User:Brainmuncher/Criticisms

Although I strongly admire wikipedia, I object to the following things associated with it:


 * Ubiquitous trivia;
 * Wrongly advertising Featured Articles as "perfect prose", or "compelling, even brilliant [prose]";
 * Journalistic prose, with heavy use of associated devices;
 * Wiki-language on talkpages;
 * Over-linked text, especially dates;
 * Randomly inserted ideas, introduced by, for instance, "A noteworthy example of...";
 * Stubs with no more than two sentences — uninformative, pointless additions that survive merely on the promise of more to come;
 * Constant vandalism;
 * Self-appointed experts who write articles in accordance to their interests (political interests, for instance);
 * Irrelevant chatter on talk pages;
 * Incorporating pop-culture (TV, computer games, modern books, etc.) with subjects that have nothing to do with it;
 * People using userpages to advertise their unimportant blogs;
 * That horrible, horrible 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica being the basis of so many articles;
 * Sloppy edits made by anonymous "contributors" eager to seize the glory of editing;
 * Many prolix articles.