/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11327441
I don't buy it, maybe like 200 000-300 000

I personally think there are about 80,000,000 articles on there.

>>11327441
I counted them myself, there are only 42069 articles on there.

>>11327457
no way. There are definitely more.

Cool. I created two.

remember the six million

>>11327441
Wikipedia is honestly one of the greatest achievements of humanity. Sure, it's only as good and unbiased as the people editing it, but the autists who live for that shit really do take it seriously, and the ability to instantly find information on practically any topic at an introductory level at least cannot be understated.

Reminder that Wikipedia never had to be free. A lot of things people take for granted on the internet easily could have been paid services from the beginning and we wouldn't take for granted free a encyclopedia or free video hosting or free search engines. We owe a great deal to the early internet pioneers and their optimism and I fear the current generation is going to let these great ideals of free and open information transfer be taken from them because they take it for granted.

>>11327441
Some of them inaccurate or politically biased. Still, is quite the achievement
Some of the science articles are great and have helped me to understand some concepts.

>>11327441
99% of them are trash and surely 10% don’t even satisfy their notability policy. Articles on living people are unethical and they’ve have been rightly sued. To top it off, their community is comprised but slight less stupid redditors, which reflects in the quality of the site

>>11327467
>politically biased
Politically unbiased is impossible when partisans believe basic facts are up for debate

>>11327465

There is certainly bias in political topics, but for natural sciences Wikipedia is great.

>>11327441
People who use Wikipedia to learn are your typical “undergrad polymath” that believes any nonsense they read on the internet and that people tell them. A good chunk of sources on that site is some obscure textbook hidden behind a $100 pricetag on Amazon shipping from Finland that doesn’t even have page specification

>>11327482
It’s not. Do yourself a favor and learn to selfteach (watching khan academy is not being an autodidact) and use scholarpedia, university sources, or any other sites that only allows specialists to write on it, such as specialized sites (SEP)

>>11327483
>>11327471
Surely you two never use Wikipedia then, right?

>>11327441
Undeniably the greatest source of knowledge in all of humanity's history

>>11327487
This mentality is how people end up with a good knowledge on a couple topic then spew retarded dunning-kruger arguments about everything else.

Wikipedia is a great starting point for any topic. If you want to continue learning about a topic then what you're saying is true. If you just wanted a cursory rundown, you're at least up on people who didn't bother reading anything about it.

>>11327494
this, and most of the problematic articles are simply because they state as fact things that are not yet proven, which is also the case in most scholarly articles, it's just that the primary audience is already aware. You'll probably end up with just as much false confidence diving straight into the material.

>>11327494
>people end up with a good knowledge on a couple topic then spew retarded dunning-kruger arguments about everything else
This describes nearly every /sci/ poster.

>I read a textbook on microbiology--let me tell you how globa warming is false!

>>11327441
They also offer a few torrents of the entire website with and without images. I think it was like 150-160GB the last time I checked.

>>11327457
based, though the numbers you suggest are still a bit high imo

>>11327483
People with an undergraduate usually have read a lot of books. Most people add to their book reading with online reading. Most people online read wikipedia. More people have undergraduate degrees than higher degrees.

I find your stereotype trivial.

>there's one wikipedia article for every one dead holocaust jew

really makes u think

>>11327461
good job man, now think on how many time you wasted

>>11327585
That should be on every hard drive with space. Imagine if a rough approximation of the sphere of human knowledge was backed up on every single machine.

>>11327624
what? did they close down?

I like wikipedia. Neat.

>>11327465

I've been doing it actively for about two-three years and it's great for personal learning (the real reason why I do it), though this musn't give way to "original research". I've created several large, autistic tables on /sci/ related topics (along with humanities stuff) and am currently overhauling an article which is of interest to /sci/ users.

That said, there's plenty of crap articles (when I realized that I actually do know better than several existing crap articles and wanted something better available, that's what got me started), one does it for free, and the format is (by design) very constrictive (just give basic, pertinent information and try to use good prose doing it).

Israel literally has a propagandas department that spends its time editing wikipedia and other "independent infornation sources"

ive noticed that random wiki articles have an increasing tendency to have tangents about donald trump. TDS is definitely real

>>11327762

Well to be fair most countries have similar departments, this is just one of the way to project soft power and spreading the (mis)information you like.

>>11327812
well it's easier than changing the dictionary definition of "Ground Zero" away from a nuclear blast site.

>>11327441
yea, no, thats a lie, like the Holocaust

>>11327771
Give one example please.

>>11327816
Common usage defines terms. The idea that words or phrases have immutable definitions that only a special council can change is laughable.

>>11327771
>>don't criticize muh president

>>11327491
I don't. The only thing Wikipedia is good for is for its tables (they are so much better than the ones in the original sources) and translating specific terms to other languages

>>11327494
>wikipedia is a great starting point
>t. redditor

Most people here don't know the difference between a primary and secondary sources.
>*looks it up*
>axtualy the difference is...
Wikipedia is a bunch of pseudo and n-ary sources mashed together in a uncohesive way by redditors. People who use Wikipedia to learn anything of substance, besides getting the overall gist of some easily confirmable facts and checking statistics, will never have any actual knowledge, as a consequence of having no clue how to properly LEARN things. Even Enclycopedia Britannica and World Atlas (both of which Wikipedia uses frequently as a source lol circular sourcing) are better than Memepedia — as reliable as Vice, New York Times, Vox, which again Memepedia uses often as a source

>>11327920

>tfw my speciality is those large, autistic tables and I know exactly what you are talking about with the source material

t-thanks. To be fair, the printed page has limited room; not so the web page, hence the greater legibility and utility of a large, well-formatted table of information.

>>11327441
The site's most dedicated editors are neckbeards. Really makes you think...

>>11327441
>>11327483
Wikipedia could definitely benefit from better standards for citations then right?

>>11327944

The sublimated, redirected nervous energy of men who are not having sex can produce marvels, just as easily as it can produce school shootings. Think of medieval monks in their scriptoria, Newton... (who are of course much superior, but the principle remains valid).

>>11327491
Do people still use Wikipedia?

>>11327457
fucking came here to post this

>>11327464
>>11327762

coinsidence?

>>11327457
Counting all the stubs 6M doesn't seem so high.

>>11327441
If it's really 6000000 then why is it illegal to quetion it in so many countries?

>>11327467
Some? More like most.

>>11327967
Israel is attacking the BBC because some programme the made compared the treatment of palestinians to the holycaust

>>11327483
>A good chunk of sources on that site is some obscure textbook hidden behind a $100 pricetag on Amazon shipping from Finland that doesn’t even have page specification
And before that, you had to rely to textbooks who cited the exact same sources but you had to pay for them and they had less detail.

>>11328089
>before that
>30 years ago
Keep thinking wikipedia — a site managed of non-academics and non-researchers —knows how to use sources. You people are no better than astrophysicists from the University of NatGeo and biologists from the Joe Rogan University

>>11327441
They used nazi colors. That says it all.

The article they have on Trump is an embarrassment to the website. Any credibility that site had went out the window when I read that laughable biased garbage.

>>11327465
>cannot be understated

>>11327957
Are you saying incel energy is an untapped societal resource?

>>11327441
oy vey, its like annudah shoah

>>11327457
by all accounts this number suggests the most likely ballpark given the photos from inside the wikipedia HQ highlighting pools, gyms, etc. which means their productivity would have been severly undermined by all that rest. Also, it would take on average 1 hour to write an article, so if wikipedia was at its prime in producing articles for about 4 years, the figure of 6 million articles just doesnt make much sense.

>>11327467
are we just pretending that the videos of Israeli summits pushing for more zionist editors dont exist?

>Wikipedia
No thanks, I stopped after the Earthquake article

>>11328051
What a bunch of idiots at BBC. Obviously the kids getting bombed in Palestine aren't paid actors.

How about one of you nerds start up a page for WP's Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. I've seen pages for all sorts of garbage but stuff like this, one of the absolute most important books on nutrition ever written, has nothing.

>>11328728
Hey someone else who's read it \o/
found it years ago back in 2006.

dude they censor mercola up the wazoo anything threatening the medical industrial complex gets a hard ride.

>>11328428

Yes, but it is tapped to an extent (editing Wikipedia, competitive video gaming, other nerd shit). Historically it was entering the clergy, there was a ready, socially acceptable social structure to shunt the weirdos/gays into. This is unmoored today, and while there are some modern outlets, there's a "gap". This gap contains the school shootings.

>>11329002
so why are they more asian/jewish?

>>11327494
>>11328428
synthesize

>>11328728
Why=?? If you are not in the in-group you will meet the deletioninsts. That is why I left Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is literally trash. Read any talk page on a controversial topic or even a non-controversial one. Use it for a quick overview and then as a resource aggregator

>>11328464
Exactly what I’m talking about. All you need to do to source stuff on Wikipedia is write an article on medium and don’t put it in the ‘opinion’ sections, so you can “”””source”””” your own bs

>>11327890
DUDE THATS LITERALY SO YIKES LIKE Cpitalism IS JUST ANOTHER OF SOCIALISM CUZ THERE A GOV BUT YOU NOW THE FOUNDING FATHERS WERE QUEER XDDD

>>11327494
>you're at least up on people who didn't bother reading anything about it.
>misinforming yourself is better than not informing at all
Retarded, and there are other way better encyclopedias to get a run down. You can always scroll down after you make a search, you don’t need to click the first option.
>>11327609
You don’t know what trivial means, maybe use something other than Merriam Websterberg

>>11330614

>"Wikipedia sucks, I only use it for its express purpose and what it was designed and intended to be."

>>11331604
>what is authoral intent vs interpretation

>>11327466
Wikipedia is not free -> someone makes a Wikipedia that is free -> that version becomes the most popular
Search engines is not free -> someone makes free search engine -> that search engine becomes the most popular

Every single episode of LOST (yes, the tv series)
has an article on the english wikipedia.

Like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Minutes

I have no reason at all to doubt that number.

>>11327441
I'd guess it's more than 10 at least

Didn't some diversity hire professor's thesis basically involve wikipaedia copy pasta?

>>11327482
t. neo-nazi

OK, buddy. I'm sorry Wiki doesn't think blacks are inferior and questions the holocaust.

>>11327457
oy vey

>>11327465
Wikipedia is absolutely worthless now, just go read the Tienanmen square massacre article. Wikiepdia is proof that the left will destroy anything given enough time.

>>11328428
not just incel energy by 2030 we will have autistic energy power our rockets

>>11334004
Wtf are you talking about? I just read the entire page, and nothing seemed left leaning. In fact, there was a section dirting on communism. I think you're blowing smoke outta your ass my guy.

>>11327482
The bias can be unbearable though, and no matter how strong a case you make, they can get around any argument by just saying "look, reliable sources say this, so that's what the article will say" and of course they define what is or isn't a reliable source

>>11327441
More than died in the HoLOLcaust, around 6 million more.

>>11327441
>found out they were being systematically edited with pro-immigration, anti-border propaganda
>decided it was a good thing and to take no action
>still have the audacity to beg users for donations

>>11327462
>>11327457
>>11327591
>>11327965
>>11327972
>>11328442
>>11333976

>>11327466
Those "free" services beat out the competition because harvesting data and serving targeted ads is a better business model than a monthly subscription fee. It has nothing to do with altruism, it's pure market forces.

>>11327461
wow, my favorite number, the highest n can be in n! before an error on a casio FX-83GT PLUS calculator is in the amount of wikipedia articles! what a coincidence!

>>11333833
He's probably just your standard conservative or lolbertarian anon, why do you jump to neo-nazi accusations like some average Twitter checkmark would?

>>11334514
Not him but probably because this website and even this thread is a hive of neonazi astroturfers. I had to check what board I was on for a second because this thread is whiny brainwashed 65 IQ typical polshit

>>11334409
im surprised you actually find this funny. go back faggot

>>11333833
>t. neo nazi
im pretty sure that was just some cuckservative but Im on board with the zionism accusations toward jewpedia. just look up the zionist wikipedia events who push for more jewish content onto wikipedia. and no im not a skinhead, im an arab. also, niggers are low iq. seethe jewish cuckold

>>11334529
>neonazi astroturfers
Do you actually believe this because that would unironically make you among the 65 IQ retards you think are /pol/posting or are you memeing?

>>11327441
Will they finally open the Gamergate page again so its obvious errors can be fixed. Since its an obvious biased article treating anything as evidence its conclusion is right in direct opposition to more evidence against its conclusion.

>>11334583
Every single board on this site is constantly raided by far right shills

>>11330614
I really liked that time I read through the talk pages of some Muslim related ones, they really pushed some bare bones evidence got salty it got removed and then started trying to convert people. Glad most articles don't let that kind of shit in.

>>11334301
People far in either direction tend to do that.

>>11334615
if it's constant and on every board is it really raiding?

>>11334645
To people that remember a time when the site didn’t have an average IQ near the retardation line? Yes. For this board that was actually quite recent, only a few years ago.

>>11334409

>>11333833
Cringe
The article on Evola is trash

>>11334645
its a long ongoing raid that been occurring since the 1990s and encompasses most of the people who post on 4chan

>>11334657
Sounds to me like you're the one astroturfing here bud. 4chan has never been politically correct on any board.
>inb4 "we were just saying nigger ironically"

>>11334676
There’s a big difference between being politically incorrect and being a holocaust denier shill, retard. You don’t know shit, halfwit incel.

>>11334702
the biggest problem with the mass killings of ww2 is that they only say 6m and not 11m it's like they try to make it just about the Jews, and the name "holocaust" is kind of propaganda laden because of its actual meaning as a religious ritualised burnt offering sacrifice which I find more than a little discordant.
and I find the increasing criminalisation of anyone who attempts to criticise the official narrative extremely worrisome.
there is definitely a deception somewhere but I'm not quite sure I'm confident enough to say where exactly.

Wikipedia is one of modern society's greatest achievements. It should be publicly funded by all the western nations. Funded without any type of regulations being imposed non it, mind you.

>>11327441
Wikipedia is power structure narrative bullshit.

>>11334702
You type like a tranny discorder stereotype which makes everything you say extremely ironic.

>>11334762
Really? Seems more likely you’re an unfuckable pol sperg obsessed with trannies.

>>11334768
>(you): /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ NAZIS /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/ /pol/
>me: tranny x 1
>(you): OMFG OBSESSED
lol

fun to read but i could live without it desu

>>11334795
it’s almost like /pol/ is a huge cancer on this site and massively relevant to this thread, while muh trannies have zero relevance. You are disabled.

>>11334615
Isn’t it more just where people who think that way or want to try out that way of thinking go, due to the penalties and difficulties of doing so in person or on other sites?

>>11334830

>>11334529
>neonazi astroturfers
How is it “AstroTurf” if there’s no central organisation directing it?

>>11334830
Are you a mentally ill transwoman?

>>11334541
>t.
>>11334661
the right can't meme

>>11334830
There are literal discord and /leftypol/ screenshots of exactly the things you accuse /pol/ of doing and yet dishonest retards like you don't even have one shred of proof of the astroturfing you claim /pol/ does.

>>11334898
Must be nice to have a boogeyman you can blame for anything posted that disagrees with your worldview.

>>11334930
>the right cant meme
wow this is a cope if ive ever seen one

>>11335009
>wow this is a cope if ive ever seen one

>>11334930
Dunno m80, I think the edit is infinitely better than the original. I'll therefore have to go with "the left can't meme".

>>11335024

>>11335028
>Dunno m80, I think the edit is infinitely better than the original. I'll therefore have to go with "the left can't meme".
>>11335030

>>11334541
He doesn't find it funny, but somehow he thinks it will "BTFO" the alt-right. Ignore it and it will leave eventually.

>>11335033

>>11335033
It's funny largely because it's edgy and unique.
Your comic just promotes the dominant view in society which is backed by the government and big money.

>>11335046
It's not just that. It's also really hard to grasp what the comic was even trying to say (ironically) beside "my opponents are clowns". Why would the character who's not a clown find "six million cookies" to be a funny edgy joke, while finding the ultimate infograph to mean the guy is a nazi? If anything it should be inversed, as one of them celebrates the "cooking" of jews (in ovens) and makes fun of it, while the other could be construed any which way.
Additionally, "six million cookies" was by definition a joke, so why is the clown acting like it wasn't a joke? Moreover, if the clown is in fact a nazi, why would he try to hide the fact he was serious about the "joke that's not a joke"? Moreover, a clown's role in life is to make jokes/say funny things. Why would the character not infer from context that the latter is a joke but the former is? What is unusual with the infographic as a response to the guy finding obvious nazi jokes funny? How would it not be another obvious source of entertainment for him?
Not only that, but in how it relates to the real world: when has a /pol/tard, for example, EVER disavowed a da jooz infographic or failed to glorify nazis? Why would what is meant as a representative of /pol/tards present the infographic with any other intent than "nazis are right umad?" kind of feeling? What is "underlying message" supposed to mean when infographics are a direct presentation of information with no intention to be subtle whatsoever?

>>11327441
Woudl it be possible to detele those 6 million articles in the timeframe of the holocaust?

>>11335045
I'm not surprised. Climate activism is inherently racist.

>Hey, Chang and Tyrone, after we Europeans exploited fossil fuels and your labor for centuries and have become wealthy advanced economies NOW it is bad for you to do the same and advance your own countries. Go back to cleaning my toilet.

>>11335100
Fucking lol, the only ones being shamed are whites. The chinese can burn as much coal as they want.

>>11335102
Wrong. The reality is that the Chinese government itself is too based to listen to white retards, but if you ban plastics and other oil-derived products in the countries that buy from China then China gets fucked regardless. Also, no one burns more coal than white women.

>>11335074
>>11335046
>NOOOOOOOOOO

>>11335081
what holocaust?

>>11335100
>The most vile label you can find to slap on any idea that threatens your disgusting bloated lifestyle.

How nice.

>>11335147
But think about the timing. Real big moves against oil only happen now that the first full-electric power supply chains are alive in Europe (and therefore available to all other equally wealthy economies). Before that, no one even entertained these ideas. It is an explicit tactic to cut off the ladder from countries whose economies are not sophisticated enough to go on to the next level of power management and thus will be forced to be subservient to the advanced economies that will inevitably end up supplying the energy of their countries. A modern, more sophisticated form of slavery. But slavery nonetheless.

>>11335156
>Real big moves against oil
Are not realistic
>full-electric power supply chains
are science fiction

>>11335163
France produces over 70% of its energy from nuclear with fossil fuels below 10%. If you can get something to 70%, scaling up the remaining 30% is a walk in the park because this is proof the tech is there. Electric cars are becoming more affordable (for those in wealthy economies). Etc.

Just accept you hate black people and want Africa to be forever poor and dependent.

>>11327459
One for every fellow citizen of the BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND

>>11335171
France, like all other countries, depends on global trade for most of it's products. It's trading partners in turn depend on fossil fuels.

You've failed to understand how ubiquitous and crucial fossil fuels are to support the modern, global economy.

Also, not surprised that a fucking pea brain retard is a big fan of nuclear power, imagines kkk cone hats lurking in every bush, and casually calls anyone he disagrees with a racist.

Go fuck yourself.

>>11335171
>Just accept you hate black people and want Africa to be forever poor and dependent.
Accept that Africa will always be poor and dependent no matter how much we help them develop

>>11335218
>we help them develop
It is the white man's burden to manage Africa and to assure that Africans are as wealthy and successful as everyone else in the world because Africans are too dumb to do so for themselves, but I'm also a firm believer in soience and that the theory of human evolution is real

>>11327441
Considering most of them are sparse summaries with dogshit sources and go against their own guidelines, I believe it.

>>11327465
>>11327482
Wikipedia is filled with historical revisionism and political propaganda. Often an article that was once decent gets nuked in accord with current events too. Or if someone of overt bias happens to find it (this is the majority of their established editors).

>>11327940
Thanks for your service.

>>11334661
holy fuck this is bad
at least stonetoss is creative

>>11327441
>go to Wikipedia
>click random article
>some dead faggot pops up
yeah, in 1000 years there will be gorrilion articles

>this thread
What is it about /sci/ that attracts /pol/tards? What could you possibly get out of this board when you're a 90 IQ blue collar worker

>>11336051
Considering this isn't Reddit, they're just exercising the right to participate. They're here for the luls, obviously. Try having some fun!

>>11327441
one for each jew that went into powering it

:')