User:Zenwhat/Hall of Shame

= The Hall of Shame = Wikipedia seems to be failing. At the very least, if it isn't failing it's not very fun to edit unless you have a very low definition of "encyclopedic" and\or a naive, unfounded belief that Wikipedia will get better over time. The purpose of this page is to document various absurd edits to Wikipedia that are somewhat reflective of the problems with it. The citation of a particular user's edit is in no way intended to denigrate them or their ability to edit, personally.


 * WP:FAIL
 * WP:Zombies
 * WP:Anti-Wikipedianism
 * User:Shii/Hoaxes (see Brahmanical See on that list)
 * Essjay controversy
 * WP:Expert rebellion
 * Talk:Muhammad/FAQ -- an embarrassing attempt at reasoning with Islamic POV-pushers
 * The protection log for Criticism of Wikipedia
 * User:Raymond arritt/Expert withdrawal
 * User:Alex756
 * User:The Thadman/Give Back Our Membership
 * List of lists
 * List of LGBT couples
 * List of major artifacts in Dungeons & Dragons
 * List of minor planets
 * List of films that most frequently use the word "fuck"
 * List of cults (not unencyclopedic, but there's constant vandalism)
 * WP:ARS (also see their wonderful article, Bawls)
 * Category:Wikipedia categories
 * Category:Exploding animals
 * Portal:Portal (kept twice over a decade, now at Wikipedia:Portal:Portal)
 * X (disambiguation) (most of the stuff there is on pop culture, if not being outright fancruft)
 * Controlled demolition hypothesis for the collapse of the World Trade Center
 * Satanic ritual abuse
 * Back to the Future timeline
 * An anonymous IP called people in a content dispute Jews and was pushing anti-semitic conspiracy theory. After reporting it on WP:ANI, most of the folks there were apologetic. Only User:ChrisO was the voice of reason and seemed to understand.
 * I attempted to make constructive edits to Austrian economics, which was and is dominated by a POV-pushing mob. I ended up getting blocked for edit-warring. See User:Zenwhat/Evidence. My ArbCom case was rejected as a mere "content dispute." At the time, User:Newyorkbrad was labeled as on vacation and unable to respond to comments on cases, yet during the weeks he put that message up, he was generally the first arbitrator to respond.
 * I proposed merging Eastern philosophy and Eastern religion (which anyone with a textbook or basic education on either would understand why). My argument was backed up by citations. One user who responded used a citation from a Korean newspaper which had a site containing malware and one of his own sources proved my claim, because it was an article on Eastern religion in a journal of philosophy. Despite this, I can't ignore all rules because that is against the rules, as demonstrated by my "edit-warring" on Austrian economics.
 * I expressed frustration about immature SysOps in the IRC. Users were apologetic.
 * In IRC (I can't post this here, because it's against the rules), I was once told by a certain nameless editor that administrators are capable of falsifying policy violations in order to justify banning users they don't like. This wasn't an anti-Wikipedia conspiracy theorist, mind you. It was two people: an IRC SysOp and an experienced, well-respected editor on Wikipedia.
 * I say that people come to Wikipedia to gain knowledge. A user replies, "Not necessarily."
 * Users are apologetic about using encyclopedias as a source FOR AN ENCYCLOPEDIA!
 * I argue that Wikimedia's statistics aren't reliable. I deal with some pretty absurd remarks.
 * The witch-hunt of Adam Cuerden
 * List of cabals, a joke, but which to some degree holds some truth: 1) That users frequently put forth silly claims about "cabals" 2) That there actually are mobs of editors around various topics.
 * I some saw blatant favoritism regarding a certain user choosing to have their userpage and talkpage history wiped. So, I decided to ask the admins to wipe my clean for me too. I didn't expect them to actually do it, but amazingly, they did. So, I left a message explaining how I wanted it restored, how I'd make immature remarks in the past that it was important for the community to see.
 * AfD for Mzoli's.
 * My comment on WP:ANI, "This thread is too critical of the admins. Someone should clamp an archive template around it to stop it and edit-war with anybody trying to remove it. Is anybody willing to do this?" Later, User:Jehochman slapped a collapse template around it.  User:Relata refero removed it.  Then User:Jehochman added an archive template.
 * Because of lack of consensus in Gun politics, a user proposed a "Conservative statistics" section that actually seems to have been up, for a while.
 * WP:BLP apparently applies to Heath Ledger, post-mortem.
 * Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BQZip01/Comments