Wikipedia Tangents

I looked up Best Foods and Hellman's mayonnaise to prove they were the same company, and ended up clicking related article links until I was reading about Old World Monkeys. WTF, internetz?

  On 12/31/2013 at 7:49 PM, OneToThirtySix said:

I looked up Best Foods and Hellman's mayonnaise to prove they were the same company, and ended up clicking related article links until I was reading about Old World Monkeys. WTF, internetz?

Wait until you read the New World Monkeys article - best read all year!

  On 12/31/2013 at 7:49 PM, OneToThirtySix said:

I looked up Best Foods and Hellman's mayonnaise to prove they were the same company, and ended up clicking related article links until I was reading about Old World Monkeys. WTF, internetz?

Turns out it's not the internet's fault, it's your fault, ya dirty hippie.

No matter what I start out reading I always end up reading about fringe science and human experiments.

  On 12/31/2013 at 8:28 PM, DerWaschbar said:

No matter what I start out reading I always end up reading about fringe science and human experiments.

Same here. And on YouTube I always end up watching serial killer documentaries or interviews.

i get angry at wikipedia as soon as i click on a link and it goes to a deleted article, where some asshole took upon himself to not bother doing a google search and deeming such things as Coil's 'Theme from blue' article non notable, its just like seriously what the fuck is wrong with you guys.

if i ever meet one of these full-time 'deletionists' in real life they might be seriously injured

always heard that referred to as "wiki-strolling"

another fun thing to do is hit "random article" and see how many clicks it takes you to get to hitler. shouldn't be that many!

I used to tangent as a kid a lot anyway, with internal thoughts especially as a fell asleep or if I was bored in the car or waiting room and then sometimes go back to figure out how I got to a thought.

There are certain wiki articles I get lost in: obscure battles and conflicts, conspiracy theories, mythology, esoteric and occult topics, geography articles, cryptozoology, local legends and lore, things like that. I get lost on google maps too for fun as well.

Browsing wookipedia or battletech wikis for me is fun as hell too.

  On 12/31/2013 at 9:34 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

i get angry at wikipedia as soon as i click on a link and it goes to a deleted article, where some asshole took upon himself to not bother doing a google search and deeming such things as Coil's 'Theme from blue' article non notable, its just like seriously what the fuck is wrong with you guys.

if i ever meet one of these full-time 'deletionists' in real life they might be seriously injured

Wikipedia's weakest section in general is music. Some excellent genre articles and the Beatles portal is amazing, but there's so much inconsistency with "notable" artists. Really weak world music/world pop music articles too. Very arbitrary.

There should be some kind of objectivity standards regarding frequent editors. There's no reason, say, Flylo's worst album is a fucking book of an article.

I always liked allmusic.com back in the day (2004 or so) as a way of navigating articles.

There is no reason for Until the Quit Comes to be that long while Cosgramma is about 7 sentences. Another thing about Wikipedia that I've noticed that some articles get really special treatment, but it's kind of random.

joshuatx you've pretty much outlined my thoughts on Wikipedia when it comes to artist/album pages.

I'm looking at that article right now and I'm seeing the sections, there is no way that all of this information is that important and not reaching.

I do this all the time, it's so much fun. Good thing there's an endless amount of things to read about.