Sponsored Links


Websites - Wikipedia

Wikipedia is a multilingual, Web-based, free-content encyclopedia project. The name "Wikipedia" is a portmanteau (a combination of portions of two words and their meanings) of the words wiki (a type of collaborative Web site) and encyclopedia. Wikipedia's articles provide links to guide the user to related pages with additional information.

Wikipedia Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
eBay Link: View Wikipedia on eBay

Boned When... (Login to Submit a Reason)

1 Censoring facts Jimmy Wales only tolerates what HE agrees with
Please Login to Vote
2 Not really educational 99% of it is a database for pop culture
Please Login to Vote
3 Deletionism All the interesting stuff gets deleted
Please Login to Vote
4 Never Boned Still rocks.
Please Login to Vote
5 Lost credibility Teachers hate it, people mock you for using it.
Please Login to Vote
6 Too picky with citations The sky is blue. [citation needed]
Please Login to Vote
7 Inaccurate Vandalism, quick changing, etc.
Please Login to Vote
8 Thought Police True or not, if they don't agree, it's outta her
Please Login to Vote
9 Editor Crusaders More concerned with format than accuracy.
Please Login to Vote
10 Fascist admins Wikipedia's biased tyrants
Please Login to Vote
11 Biased articles Apparently hijacked by propagandists
12 TMI Too Much Information
13 Historical fabrications changing history to promote their ideaologies
14 Web Notability Print sources required for websites.
15 The zoophilia page Practically condones and promotes bestiality!
16 SOPA protest "neutral" site shouldn't be getting into politi
17 2009 advertising campaign WIKIPEDIA FOREVER! What are you, 8?
18 Search Engine Monopoly Seems like everything has a Wikipedia page!
19 They always like to bully... ...with the Dallas area web users!!!!!
20 Day 1 Sucked from the start.
21 SOPA Black Out Thanks for locking us out!
(hide reasons) 
(view all reasons) 

Wikipedia Comments (You must Login to Comment)

79 I'm posting uner "thesharkisdead" on wikipedia. It's a sad group of robots that populate that site, if anything, it's fun to torment their useless lives. "I AM A WIKIPEDIA MODERATOR", nice, go continue shilling your slanted biased views. "kb"'s handle is not mine guys! -- Submitted By: (Chubby Rain) on July 8, 2010, 4:00 pm - (1 votes) - Login to Vote
80 I see what they are trying there! Sock puppetry?!? They better have proof -- Submitted By: (PYLrulz) on July 8, 2010, 3:33 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
81 I read the Wikipedia deletionist/moderator's reasoning as to why BTF does not deserve its own Wikipedia page, the accusation that kb3777 (is that member you, Chubby?) is "self-promoting" after falsely accusing them of selling merchandise, and making up excuses why BTF doesn't deserve a wikipedia page. I am more and more convinced of the "Thought Police" and "Deletionist" reasons. Maybe we should lose the wikipedia links on the BTF topics. If they can't show respect to BTF or its fans (or refuse to drop those who want total control of wikipedia and its subjects), then they clearly no longer deserve the hits from BTF's links. -- Submitted By: (Robert) on July 8, 2010, 2:43 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
82 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jumping_the_shark#Linkspam Looks like the BTF people need to start sticking it to Wikipedia, they dont want Bone the Fish on there -- Submitted By: (Chubby Rain) on July 8, 2010, 12:12 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
83 I don't think Wikipedia is worthless exactly, it actually does tend to provide pretty useful articles. The community itself behind the article pages is incredibly toxic... I was bitched out by a guy with a few zillion edits because I dared ask a question about one of his pet articles. And god forbid you actually make an edit to an article that an elite user doesn't agree with (or assumes is incorrect because you're a newbie)... they'll revert it within an hour and you might get blocked. But oh well, that doesn't seem to interfere with the quality of the articles too much. They're good for basic reference but I mean, don't expect everything there to be the gospel truth. One problem seems to be articles can get too long and fixated on recent events. An article on a sports team for example will usually devote like 80% of its body to the last 5 years, even if the team's sucked during them and their most important years were 30 years ago. Also some articles are just far too long to be read in one sitting... someone should tell the editors they're writing an encyclopedia article, not a book. In short, most problems seem to trace back to Wikipedia's power-users being too egotistical. But then again, maybe that's inevitable... not many normal people feel like making a zillion edits to an encyclopedia. -- Submitted By: (doctor_awesome) on April 27, 2010, 6:43 pm - (1 votes) - Login to Vote
84 Definitely the bunch of know-it-alls swaggering about deleting useful information and slapping "citation needed" on everything they disagree with. They don't seem to care much for first-hand knowledge at Wikipedia either. I hate it when a citation is needed for some event that anyone over the age of 30 probably remembers. And yet if you wish to challenge or remove something, you need no specific knowledge whatsoever. I recall reading an entry on New Orleans sourdough bread. Where it mentions the bread to be more light and airy than most breads, there is a note: dubious - discuss. I took a look at the discussion, thinking some baker would explain why this is an exaggerated claim. Instead, it's just some loser who thought the claim conflicted with the bread also being described as hard and crusty. You have to wonder if this guy has ever eaten bread. And in spite of person after person explaining that it can be crusty on the outside and airy on the inside, nobody had dared to take down the "dubious" notation. Ridiculous. -- Submitted By: (AndyC) on April 3, 2010, 5:28 am - (1 votes) - Login to Vote
85 A lot of stuff stays on wiki. It is just that you need to follow the guidelines (ie sourcing, neutrality, blah, blah, blah). However, the problem comes from the contentious areas. Certain editors have more pull than others and can keep their version of the content up while their opponents who have less sway can't have any part of their version up even if they go by the same rules. -- Submitted By: (JamesO) on February 26, 2010, 2:40 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
86 From what I've heard, NOTHING is guaranteed to keep Wikipedia's deletionists at bay. -- Submitted By: (Robert) on February 9, 2010, 2:20 pm - (1 votes) - Login to Vote
87 If you want to guarantee an article on wikipedia for BTF, you have to find a reporter from a newspaper of a major metropolitan area ie(NY Times, Wash Post, LA Times, etc.) to write an article about BTF and the demise of JTS so you can have a good source to put in the wiki article that will help keep the deletionists at bay. -- Submitted By: (JamesO) on January 4, 2010, 10:18 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
88 I would encourage people that support "Bone the Fish" to work to get the site more mentions and links articles written about it- the more our resume grows, the sooner we will have our own page on wikipedia! -- Submitted By: (Chubby Rain) on December 20, 2009, 7:44 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
89 Those are some of the reasons I thank God I don't have a wikipedia account. -- Submitted By: (Robert) on December 19, 2009, 9:39 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
90 Agreed with that Travoltron. A few years back, I had started making at least stub articles for local state routes around Pennsylvania, with the clear intent on building up the article down the road, and got chewed out by some power hungry editor telling me not to do such a thing, even if I planned on having information for the state route put in. -- Submitted By: (PYLrulz) on December 19, 2009, 4:24 am - (1 votes) - Login to Vote
91 There are really two faces to Wikipedia. If all you do is read it, I suppose it might seem really cool. But try adding in an article about something sometime. Some of the most obnoxious bullies and bureaucrats you will ever meet will immediately come out of the woodwork and try to delete your article. If these losers don't succeed in speedily deleting your article for "non-notability" or "original research", they can just put your article up for deletion repeatedly until it finally is deleted. -- Submitted By: (Travoltron) on December 18, 2009, 10:49 pm - (1 votes) - Login to Vote
92 Well, there is a link to "Bone the Fish" at the "Jump the Shark" site. No offense, but personally I think it is a little to early to give "bone the fish" an own site. When it has been around longer and people begin using "Bone the fish" as an idiom it will surely be added. -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on November 16, 2009, 2:27 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
93 Wiki rejected the BRF page that was submitted- please if any fans of BTF want to try it again- go for it!! -- Submitted By: (Chubby Rain) on November 15, 2009, 6:01 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
94 Why is "No Bone the Fish" even an option? Just go there and add it yourself! -- Submitted By: (ScottyB) on November 15, 2009, 5:23 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
95 I use Wikipedia all the time...I used it to study (and no, I didn't simply copy the information there, but it was a good way to find good books about a topic), I still use it when I need to know something and if anything, it became better since they insinst on citicitation. BTW, in my country they made a test, comparing Wikipedia to common dictionaries...Wikipedia actually won! They had one mistake less on hundred topics. -- Submitted By: (Swanpride) on September 6, 2009, 5:20 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
96 Wikipedia boned the fish when some vandalizers started teasing the Dallas/Fort Worth area users, exciting them with unsourced information for no apparent reason. Why is it that, of all the parts of this lovely country, Wikipedia so chooses to bully us North Texans, huh? First, we are force-fed untrue information regarding aviation services (e.g. DFW starting flights to some unknown Mexican city, Dubai, etc., airlines such as Iberia, Qantas, Air India, all promising DFW as a future destination). Then, some mom-and-pop independent station says they're going to launch a free, 24-hour classic TV station on 54-2 (despite honest-to-Pete sources linked to the article) and guess what? WE DON'T HAVE IT YET!!!!! I predict third time WON'T be the charm and someone will put in "Bloomingdale's will be opening a store in Dallas!" STOP THE HATE, WIKIPEDIA!!!!! -- Submitted By: (SVN) on August 23, 2009, 3:38 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
97 When the Vandalism started. I tried to search Apple Computers on the site, and all I got were porn pics. It's not worth it. -- Submitted By: (Ken) on May 10, 2009, 12:45 am - (0 votes) - Login to Vote
98 maybe the Emmy's can be paid off to add "Bone the Fish" as an award winner so we can get onto wikipedia... -- Submitted By: (Chubby Rain) on May 4, 2009, 2:47 pm - (0 votes) - Login to Vote

Login to See the QUICK COMMENT Box


Log in to BTF

Register - Forgot password?

Follow on Twitter!

App on Facebook


Related eBay Auctions

Powered By: TempusMedia - (Page load took:0.4 seconds)