What’s the first thing you do when you’re looking for an answer to any question? You Google it, of course. And which website regularly has its page with the answer in the top three search results? Can you guess it? It’s Wikipedia. Try it out. Type a random word into Google and you will most likely get a related Wikipedia page in the top three results. Most people don’t bother scrolling down the page, let alone flipping through pages of search results, and just click the wiki link.

Because Google’s rank algorithm gives more weight to pages people click on from search results, Wikipedia over time got unprecedented power to shape the public opinion on any topic imaginable by being considered a source of solid information. But, Wikipedia is free, isn’t it? And the information seems to always be carefully sourced with links beneath the article. So what’s the problem? Well, there is a laundry list of them but the biggest one is the low retention of editors.

All pages on English Wikipedia are edited and maintained by a relatively small subset of entrenched editors who hold admin power and can ban users and delete their contributions at whim. The core principle should be to always base the articles on information found in reliable sources, but the definition of a “reliable source” is left to the consensus. This simply means that admins form cliques and will back each other up against the outsiders, no matter what. This drives away all dissenting contributors and leaves only the most hardcore editors. And what do you think happens when Wikipedia gets to cover GamerGate?

Exit, facts

wiki gamergate article

Every word is pulsing with weaseldom

The above paragraph manages to get absolutely everything about GamerGate wrong. First of all, the reason for GamerGate was that, when people mentioned the trivial scandal of Zoe Quinn whoring herself on Reddit and various forums, they would get hit with a nuclear banhammer. This would prompt others to start talking about Zoe Quinn and “hey, why did that other thread get banned?” which resulted in more censorship and more people getting curious and furious. The peak was hit with the “gamers are dead” articles. Then the GamesJournPros list got leaked, the collusion of gaming press was made public and the ball rolled downhill from there.

If there is a culture war, it was started by SJWs in a desperate attempt to force a paradigm change in video games culture. Just like Hitler foolishly believed Russia was rotten and would surrender on the first day of blitzkrieg, SJWs thought a series of pompous articles would destroy the misogynerd culture once and for all.

SJWs would usually not resort to such overt tactics as publishing articles that call for the end of gamers, but that’s because they ran out of patience and got too arrogant. SJWs are simply not prepared for the level of persistence and ingenuity gamers possess and this is the war they are definitely going to lose.

Enter, bias

wiki gamergate article 3

Six sentences, three uses of the word “misogyny”


Ironically, this paragraph invokes the “damsel in distress” trope, the very one Anita railed against in her video series. We are supposed to feel sorry because Anita Sarkeesian was “harassed,” which was actually just criticism of her work. The problem arose because Anita touted her work as academic and actually wanted it to be used in gender studies. A defining characteristic of academic work is peer review, which freaked Anita out, because SJWs are not used to being questioned. In other words, if you can’t deal with critics, simply paint them as harassers and misogynerds. And don’t forget to turn the comments on your Youtube channel off!

It’s interesting to point out that damsels in distress were saved because fertile women had only one advantage over men—they could bear children. Because female SJWs are mostly not interested in bearing children but still clamor for the female privilege, we should probably think twice before coming to aid of witches such as Anita or Zoe.

Take my lip piercing

Zoe Quinn omfg

Zoe Quinn is so HOT

The above picture of Zoe Quinn from the GamerGate article on Wikipedia was not originally present there. In fact, there was a much more neutral picture of her in a gaming convention, but Zoe herself intervened with the Wikipedia admin that was favorable to the SJW cause and, sure enough, the picture was promptly changed.

The admin in question, RyuLong (translated as “DragonDragon”), actually got himself in a lot of trouble because of his bias over GamerGate article and there is even an ArbCom (Arbitration Committee) case over it. In short, ArbCom is a nerd tribunal that talks fancy words but mostly has no teeth and will probably decide to give RyuLong a slap on the wrist.

Even Jimmy Wales, the daddy of Wikipedia, chimed in and tried to silence GamerGate supporters:

jimmy wales twitter 1

No donation for you, Jimbo!

We’re off to never-never land

Surprisingly enough, this Wikipedia article has had an opposite effect—people become curious about GamerGate and start investigating on their own, which usually brings them to the closer realization of how deeply infiltrated our society is with SJW ideas and zealots. The bias and obvious weighting of the article has ended up working against SJWs.

Wikipedia was originally envisioned as quasi-anarchist “encyclopedia everyone can edit.” While it is a noble goal to collect and organize the sum of all human knowledge, nobody accounted for the psychology of humans. No matter what kind of structure we create collectively, someone will want to control it.

Since Jimmy Wales has effectively removed himself from the hierarchy in Wikipedia and has no say in what happens behind the closed doors, we have no ultimate recourse to slander against GamerGate. In the end, Wikipedia is plagued with systemic problems that will sooner or later bring it down. It will be a sad day but it was doomed to fail from the start.

Did you like this post? Read more #gamergate news on Reaxxion, ROK’s little brother. Click here to visit.

Send this to a friend