srsly. every article i write they delete.

i just wrote one up, and theyre like "whats the importance???"

it's just stupid. like when they deleted the label's page for the same reason.

fucking d-bags

WELLL

shut your blasphemous mouth, wiki is awesome

What did you write about?

first my label, now my podcast.


wiki bites, sauce.

i could read wiki all day

Yeah, i'd rather wiki be very selective with articles, then i have more trust in the sources and articles i read.

the point is... multiple sources were cited.... it's not like i'm randomly adding articles about nothing.

OK. but my point is sorta unrelated to your problem.

It's just good that overall they are extremely picky. But in your case i don't see why they deleted your stuff.

yeah, agreed.

theyre nuts with music related things
they try to make sure everyone and their brother doesnt add their band/label
they want to make sure they only have things that people really care about

i just added a very large article about the band weston haha

then add my shit, yo. haha

i agree with brian, i'd rather they were selective.

don't hate them just because they don't keep your shit.

meh, im gonna go deface me some wiki's.

they deleted my awesome article on the pen 15 club :(

:lol:


maybe if we all contributed... like if we wrote a few words or so. then updated it and the next person did it.

so they see all these edits by different people... meaning it's note worthy.

:wub:

I just like instigating doubt in existing topics.

Such as, at the end of Helen Keller's bio,

"...some have speculated that Keller's illness was an elaborate hoax."

:lol:

i was browsing articles about reptilian alien theories last night and hit an article with the best warning at the top.

It is proposed that this article be deleted, because of the following concern:

unsourced bio, possible vanity, possible nonsense

I read that article over the summer, Joe.

It was good times.

:lol:

And, uh, Brad, perhaps they went to your label site and saw that all it contained was a picture of a kid smoking pot and thought "Hmm, maybe this is bullshit"...

this was before.



the label crashed due to hussain breaking his contract. chris requested that i up up that picture. whatev's though.

Well, just a thought.

I don't know anything about wikipedia other than that they have a Dashboard Widget that is kinda cool and that Stephen Colbert hates elephants.

the stephen colbert/wikipedia thing was funny

yeah, i tried putting the label site up there a while ago.

this picture of pete dohorty smoking crack is a day old.







sometimes i dont understand chris.

part of my job is monitoring wikipedia to make sure no one makes shit up about my boss.

but I have to do it from home because they've banned all the ip addresses on Capitol Hill because staff members were posting shit about rival politicians.

:lol:

that is funny

beware folks. that's what happens when the people who run the country get bored.

sarah that's like the funniest thing i've heard today

and andrew's comment

also directed at sarah: who are you working for right now?

Well, perhaps if they DID THEIR FUCKING JOBS they might not be so bored...

PERHAPS WE COULD DO OUR FUCKING JOBS IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KICKED OUT THE GODDAMN REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP WHO CURRENTLY HAVE A STRANGLEHOLD ON THE CAPITOL AND WOULD RATHER PASS TORTURE THAN HEALTHCARE

ahem.

why would your podcast be an important page?

our job as the american people has to do with a lot more than getting republicans out of power... we are allowing this government machine to do this shit. china doesn't call the bush administration the CEO government for no reason... bigger shit than that has to go down.

Does WIKI recognize the scwb yet?

Um, yeah, but still there are plenty of Democrats in power who don't do shit. In fact, I'm constantly amazed when the government accomplishes anything, considering how petrified they are of actually making a decision. Bunch of pussies, the lot of them.

Christ I'm old.

Unfortunately, because the House of Representatives is a majoritarian institution, the Republican leadership is able to essentially shut Democrats out of the progress. We can yell on the floor all we want (and we do), and we can introduce as many amendments as substitutes to completely change Republican bills (and we do), and we can introduce as much progressive legislation as we want (which we do), and we can attempt to use discharge petitions and other procedural rules to force our bills to the floor (which we do), but when Republicans control the rules committee and use procedural votes as barameters of party loyalty, it's pretty much impossible for us to do much besides obstruction.

The Senate can filibuster, which is something I wish they would have done for military tribunals and FISA, but the minority party in the House has very little power, especially under this leadership.

Essentially what I'm saying is that there are very few Democrats in power. We're elected, we're there, but our hands are tied as long as we are in the minority.

And please do not call David Obey, Rahm Emmanuel, John Conyers, John Lewis, Barney Frank, Chris Van Hollen, Elijah Cummings, Neil Abercrombie, Nita Lowey, Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, and so many others pussies. They don't deserve it, particularly when they are busting their asses practically from morning until night trying to get something done for their constituents. There are certainly bad eggs in both parties, but I can tell you with certaintly that as frustrating it is for us not to see Democrats do anything, it is more frustrating for most of them not to be ABLE to do anything.