhe, there are like 3-4 of them but noooo it only can be tatars bc they and their historians said so. it pisses me of. i blame stalin

[@quantumblauthor7300]

@@fool4343 you are a normal person in a sports-minded world. My condolences

[@fool4343]

@@quantumblauthor7300 that is relieving, thank you

[@TheTransporter007]

Wikipedia is simultaneously one of mankinds greatest creations, and at the same time the most monumental trainwreck in recorded history.

[@youkofoxy]

Well, that is Mankind for you.

[@ced3763]

it teach peoples to check their source and be critical.. you wouldn't have this with a perfectly curated platform..

[@lightningninja6905]

​@@ced3763Ehh does it though? It seems to me that people will just be wrong if you give bad info.

[@ced3763]

​@@lightningninja6905 I don't know of any enciclopedia who get 100% of it's fact straight.. But wikipedia never pretended to be accurate in the first place. If you are smart and curious enough to look things up in a encyclopaedia, you are probably capable to be critical to some extent, but even if you are not, it's not so bad that your chance of being mislead over just a few search is statistically significant.It's not perfect, but calling it a trainwreck is a bit excessive.. you wish most gouvernement would operate at this level of truth and integrity, they mostly do not..

[@lightningninja6905]

@@ced3763 Those actually are all fair points! I was specifically talking about the idea that it (being wrong) would teach them to investigate further and be critical of the text. As I understand that those skills aren't really improved when bad information is given.

[@scottgmccalla]

When I was in high school, sometime between 2006 and 2007, I was looking at the Wikipedia page for Narwhals, and I found in the Habitat section that someone had edited in that "Narwhals like to surf through the desert and pick up chicks". When I shared the page with my friends maybe an hour or so later, the page was already fixed!

[@m0nkEz]

I remember that the title of the China Rockfish had been changed to "China sucks man" when I was in high school. Lasted a good few months, at least, but it's no more.

[@KasumiRINA]

ruined, you mean! Always screnshot or just see history because vandals always "fix" good stuff and make pages boring.

[@joshuaanolick3635]

The business about citing Dr Nweeia reminds me of the line in Dr Strangelove when the Soviet Ambassador gravely says "Our source was the New York Times."

[@paulmayo2948]

The phone call scene between the presidents, dry as a bone humor at it's best

[@thomaseriksen6885]

Why on earth would a foreign dignitary say some so

[@gearandalthefirst7027]

@@paulmayo2948 More like "dry as a modified canine tooth structure" given the context

[@apokalypthoapokalypsys9573]

​@@gearandalthefirst7027canine tooth structure - dogtooth - Yorgos Lanthimos - dry humour We do live in a simulation.

[@roskelld]

I had a number of instances on Reddit where I’d make a post and it would be removed or shadow blocked by a mod for some “inappropriate content” reason only to be posted again by them to collect the juicy internet points. I’m left feeling that maybe some people just need to feel a bit of power in this world and maybe a webpage is the place they can find it. P.s Nice Dark Souls poster! I have the same one.

[@saschamayer4050]

Had the same problem on stack overflow (stack exchange). I then decided that my time was too valuable to be wasted on a platform that's ruled by toxic elitists. 🤷‍♂️

[@KasumiRINA]

A bunch of Ukrainian accounts were permabanned the day poo tin banned discord, for comments as innocent as "Nice!", the other day I've seen people banned for commenting on st. petersburg travel videos pushed on everyone for saying "I wish same happens to them they do to us", apparently the web is really big on siding with colonizer and bullying the people trying to survive a genocide. Basically we are blocked from all foreign social media, anything you post against RF is censored. Even here, I have to censor their country name as KZbin really doesn't like truth about colonizer country of war criminals be published. They love downplaying atrocities. Speaking of that, I have alarm telling me there's a ballistic missile my way. I live hundreds of kilometers from any frontline.

[@spiralsun1]

Internet censorship banning and blocking and stealing literally will destroy humanity when you throw the relentless AI censor-bot terminators into the mix.

[@KasumiRINA]

6:17 Supported BY WHAT?! I hate this passive aggressive bullying with VERY OBVIOUS hazing, basically saying "you're new so you don't matter, go clean grammar". Mods are on power trip, as always.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

Having reviewed the logs, it sounds like Wolverine XI was trying to push the Narwhal article for featured article status. This is probably why he was trying to wave everyone off the article - stability of text and felicity of style count for selection. Of course, this is bad behavior, both in a Wikipedia context and in real life. Here's hoping the guy learns to chill out a bit!

[@1e1001]

that's mentioned in the video as well

[@DamnZodiak]

That account has a documented history of similar behaviour under multiple articles. Apparently they just do trillions of minor edits to lots of articles as an ego boost and to claim ownership.

[@jeffrey.p.thornton]

@@JorgetePanete I corrected the typo

[@LieseFury]

"it interrupts the flow" sir, this is an encyclopedia…

[@ZenobiaofPalmyra]

lol

[@Efreeti]

As someone who has edited Wikipedia for many years, beginning in 2005, I have to agree with the other editors about the clear ownership behaviour by Wolverine XI. Sadly I've encountered dozens of editors much like them, their focus being on edit count and the presentability of the article for possible Featured Article-baiting rather than up-to-date and accurate information. That said, I really like your presentation style, I'm glad someone linked me to your video on KZbin comment bots fishing for blocked words, I'm gonna be watching more of your videos!

[@tfk_001]

My only experience with editing wikipedia was fixing the absolutely atrocious spelling of "Lousaina", "Grenadines's," and the less atrocious "defence" (in a context where defence was wrong) and also added an album to a band's discography that somehow hadn't been added a few months after its release. I long for the days where I can find a drama to the scale of narwhal horns

[@valentinmitterbauer4196]

It may not be on the same level as narwhal horns, but the "talk"- page of the entry to "Yasuke" keeps deintegrating more the further you scroll down.

[@syro33]

Isn't defence/defense just an American vs British spelling difference? Was it like, something that was needed to specifically follow the one spelling? I suppose that would make sense if it was like, part of a book title written by a Brit, or something.

[@ulture]

@@syro33 wikipedia has a policy where if it isn't the name of an organisation (e.g. the UK Ministry of Defence or the US Department of Defense), it doesn't really matter which conventional English you use as long as it's consistent throughout the article. That said, they do prefer it if pages about the UK use UK English, and US English is assumed everywhere else (even countries that use forms of English closer to UK English, like India or Australia). That's just a result of there generally being more US users than the rest of the Anglosphere put together (for now at least.... there are looooots of English-fluent internet users in India these days, so the "analyse/centre/defence/labour/organise" gang will win in the end)

[@luckyblockyoshi]

@@valentinmitterbauer4196Premodern Japanese history on Wikipedia is a mess. I don’t think anyone who actually works in the field edits there. Most avoid it because your edits WILL be reverted 99% of the time and it’s just a waste of effort. The Yasuke page has only gotten to this (pretty good) level because of all the attention, and still I’m pretty sure the people who edited it have pieced it together from various places without any actual background in the field or consulting with people actually working in it (a lot of the citations they managed to scrounge up for the quotations are literally a bunch of random japanese media articles lol). Seeing the talk page go on for so long at the beginning without a single person even considering Japanese-language sources was a pain. And holy hell why is it still going on the answer has been clear from the beginning.

[@Chicky_Lumps]

You must made me realize I'm so used to "defense" having two spellings, I never even consciously noticed there were two.

[@TomSFox]

I feel like this video underdelivers on the gay narwhals.

[@drdca8263]

Well, it no longer advertises that in the title or thumbnail (which is why I clicked it, actually. Wasn’t interested if it was going to be primarily about that, but when thumbnail and name changed and suggested it wasn’t primarily about that, met my interest threshold)

[@super-tian]

@@drdca8263 Lol It’s still in the description

[@drdca8263]

@@super-tian yes, but the change to the title/thumbnail convinced me (correctly) that it was a small enough part of the video that I would likely find the video entertaining

[@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts]

If watching welsh nationalists has taught me anything, it's that Wikipedia is full of misinformation also, i occasionally find random, unscorced statements on wiki that sre so fascinating they MUST come from somewhere. But where? Who knows.

[@annaairahala9462]

Welsh nationalists? What rabbit hole did you fall down to start watching Welsh nationalists?

[@Trotoloko]

Stay away from any wikipedia page regarding a powerful political position, including organised religions. The Catholic pages are extremely white washed and with a suspicious "care". And even some philosophy definitional pages are pure absolute garbage, like the nihilism one

[@theghosthero6173]

​@@annaairahala9462 absolutely go check out Cambrian Chronicles, his work is very similar and very good (its 19th century nationalism in question, dont worry)

[@Loutron3030]

​@@annaairahala9462Probably British, the Union's been hanging on by a thread since England unilaterally decided on the rest of Britain's behalf to sabotage our own economy. Support for Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party; has been rising then fluctuating since 2016 and their voter share increased in the recent 2024 election. Scotland's been eying the door forever, even before England dragged them out of the EU against their will- so Wales has been taking notes.

[@Tegmete]

​@@annaairahala9462 He/she probably watches cambrian chronicles. Great channel by the way.

[@SlimbTheSlime]

Wolverine XI looks to be one of the "wikipedia cryptids" who haunt the site.

[@el_fucko]

Oh, nothing that elaborate, I don't think - he's just some hyperactive kid. You'll want to look at people like Lightburst or Silver seren for the real weirdo stuff.

[@amelialonelyfart8848]

It's set to be deleted soon, but the talk page for "List of Hindi songs recorded by Asha Bhosle" is the most toxic Wikipedia talk page I've ever seen. It starts with a somewhat innocuous request to split the article, followed by "Have you considered leaving it THE FUCK alone!?" (said by Wikipedia Celebrity EEng, no less. Yes, that EEng.) The rest of the discussion is just somewhat politely arguing for splitting it (it's over 600,000 bytes long) and everyone else being really aggressive.

[@Speederzzz]

Aha, EEng, who has their own thread on wikipediocracy... Could still be a case of WP:HOUND(ing) but with EEng, you never know

[@amelialonelyfart8848]

@@Speederzzz I try not to get involved in internet drama anymore but it's kind of astounding how often EEng has come up in my life lately. From being praised by a bunch of (in hindsight, creepy weirdos) folk several years back for being one of the few "sane people" of Wikipedia, to writing what is sometimes considered the greatest Wikipedia article (Phineas Gage's biography, which I find over-edited and clunky) to him telling random people to shut the fuck up for having issues on Wikipedia articles.

[@el_fucko]

@@amelialonelyfart8848 Don't forget to credit his merry band of enablers (most notably Bishonen), without whom he'd never be able to get away with this behavior.

[@Palakarava]

Wikipedia needs a policy in place to prevent these "page guardians" from having such a powerful grip on a page. Perhaps after a large enough number of edits, over a long enough period of time, their account is automatically, permanently locked from editing the page further.

[@aenetanthony]

I think rate limiting would be better than banning them from the article. Just say that after a certain large number of edits over a fairly short time on one article, you can only make 1 edit per day or something. It would force them to consolidate their tiny edits into larger edits which are more manageable for other editors to parse.

[@oiytd5wugho]

there is a policy of no more than (iirc) 3 edit reversals. Once you've done so 3 times you have to take the disagreement to the talk: and figure it out there. It is not automatic, though. If someone is tying to appropriate the article by other means, then the only way is to start a discussion about their behaviour and tag someone above you (who depends on the topic, probably someone from a relevant wikiproject)

[@oiytd5wugho]

@@aenetanthony this doesn't work for current events, where people can legitimately make multiple edits a day. There are policies against ownership and edit wars, they just aren't automatic because that cannot be implemented without impeding some good-faith edits

[@Speederzzz]

There is indeed OWN (page ownership) and 3RR (3 revert rule). Every rule breach needs to be put forth on the Administrators noticeboard, so an admin can look at it and decide on proper punishment. There are sometimes legitimate reasons do to a bunch of smaller edits, but often these will be used against you if you get accused of something. (Why not just edit all your little changes in one go? Do you want to inflate your edit count for cloud? The problem is that being an admin has become more and more a chore and the method for becoming an admin can be quite stressful so people don't bother. But people need to actually go to the wiki-police if they see something rulebreaking. Most do not (not gonna blame them) so these people continue without any worries.

[@chriscraig6410]

Of course 3 edit reversals (revert change, restore change, revert change) favors the status quo, which is usually the original state. It's yet another way page guardians maintain control

[@Methlab]

I hate misinformation on Wikipedia >:(

[@annaairahala9462]

Welcome to much of wikipedia

[@oiytd5wugho]

Honestly, every time I read an article about something I know stuff about I see various levels of misinformation, so I just assume the whole website is to be taken with a teaspoon of salt. edit: scratch that, the articles on math or physics principles are entirely factual, they suck for other reasons (overcomplicated)

[@Trotoloko]

​@@oiytd5wughoIt just depends if they are calling for specific interests. Political pages, including religious, are an absolute nightmare and the more popular, the more whitewash they have

[@SineN0mine3]

​@@annaairahala9462Wikipedia is the most inaccurate and untrustworthy website on the internet (besides every other website)

[@tree_eats]

@definitivamenteno-malo7919 There is a curious rabbithole of documentation regarding the government of the USA employing intelligence agency members to maintain editorial control over certain pages, for the purpose of maintaining sociopolitical narratives. Certainly not of great surprise in a post Snowden and Wikileaks era but interesting nonetheless.

[@QerstyBass]

i wanna see wolverine xi's furaffinity page

[@Ringtail]

he is apparently a hardcore christian so you'd be disappointed

[@sanguillotine]

@@Ringtailthat just makes me more convinced that he has one and it’s full of very niche stuff

[@ahdog8]

unfortunately there does not seem to be a user on FA named WolverineXI so we'll never know 😔

[@ThylineTheGay]

@@Ringtail i'm _sure_ there's a hardcore christian niche of the furry fandom

[@Neogeddon]

@@ThylineTheGay I'm delighted(?) to inform you that there is indeed

[@benpierce2150]

has wikipedia really gone this long without the equivalent of git blame? there could be 10 billion edits, but search for who to blame a particular piece of code on should be easy if not fast and easy

[@el_fucko]

There kind of is something like that: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiBlame

[@generalissima_4279]

as a frequent wikipedia editor, thank you for covering this sort of beautiful drama. you left out the Featured Article Candidate nominations by Wolverine, which also had large amounts of completely missing the point lol

[@LarsDonner]

All I knew was that they're the Jedi of the ocean and that they cause quite the commotion. I guess this is said commotion.

[@silveryt2]

Just don't let them touch your balls.

[@PlatinumAltaria]

I see errors on Wikipedia all the time, and it's genuinely concerning that a website that most people see as a primary source for factual information is controlled by a handful of extremely rigid people. Bad sources are so common, and because we assume good faith they're very rarely checked.

[@Gulitize]

German wikipedia is near unusable because of the admins and long time editors.

[@stefanmilicevic5322]

Most editors are working in good faith to provide factual information, so your overgeneralization is somewhat misplaced. Bad actors exist in all kinds of groups universally.

[@luckyblockyoshi]

It’s not necessarily that we assume good faith and they’re not checked, but more like most of the time it’s not worth going through an edit war just to fix one part of one article, and most people won’t bother with that

[@eljanrimsa5843]

Never seen so many misleading overgeneralizations, false claims, and exaggerations wrapped up in two sentences..

[@PlatinumAltaria]

@@eljanrimsa5843 You can point to where in my comment the false claim is, or delete this reply in shame.

[@__-vb3ht]

This low key makes me want to contribute to Wikipedia pages somehow

[@HGModernism]

Do it! It's way easier than it might seem. Even if you aren't a specialist, just checking sources when you see something odd is a great way to contribute!

[@lonjil]

It makes me want to not touch wikipedia ever

[@lightningninja6905]

It's funny, this video made me want to do the same to an article (Mason Jars) that I believed to have numerous NPOV violations. (I wasn't sure how to go about it properly) However when I went to look for it, some fine fellow by the name of TheHiddenWind had already fixed those issues, only 7 days before now. Plus he cited the same concerns as me, which felt reassuring in a weird way.

[@Jack93885]

Pretty much all of my edits have been reverted, most made when I was a child. One day recently I was reading up on something and went to check the source for the information provided and found that the information had been put into a table on Wikipedia backwards so I fixed it. I think it's my only edit to ever stand but I'm happy with it. My minor contribution counts for something, next time someone goes to that page but doesn't go to the actual source they'll leave with the right information. :]

[@annaairahala9462]

@@Jack93885 Yeah it's rough. There is one edit I'm proud of that still exists on an ever growing page. It added new information that was missing. I tried adding a photo tied to the information too, but unfortunately I could never get in contact with the photographer (I'm not even sure if they're alive anymore tbh) Meanwhile I have a number of other edits that are still around but modified to the point where they aren't even saying the same thing the source says or ones that were reverted that shouldn't have been but I just didn't have the energy to debate people in the talk page. I find it's best to focus on things that add new sources, because at least that way the people interested in information can still get it. Personally, I've just retired from touching wikipedia edits, it's a losing battle.

[@spockamania]

WolverineXI sounds familiar to me, which as a non editor sounds concerning. The only insight on the backend has been through glorified "drama" videos (through an obviously educational lense, not just "OMG did you hear what they did??"). Which if I recognize the name, that's concerning. I'm going to do my own digging if I remember when I get home later. There may be more to this rabbit hole

[@shadoww7301]

did you find anything?

[@spockamania]

@@shadoww7301 Thank you for reminding me. I had completely forgotten. That said, I have not found anything in either my YT history or discord messages. So either this was a weird Mandela Effect or it's in a video I just couldn't find. I'd assume the former rather than latter

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@spockamania it felt vaguely familiar to me from a Sarah Z video fwiw, but her videos are so long I'm certainly not going back to check through them all (and I don't think there's transcripts).

[@jcnot9712]

Wikipedia is a horrible place to learn trivia or any kind of niche information in general. Its best use is for common sense knowledge that you’re lacking on, since that’s gonna have the highest chance of getting corrected the quickest. For example, if you’re studying any STEM subject and you need a quick place to grab a related formula from, then Wikipedia is excellent. But if you’re in grad school writing a research paper on that same topic, then not so much.

[@thewingedporpoise]

yeah it's like, "when was this historical event" or "the basic understanding of this concept" but like, if you're ever looking at birds you'll find like, groups of birds with one of them having like 5 paragraphs total and one or two pictures and the others are all like 5-10 sentences and no pictures, even moreso with lizards and of course, a bunch of insects don't have wikipedia pages it's good for broad overviews of things but y'know, you'd never go to an encyclopedia for graduate research anyway, that's the level of Wikipedia and it does that about as well as it can

[@KasumiRINA]

I use it as makeshift dictionary for terminology and foreign spelling: don't know translation of SPECIFIC term and Google Translate gives results for synonyms are that are too generic? Open Wiki page and change language. Title alone is sometimes enough. Though that has its issues when you get to THOSE countries which absolutely censor wiki, good luck finding atrocity articles in ru or zh.

[@doomtho42]

Learning is pretty much my only hobby, and unsurprisingly this led to me getting into editing wikipedia articles a couple of years ago, but alas my initial enthusiasm for the hobby was completely and totally quashed within a matter of days. Needless to say, I was not at all prepared for the level of irrationality and toxicity amongst the community of editors - well, the toxicity I could deal with; the irrationality I cannot.

[@eljanrimsa5843]

Get other hobbies!

[@birobiro1910]

How the hell did I get here 😂 but extremely immersive storytelling. Didn’t care for Wikipedia editing nor do i know anything about narwhals but was hooked till the end. Staying for more

[@enduser178]

"and read the other sources that support this statement" brother you mean the ONE source that doesnt' even MENTION it??

[@Chris_Cross]

I hate Wikipedia editors like Wolverine XI who think they own articles and prevent you from making edits to things

[@edwinrollins142]

Wikipedia drama is so juicy in such a weird way, lol

[@cyberfutur5000]

I'm still early in the video, but the thing that I wonder is, why should they communicate the state of the water? Their both in it. They can feel it with at least every body part except their tusk and probably also with that. It's like assuming handshakes must be to communicating air temperature and humidity.

[@when-do-we-get-a-block-button]

its not saying "they tell eachother how the current water is" it seems to be saying "they rub tusks to tell how water they have been to previously is" so like, if i told you that a road i took a while ago was flooded and to avoid it while we were on a completely different road. not speaking on the truth or lack of in this case

[@shadoww7301]

they're*

[@markkealy4417]

@@when-do-we-get-a-block-button I get what you're saying, but does that mean the tusks are meant to store information for prolonged periods of time? There's no way the information on how the water was an hour or two ago would be useful to the narwhal, so the tusk would have to both retain its readings for maybe a day or two, and then the other narwhal would have to figure out where it had been.

[@MildMisanthropeMaybeMassive]

Videos about Wiki edit wars just have a special place in my heart. I don’t know why exactly, perhaps it’s amount of effort put into both the Wiki article and video, as well as the funny quirks of someone so obsessed with single topics which touches my fascination with neurodivergence. My favorite video on this very niche subject is Whang’s video about the Silent Hill Wiki and the Intactivist admin.

[@makinginternetcontent]

I mean, at least this claim has a citation, that's better than some other curious claims i've seen on wiki pages!

[@drywallco-l5o]

6:48 I like how she matched up the hair and outfit to fit what was filmed earlier, but now there is a huge moose skull in the background lmao

[@emmanuel1337]

This video took me back to when I decided to contribute to the PT-BR page on _Tyrannosaurus rex,_ which at the time had a lot of outdated and dubious information. It quickly became a battle of editing between me and whoever thought they had ownership of the page, until I eventually gave up (or was blocked in some way, I don't even remember) and just accepted that the page simply was lost and unfortunately some people would come across it and be duped by the wrong information. To this day there's still some wild information without citations just thrown in there as if it was fact that even contradicts stuff that is said in later sections of the page itself, but it's infinitely better than before. I'd like to do something about it, but I just don't want to risk devoting my time just to have the corrections reverted later and maybe even have to get into an argument with an obsessed person...

[@herzogsbuick]

i've been using and editing wikipedia since it came out. it is indispensable for me. but i edit anonymously and don't get involved. i know the number of good and kick ass wikipedians far exceeds those with a warped sense of responsibility. but they're obnoxious and loud. editing anonymously allows me to stay on visual flight rules, missing the storms, and contribute the best i can. enjoyed the video, subscribed!

[@Ohadium]

Great video, well made and I adore the fact you went through and verified the facts about the tusking because you really care for the subject and are willing to learn as much as you can about it. Love how other editors have caught up to Wolverine's "forced ownership" over the article and that the edit made it through in the end. The video in general was really interesting, I loved learning about a subject I've never heard about before through a video I've been randomly recommended and peeked my interest. Keep up the good work! (Apologies for bad English is not my native tounge)

[@TommyLikeTom]

I really wish my life was so peaceful that I could sit down and make a video about narwhals

[@SprayNpreyT]

You have enough peaceful life to watch videos, so is a matter of priorities

[@donperegrine922]

You can make it! Live your Narwhal dreams! What's holding you back?

[@ZimoNitrome]

Narwhals was one of my favorite Wikipedia rabbit holes. I think it was originally one of the prime examples of asymmetry in animals.

[@Rizon1985]

As a female you don't experience this, but us human males use the similar method of rubbing our penisses together to communicate as well. Most often we use it for small talk, like about the weather, but we can also use it for more serious conversations like discussing politics, current bitcoin prices or whether Maradona used an illegal hand play to score against England in the quarter finals match of the 1986 FIFA World Cup. This is the reason why women find men so hard to communicate with. You lack the "tool" we have grown up with our whole life and with which we learned to communicate. Forever grateful to my uncle Benny to teach me how to talk with men when growing up as I went visiting him in the trailer park.

[@MistressMillie]

Proof? I'm a visual learner.

[@Rizon1985]

@@MistressMillie I'd write a wikipedia article about it but it would only get banned by the established tyrannical author enclave controlling the site.

[@hamburgerbroz6439]

thrilled to have been recommended this video randomly, so up my alley! love your delivery style!!!

[@9000ck]

Maybe the tusk rubbing is a symbolic sort of sparring. Like most of youtube. And Wikipedia apparently. I love Narwhals. The best party is a Narwhal party.

[@erickent3557]

And exposure to alternately fresh and salty comments elevates the heartrate

[@krankarvolund7771]

My favourite fact about the trade of unicorn horns, we have a letter from the Renaissance that basically says "Hey, the horn you sent me does not work, please send me a real one as soon as possible" XD

[@HGModernism]

I'm just imagining a pile of dead cupbearers sitting next to the person writing the letter

[@Velocirocelot]

I loved this video! Your enthusiasm is infectious, and I would love to see more videos of you fact-checking Wikipedia articles, and the drama that can occur within Wikipedia edits haha. Subbed!

[@CelticShaman.]

I was informed of this video through another discussion about other Wikipedia dragons, jealously guarding their horde of articles. This was a fun video, well done.

[@goatyqt4553]

OH MY GOD. You talked about greenland sharks and just got me obsessed with them once again. I live in probably the best city to observe Greenland sharks (there’s been studies on them since they move to shallow waters here in Baie-Comeau sometimes). The French article is exceptionally more detailed at some points because of this, and I just remembered I wanted to add some valuable information to the English version!

[@HGModernism]

Do it! I'd read it

[@goatyqt4553]

@@HGModernism bad ending i forgot everything about my wikipedia account. Wanted to write about the interesting methods Julius Nielsen et al. created to estimate Greenland sharks' age. It's a really fun article on Science Magazine!

[@TREYtheExplainer]

Thank you for exposing a side of Wikipedia bureaucracy I never knew existed 🙏 I really appreciate your level of research

[@RobMarchione]

This is fantastic and you should keep being awesome.

[@RobMarchione]

Also I have never so badly wanted to edit a wikipedia article on Narwhals.

[@eqwerewrqwerqre]

While it's true we must _assume_ good faith, it's also true that we can alter that assumption in the face of evidence. This wolverine person is blatantly and obviously attempting to exert undue control on _at least_ this article. I'd bet this isn't the only one. And it's not even just an interested person wanting the best narwhal article possible, they even eventually included your change, but only when they had time to make it _their_ change. That's very selfish and frankly childish behavior. All that said, this is your first video I've seen. I really like the calm exploration and interesting information. Your presentation is the perfect amount of chill and interesting. Thanks for creating!

[@insertphrasehere15]

Used to work with Elmidae over at New Pages For Patrol. Good to see them as pithy as ever. :) You see this all the time, ownership and reverts edits that others make that aren’t obviously helpful. In this case WIX probably reverted thinking that you were another new account trolling the page, then went back and reviewed it later and realised that you were right. Or they thought that there may be an issue with the sentence, but that it would be better to put it back and edit it, rather than delete it (the ref coding would be harder to re add than it would be to edit the sentence). The notice on your page was an automated script… kinda rude not to go back and apologise afterwards though… Don’t bite the newbies and all that.

[@viniciusbatista146]

10:15 this is the biggest plot twist i ever saw

[@arkonnKeb]

I watched your video in deep night, i wake up 9 hours later and youre almost at 1000 subs! Much deserved, to milion and beyond

[@donperegrine922]

I think this channel is at nineteen THOUSAND subs now!

[@DustinHarms]

I am insanely glad I randomly found this channel. Every video that's popped up is 100% "my jam."

[@affegpus4195]

Suposely there was this huge war on wikipedia between the Tiger people and the Lion fans about what would beat what, unfortunadely i can't seem to find it on the talk pages anymore

[@simonz5905]

From all the good faith editor of Wikipedia, THANK YOU Elmidae!!!

[@jekanyika]

I once tried to fix an error on Wikipedia and it didn't end well. People get really possessive over certain pages.

[@Ratzfourtyfour]

That's why I stopped contributing to Wikipedia. Pointless debates with dimwits are not worth my time.

[@gaboratoria]

Sadly

[@Freddisred]

A very cathartic video essay, thank you for enduring this lol.

[@premodernist_history]

7:59 I LOVE your Wolverine XI voice. That is exactly the voice that plays in my head when I read some Wikipedia talk pages.

[@elh7149]

the twist that is Was WolverineXL was Incredible I was cackling

[@CoolPorygon]

the culture of high level wikipedia editors is kind of insane sometimes

[@orterves]

10:07 if you haven't already tried it, binary search over diffs will be less frustrating and a lot faster than linear

[@HGModernism]

Yeah, I normally use binary search with no issues, but here it took waaay too long. For me the UI takes like 5-6 seconds each time to load and you don't understand HOW MANY edits this guy made.

[@orterves]

@HGModernism true I suppose less frustrating would still be extremely frustrating. It made for a good video in the end though

[@HolyOrderJoshua]

Recently found your channel. Great content! Looking forward to your future videos!

[@user-xsn5ozskwg]

It's always odd how many petty tyrants pop up online in completely public spaces. Wolverine seems to be on the "better" side, at least, concerned more about ownership than declaring their knowledge irrefutable, but it is a headache and a half trying to correct some of the articles out there with dubious or no sources only to be met with someone who thinks what they've provided is forever definitive.

[@Arcad3n]

This is genuinely, legitimately, the first time in my life that I realized that narwhals are real animals and not fictional creatures. I’ve somehow never encountered an actual photo or video of one until now and I’ve only ever heard them compared to unicorns so I thought they were literally sea unicorns. I’m 23.

[@doomsk888]

great video! Love your tone of humor and information :))

[@flyingfetus4364]

I just wanna say I really love the way this video is edited and made, it feels like there are many videos (almost made) in one, with every time the video is seemingly concluding around a thesis being spun around by an update a few months later that advances the plot. I never thought I'd find wikipediatube fun, but now I'm a subscriber.

[@erickent3557]

WoverineIX tried undoing this video's editing.

[@njerurichard3581]

what's the song playing in the background between 5:40 and 6:40, kindly?

[@nyuwumi]

Have you figured it out yet? I'm curious as well!

[@Verlisify]

Scary to think that there is a WolverineXI level obsessive person gatekeeping every topic, niche, and animal

[@johnsmith2875]

This reminds me (sorta) of the amazing race Wikipedia pages that were aggressively guarded by one editor who reverted all changes made to them. They were determined to have a really ugly chart that displayed season progression. I wonder how that ended up.

[@EXQEX9]

This creator seems so grounded and thorough. Thanks for creating!

[@neon-kitty]

Great video! My only tiny nitpick is that the music and sfx were a bit too loud compared to your voice imo.

[@damianshaw8456]

+

[@HGModernism]

Thanks for the feedback! I've turned them down in my most recent video. I'm still trying to figure out audio-editing!

[@cds5506]

@@HGModernism The first song is a really nice track for the video, so your choice was excellent. Really provides a cozy vibe.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@HGModernism I would advise looking-into using your voice as a side chain trigger on a compressor for the music. (As well as just using a vocal compressor on the voice itself.) Especially if you edit in Resolve, which can use any musical plugins (with many good free ones). (Maybe there's free ones for Premiere too, but I know lots are paid-for at a much higher price.)

[@cheesetown777]

I’m so glad I stumbled upon your page. It’s as if someone unmuted my inner thoughts.

[@weeb3277]

i love these wikipedia mysteries. I think there aren't enough of them.

[@eldoblixtlo1058]

There was some dude who's famous on mainstream media from all sides of the political spectrum for his anti-China views. While I don't really care about his views on China but he sure do have hateful racist and homophobic bigotry in his books that Wikipedia editors tries to mention in his Wikipedia articles but there's always this little imp removing anything negative about him regardless of the sources such as sourcing directly from his own books. This editor falsely claims these edits breaks the policies of the Wikipedia's source rule when they don't.

[@peterfireflylund]

Sounds like you are not so secretly pro-China. Not everything you don’t like is hateful, racist, or bigotry.

[@carrotbo9]

@@peterfireflylund sounds like you're the guy editing that wiki page😨😨

[@tree_eats]

@peterfireflylund While that is fair, it is also a common observation to be found that those negative of China within a Western context are often using hateful, racist and bigoted arguments. I won't accuse you of being a Sinophobe; that isn't necessary when major national and international Western media outlets have spent the past few years being openly hateful, racist and bigoted towards China. At some point I have to wonder if the ill wishing of billions of people might be more accurately described as being a sociopath.

[@osjos2822]

@@peterfireflylundI like how you defended the person without even knowing who it is. Defending bigots who you don’t even know anything about is dedication to the craft

[@hooverblox3804]

Oh hey jessica! We were friends at Susan B Anthony Middle school! It was so cool that you had a house on 3rd&Market st and your mom Gloria, maiden name Smith, made the best apple pies!

[@Nilejavxip]

Riiiight!

[@cds5506]

I found your video today by chance, and wow! What a fun and fascinating journey. Thank you for sharing. I have subscribed and look forward to exploring the rest of your catalog.

[@lemonlordminecraft]

0:36 dude. Narwhals are fish. All mammals are fish. Don't make me pull out the cladogram!

[@drdca8263]

It seems pretty reasonable to me to have a word for “[things you call fish] which are not descended from land animals”. I think “fish” is not infrequently used to mean this?

[@webbowser8834]

@@drdca8263 You are correct. Kind of like how we don't really call birds "dinosaurs" unless we want to annoy creationists, despite the fact that birds descended directly from dinosaurs. Fish is generally used to refer to "aquatic vertebrates that are not descended from land-based animals".

[@evanpereira3555]

Oh no, not the fish argument, last time I settle with "Lamprey isn't a fish".

[@ncpolley]

Mammals are not fish. Please cease with this useless gatekeeping. Not all words need to ascribe to phylogenetic taxonomy. You're not more scientific or helpful for it.

[@oscaranderson5719]

@@lemonlordminecraft says here they’re a kind of eukaryotic cell. just, like, a really big one.

[@deaneatsgreens]

I am absolutely here for the bonus facts every time. They complete the video

[@london_vivere]

your outfits are always immaculate!! Love the biology videos keep them up!

[@Dacronhai]

My KZbin recommendations have been really good lately, nice video and as somebody very interested in sharks and even the greenland shark specifically the idea of somebody claiming that they *hunt* meese threw me for a loop

[@SophiaWoessner]

They were tusking

[@itsrachelfish]

Never thought a video about editing wikipedia would be so interesting. Bravo 🎉

[@Lars22]

Love your videos, but as a non-native speaker could you keep text a bit longer on the screen - ie I had to go back and pause for the narwal joke at 1:34. Keep it up!

[@magpie1466]

I genuinely have so little initial interest in the subjects of your videos but your presentation skills & the sheer nerd energy of it all keeps me watching. I mean this as a compliment but I understand if that's hard to believe. Great stuff. I've been subscribed for a long time now but I've heard commenting can be helpful so here I am.

[@headerahelix]

What annoys me most about Wikipedia is its inconsistency and the way Americans seem to feel they own all English Language articles, including those relating to countries and cultures that are not American. American spellings will often, but not always take precedence over English ones. Or, if a recipe originated in the UK or another anglophone country it won't always actually have the native version and instead the more popular American version. I'm not even going to say one version is better than another, that's not the point, but what came first and whose culture it came from should always take precedence over Americans getting to basically bully all other English speakers off of things relating to their own culture because everyone else is outnumbered. And don't get me started on historic events... Pretty much every single world event that the US was around for will center Americans, even if they played a smaller roll. Call me crazy but I'd hope a collaborative, worldwide project intending to catalogue humanity's knowledge would want to put aside ego and you know, not treat it as an opportunity to colonise others cultures. Which I don't think is an overexaggeration considering how many people globally rely on Wikipedia for accurate information.

[@deadlined825]

I would be gnawing my own arm off in anger experiencing this