Is 'Chess.com' Trying To Rename The Bishop? The Outrage Over A Joke About Renaming A Chess Piece Explained
What Does 'Vibe Coding' Mean? The New AI-Enabled Programming Trend Explained
Who Is Chinese Scientist Jiankui He And Why Do Memes Have Him Conducting Genetic Experiments? The Contentious Figure Explained
What Is The 'Don't Touch My Pizza' Song And Who Sings It? The Viral 'Nyanwolf' Animation Meme Explained
What's Up With All The Backlash Against Tesla Lately? The Tesla Vandalism And Stock Price Crash Explained

you reliable sources? ikipedia NOTFORUM ntionally uscating facts via offission [hide] This is direct criticism directed towards the Wikipedia editors responsible for the SBI-article as well as those here on the Talk-page refusing to correct misinformation. Repeatedly, registered editors have replied with "do you have reliable sources?" when people explained how the current version of the article is plain wrong. When sources are being mentioned, it is dismissed under the guise of "social media posts are not accepted on Wikipedia". That much would be somewhat okay (albeit still weird in the year 2024, when much official stuff takes place on Twitter and co.), if the consequence then would have been to remove the article due to a lack of sources that display the entire situation. This didn't happen as of now. Instead, websites such as Kotaku, IGN, Eurogamer, Polygon and others are accepted as "reliable sources". The issue here is that all these websites have long joined an ideological side in this dumb "culture war" or whatever you want to call it. I'm not calling for any side, the point is: These traditional news media all intentionally omit key information from their articles, because only so can they push the narrative that SBI critics are "evil". Altright, nazis, women hater, homophobes, transphobes, racists, bigots, etc. - these websites call everyone who dares criticizing SBI that, whether it is directly so or via established wording (like calling it "GamerGate 2.0" which has long since strongly connotated to all the aforementioned insults). And these websites are now accepted as "reliable sources" by Wikipedia-editors such as "Rhaine", "Dumuzid" or "MrOllie" or "Jester". Instead of listening to the people voicing their criticism (we're not doing this for fun ...), we're being further vilified by being told that we "believe" something, when all we're doing is pointing out factual errors. We're being told to make this Talk-page a "battleground", which for all the time being was not the case, again, we were only pointing out factual errors. At this point, it is SO weird how all these registered Wikipedia editors fail to grasp what the issue is: That by omitting one side of the ongoing situation entirely, you create a false image of the situation as a whole. It doesn't matter what side I'm on, behavior like this would be bad for any ongoing situation. Nobody her wants you to change the article to say "the critics of SBI are heroes, fighting for justice". No, all we desire is that you include EVERYTHING in the article. IF that is not possible because you insist on your "social media posts are not allowed as source", then the only reasonable cause of action would be to remove the entire article. Take it offline, wait until the situation is over, then report after the fact when all facts are bared in the open. Right now, the article only benefits bad actors who will use it as ammunition for their agenda ("See, everyone, even Wikipedia says these guys are bad!!1, it's OFFICIAL!!!1"), allthewhile you kept saying that you have no interest in taking a role in this situation. Well, you're doing that right now in this moment. A neutral position would either add key information to the article or, if that's not possible, unpublish it until further information becomes available. After being threatened by Wikipedia editor Jester, I expect the worst after posting this topic, but I also hope that this reaches someone in position of power on Wikipedia who wants to prevent Wikipedia becoming an anti-factual place that exists for pushing agenda that certain editors find themselves siding with. One last time: The critics of SBI are not nazis, nor women haters, nor racists or anything like that. The current version of this Wikipedia-article insinuates exactly that, though. I won't accept being called that. I have done nothing to deserve it. Thx. 2003:D8:8F3C:E000:B8F6:2724:3492:FC17 (talk) 02:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC) Just to be 100% clear, the underlying complaint here, whether true or not, is that these consultants were responsible for more diversity in video games? Do I have that correct? Dumuzid (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC) No.

Share Pin Download More

wikipedi bias sources rant

Origin Entry: Sweet Baby Inc Detected Controversy

File type: png

Resolution: (947px x 892px)

File size: 96.9 KB

"*Part 1*":https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2788980-sweet-baby-inc-detected-controversy

Note: The Lolipop Chainsaw remake was released a while ago

_"Due to people now claiming that Lolipop Chainsaw has actually never been a game for “the men” and actually was an empowering feminist game, I’ve been demanded to expand this previous comic of mine"_

Pinned Alec (CEO of Obscure Video Games and Anime) @SpaceCadet Alec They'll censor all your games in a manner such as this They'll make you remove content of stuff that offends them And they'll force you to make games for journalists It's the plain situation There's negotiation With the fellas at Sweet Baby Inc Swe-Baby 4:02 PM - Jul 3, 2024 -7,888 Views 21 Reposts 1 Quote 69 Likes 6 Bookmarks 27 До ↑ Alec (CEO of Obscure Video Games and Anime) @SpaceCadetAlec They're as stuffy as stuffiest of special consulting groups Add a thing they don't like and they order in the troops Everyone on this site could tell them everyone will lose Take a tip, take a lesson You'll never win by messin' With the fellas at Sweet Baby Inc 4:03 PM - Jul 3, 2024 - 207 Views lil View post engagements 11 Alec (CEO of Obscure Video Games and Anime) @SpaceCadet Alec And if you find a game with some sexy thing You're gonna have to put away your ding a ling Cause you can't have waifus SPIDER-MAN 4:03 PM - Jul 3, 2024 - 189 Views lil View post engagements 2 8 ☐ 1 ↑ SPIDER-MAN 2 口 ↑ Alec (CEO of Obscure Video Games and Anime) @SpaceCadetAlec So they sent this little warning, they're prepared to do their worst And they stuck in your inbox hoping you can be coerced I can think of quite another place they should have stuck it first They may just be neurotic Or possibly psychotic They're the fellas at Sweet Baby Inc 4:05 PM - Jul 3, 2024 - 170 Views ilil View post engagements 172 11 Σ ↑

memecenter.com memecenter.com Sweet Baby AAAAI

View All 78 Images

Load 3 Comments

More:

+5

Sweet Baby Inc Detected Controversy - As with Gamergate, so with this

PROTIP: Press the ← and → keys to navigate the gallery, 'g' to view the gallery, or 'r' to view a random image.

you reliable sources? ikipedia NOTFORUM ntionally uscating facts via offission [hide] This is direct criticism directed towards the Wikipedia editors responsible for the SBI-article as well as those here on the Talk-page refusing to correct misinformation. Repeatedly, registered editors have replied with "do you have reliable sources?" when people explained how the current version of the article is plain wrong. When sources are being mentioned, it is dismissed under the guise of "social media posts are not accepted on Wikipedia". That much would be somewhat okay (albeit still weird in the year 2024, when much official stuff takes place on Twitter and co.), if the consequence then would have been to remove the article due to a lack of sources that display the entire situation. This didn't happen as of now. Instead, websites such as Kotaku, IGN, Eurogamer, Polygon and others are accepted as "reliable sources". The issue here is that all these websites have long joined an ideological side in this dumb "culture war" or whatever you want to call it. I'm not calling for any side, the point is: These traditional news media all intentionally omit key information from their articles, because only so can they push the narrative that SBI critics are "evil". Altright, nazis, women hater, homophobes, transphobes, racists, bigots, etc. - these websites call everyone who dares criticizing SBI that, whether it is directly so or via established wording (like calling it "GamerGate 2.0" which has long since strongly connotated to all the aforementioned insults). And these websites are now accepted as "reliable sources" by Wikipedia-editors such as "Rhaine", "Dumuzid" or "MrOllie" or "Jester". Instead of listening to the people voicing their criticism (we're not doing this for fun ...), we're being further vilified by being told that we "believe" something, when all we're doing is pointing out factual errors. We're being told to make this Talk-page a "battleground", which for all the time being was not the case, again, we were only pointing out factual errors. At this point, it is SO weird how all these registered Wikipedia editors fail to grasp what the issue is: That by omitting one side of the ongoing situation entirely, you create a false image of the situation as a whole. It doesn't matter what side I'm on, behavior like this would be bad for any ongoing situation. Nobody her wants you to change the article to say "the critics of SBI are heroes, fighting for justice". No, all we desire is that you include EVERYTHING in the article. IF that is not possible because you insist on your "social media posts are not allowed as source", then the only reasonable cause of action would be to remove the entire article. Take it offline, wait until the situation is over, then report after the fact when all facts are bared in the open. Right now, the article only benefits bad actors who will use it as ammunition for their agenda ("See, everyone, even Wikipedia says these guys are bad!!1, it's OFFICIAL!!!1"), allthewhile you kept saying that you have no interest in taking a role in this situation. Well, you're doing that right now in this moment. A neutral position would either add key information to the article or, if that's not possible, unpublish it until further information becomes available. After being threatened by Wikipedia editor Jester, I expect the worst after posting this topic, but I also hope that this reaches someone in position of power on Wikipedia who wants to prevent Wikipedia becoming an anti-factual place that exists for pushing agenda that certain editors find themselves siding with. One last time: The critics of SBI are not nazis, nor women haters, nor racists or anything like that. The current version of this Wikipedia-article insinuates exactly that, though. I won't accept being called that. I have done nothing to deserve it. Thx. 2003:D8:8F3C:E000:B8F6:2724:3492:FC17 (talk) 02:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC) Just to be 100% clear, the underlying complaint here, whether true or not, is that these consultants were responsible for more diversity in video games? Do I have that correct? Dumuzid (talk) 02:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC) No.

View Gallery Random Image

+ Add a Comment

Comments (3)

Display Comments

Image Details

892 views (0 from today)

Uploaded Mar 14, 2024 at 03:32PM EDT

Origin Entry

Sweet Baby Inc Detected Controversy

Tags

Claim Authorship Edit History

About the Uploader

Evilthing

Treasurer & Elocutionist & Media Chauffeur

Textile Embed

!https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/002/775/246/7ab.png!

Today's Top Image Galleries

My Little Pony characters

My Little Pony

Spooky Pokemon trainer

Hex Maniac

Two edits of JD Vance

J.D. Vance Face Edits

Artificial Intelligence depiction.

AI / Artificial Intelligence