Best known for: Difference between revisions
(Thoughers USE though at the end of their sentences, they are not against it. take meds.) |
Cheeselord (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
A prominent name on Wikipedia's [[Long-term abuse|list of so-called long-term abuse]] is a hero they disparagingly call "Best known for IP" (BKFIP). This [[gigachad]] has been removing "best known for" on articles for ten years going.<ref name=":0">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Best_known_for_IP</ref> And unlike other names on their "abuse" list, BKFIP isn't even a troll. In fact, this is openly stated by the wikipedia ministry of love as the biggest obstacle in their unjust conspiracy to remove him from history:<blockquote>The principal problem with this case is that most edits made by this user are good-faith edits that are often supported by editors when looked at on their individual merits. This makes issues of conduct harder to enforce.<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>They claim to have given him 3-month IP bans for the crime of removing "best known for" on articles.<ref name=":0" /> Why? According to them, his edit summaries are "snarky". As you read through the article, it becomes obvious that the only reason they prosecute this innocent man, and refuse to concede that he is right, is due to his "incivility" and "offensive and aggressive summaries" and "personal attacks in the edit summaries."<ref name=":0" /> Yikes. | A prominent name on Wikipedia's [[Long-term abuse|list of so-called long-term abuse]] is a hero they disparagingly call "Best known for IP" (BKFIP). This [[gigachad]] has been removing "best known for" on articles for ten years going.<ref name=":0">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Best_known_for_IP</ref> And unlike other names on their "abuse" list, BKFIP isn't even a troll. In fact, this is openly stated by the wikipedia ministry of love as the biggest obstacle in their unjust conspiracy to remove him from history:<blockquote>The principal problem with this case is that most edits made by this user are good-faith edits that are often supported by editors when looked at on their individual merits. This makes issues of conduct harder to enforce.<ref name=":0" /></blockquote>They claim to have given him 3-month IP bans for the crime of removing "best known for" on articles.<ref name=":0" /> Why? According to them, his edit summaries are "snarky". As you read through the article, it becomes obvious that the only reason they prosecute this innocent man, and refuse to concede that he is right, is due to his "incivility" and "offensive and aggressive summaries" and "personal attacks in the edit summaries."<ref name=":0" /> Yikes. | ||
Comparisons have been made by [[/qa/]] users<ref>https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4317834/#4319630</ref><ref>https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4418526</ref><ref>https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4321171/#4321171</ref> between this user and the [[Though|Anti-Thougher's]] war on [[Thougher|thoughers]]. | Comparisons have been made by [[Qa/|/qa/]] users<ref>https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4317834/#4319630</ref><ref>https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4418526</ref><ref>https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4321171/#4321171</ref> between this user and the [[Though|Anti-Thougher's]] war on [[Thougher|thoughers]]. | ||
== Citations == | == Citations == | ||
Revision as of 01:31, 19 August 2022
"Best known for" is a spineless weasel word phrase best known for[by whom?] as the sole anonymous authority that Wikipedia jannies allow on their site. It is a vague and ambiguous crutch for bad articles.
As of the time of writing, there are approximately 123k Wikipedia pages that use this cowardly phrase.[1]
Conflict with rules
Putting "best known for" on an article is against Wikipedia's own rules as per NPOV and AWW. This becomes comically self-evident when you read the example list of terms that conflict with AWW:
- some people say
- it is believed
- many are of the opinion
- most feel
- it is often reported
- it is widely thought
- it is often said
- X has been described as Y
But apparently "best known for" is A-OK daijoubu...
Best known for IP
Wikipedia's article (warning: extremely biased): Best known for IP
A prominent name on Wikipedia's list of so-called long-term abuse is a hero they disparagingly call "Best known for IP" (BKFIP). This gigachad has been removing "best known for" on articles for ten years going.[2] And unlike other names on their "abuse" list, BKFIP isn't even a troll. In fact, this is openly stated by the wikipedia ministry of love as the biggest obstacle in their unjust conspiracy to remove him from history:
The principal problem with this case is that most edits made by this user are good-faith edits that are often supported by editors when looked at on their individual merits. This makes issues of conduct harder to enforce.[2]
They claim to have given him 3-month IP bans for the crime of removing "best known for" on articles.[2] Why? According to them, his edit summaries are "snarky". As you read through the article, it becomes obvious that the only reason they prosecute this innocent man, and refuse to concede that he is right, is due to his "incivility" and "offensive and aggressive summaries" and "personal attacks in the edit summaries."[2] Yikes.
Comparisons have been made by /qa/ users[3][4][5] between this user and the Anti-Thougher's war on thoughers.
Citations
- ↑ Using a search engine to search for site:wikipedia.org "best known for"
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Best_known_for_IP
- ↑ https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4317834/#4319630
- ↑ https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4418526
- ↑ https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/4321171/#4321171
