Post by blissyu2 on Jul 10, 2008 16:36:41 GMT -5
Encyclopaedia Dramatica now has its own article on Wikipedia:
See here
It wasn't the first time that they had their own article, but they were repeatedly deleted and recreated for ages. In spite of easily being notable enough, Wikipedia couldn't dare bring themselves to list it:
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please see prior discussion(s) before considering re-nomination:
[hide]Deletion discussions:
* Keep, May 19 2008, AFD
* Allow recreation, May 8 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), May 7 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), May 3 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted, March 6 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted, February 6 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted, January 10 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), December 8 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, October 3 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), September 8 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, July 23 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), April 29 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, April 23 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, November 18 2006, DRV
* Keep Deleted, October 28 2006, DRV
* Keep Deleted, September 5 2006, DRV
* Deletion Endorsed, July 23 2006, DRV
* Delete, July 23 2006, AFD
* No consensus, March 30, 2006, AFD
* Keep, June 8 2005, AFD
* Delete, December 18 2004, AFD
So what now? Well, now they have something of a problem, because now there are disputes about what Encyclopaedia Dramatica's content is. Is ED's sole aim devoted to discussing Wikipedia? Or is that its main aim?
The fact that ED has articles on prominent Wikipedians, for example SlimVirgin, Durova and Jayjg, and because they are so upsetting for those people, makes people at Wikipedia think that that is all that they do.
So, because these people refuse to ever actually go to ED, they insist *DAMMIT* that ED is solely there to upset them.
ED is a spinoff of LJ Drama, which was, strangely enough, devoted to discussing Live Journal (LJ). Whilst LJ Drama expanded to include MySpace, Blogger and even 4chan, that is the main hub of discussion on ED too. ED is meant to catalogue lives, not what is on Wikipedia.
The way that they do it mimicks and mocks Wikipedia, but Wikipedia isn't the focus.
ED has something like 1 million articles, of which less than 1,000 are related to Wikipedia.
That's not their main aim at all. That's a tiny microcosm.
It just goes on to prove that Wikipedians are obsessed with things within their own world. So they lie and pretend that ED is really about them.
At this point I think that a quote from the song "You're so vain" is appropriate:
"You're so vain. You probably think this song is about you, you're so vain. You probably think this song is about you, don't you, don't you?"
See here
It wasn't the first time that they had their own article, but they were repeatedly deleted and recreated for ages. In spite of easily being notable enough, Wikipedia couldn't dare bring themselves to list it:
Articles for deletion
This page was previously nominated for deletion. Please see prior discussion(s) before considering re-nomination:
[hide]Deletion discussions:
* Keep, May 19 2008, AFD
* Allow recreation, May 8 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), May 7 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), May 3 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted, March 6 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted, February 6 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted, January 10 2008, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), December 8 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, October 3 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), September 8 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, July 23 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted (speedy close), April 29 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, April 23 2007, DRV
* Keep Deleted, November 18 2006, DRV
* Keep Deleted, October 28 2006, DRV
* Keep Deleted, September 5 2006, DRV
* Deletion Endorsed, July 23 2006, DRV
* Delete, July 23 2006, AFD
* No consensus, March 30, 2006, AFD
* Keep, June 8 2005, AFD
* Delete, December 18 2004, AFD
So what now? Well, now they have something of a problem, because now there are disputes about what Encyclopaedia Dramatica's content is. Is ED's sole aim devoted to discussing Wikipedia? Or is that its main aim?
The fact that ED has articles on prominent Wikipedians, for example SlimVirgin, Durova and Jayjg, and because they are so upsetting for those people, makes people at Wikipedia think that that is all that they do.
So, because these people refuse to ever actually go to ED, they insist *DAMMIT* that ED is solely there to upset them.
ED is a spinoff of LJ Drama, which was, strangely enough, devoted to discussing Live Journal (LJ). Whilst LJ Drama expanded to include MySpace, Blogger and even 4chan, that is the main hub of discussion on ED too. ED is meant to catalogue lives, not what is on Wikipedia.
The way that they do it mimicks and mocks Wikipedia, but Wikipedia isn't the focus.
ED has something like 1 million articles, of which less than 1,000 are related to Wikipedia.
That's not their main aim at all. That's a tiny microcosm.
It just goes on to prove that Wikipedians are obsessed with things within their own world. So they lie and pretend that ED is really about them.
At this point I think that a quote from the song "You're so vain" is appropriate:
"You're so vain. You probably think this song is about you, you're so vain. You probably think this song is about you, don't you, don't you?"
