User:Ondertitel

I add content and try to reference what others have added. I work mostly on warez related articles. Referencing those articles is hard.^[1][2]

“

Much has been written about some of the elements of the dark side, mostly in the form of Wikipedia articles; blogs; and articles in trade journals, magazines and newspapers. However, there is a paucity of scholarly work that brings them together.[3]

”

Doing this I find errors in sources Wikipedia considers excellent ((peer-reviewed) papers, books, ...), while otherwise excellent primary or "self-published" sources can be a red flag for extremist deletionists (those that you only see talking/reverting instead of helping to WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM or going towards the WP:AIM of the project by adding content), even though the exact same sources are used by the former category ... For uncontroversial parts, one has to adapt to the topic. In time it will be replaced by better sources that are harder to find or read. One must not limit themselves to English literature only. Many good sources are in German for the warez topics. Already plenty of sources are added to page references, but they are still barely used for citing more than the one sentence.

For the warez scene, Wikipedia is unique in how it brings various notable topics together of this underground culture. I started editing with the single purpose of WP:PRESERVEing what others already added. My approach is based on sourcing, like a literature review, because I know editors tend to piss off new contributors and domain experts that are needed the most.^[4][5] I can speak from experience by getting banned after encountering a rule juggler. (challenging/deleting stuff, while there is a picture illustrating the sentence (!), after I added a reference not deemed good enough,^[6] while much later I encountered that source in an academic paper) Most would've totally given up before even getting started/banned!^[7] Not for me because it was the reason I started editing in the first place albeit slowly. English is not my mother tongue. It matters: . About editor gangs: https://archive.vn/YnJnD

Exhaustive list of Wikipedians I've encountered that understand the shithead problem:^[8] Shaddim, Brews ohare.

A good read to understand why it became this way: The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dictatorship of the Small Minority by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.

See also: Brandolini's law. Encounters:

Good sources with errors: (pointing out factual errors in academic papers)

• "die bereits seit über einem Jahrzehnt bestehen" Neither Class or Myth were active for more than a decade.^[9]

“

Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts. --Richard P. Feynman

”

^[10][11][12] An outside look on Wikipedia by Helen Buynisk: Wikipedia: Rotten to the Core

The Fundamental Law of Administrative Workings [F.L.A.W.]:^[13]

“

The real world is what is reported to the system, in other words, the system has a severely censored and distorted view of reality from biased and filtering sensory organs. This distorted view displaces understanding of the actual real-world, which in turn pales and tends to disappear. This displacement creates a type of sensory deprivation and a kind of hallucinogenic effect on those inside the systems, causing them to lose common sense. In addition to negatively affecting those inside the system, the system attracts to it people who are optimized for the pathological environment the system creates. Thus, systems attract systems-people.

”

See also Secret History #8: Death by Bureaucracy

“

If a businessman makes a mistake, he suffers the consequences. If a bureaucrat makes a mistake, you suffer the consequences. --Ayn Rand

”