Wikipedia is a frustrating site. I have lots of ideas and information to contribute to several of its encyclopedia articles. Yes, they have a disclaimer about people's work being edited mercilessly. Jerk off users like "Moncrief" and "Fuzheado" keep deleting my work at will. I spend quite a while researching and writing the information and in a few seconds, it's deleted by another user. Some people going around thinking they are superior over others (only their work is acceptable and others are not). Of course, they'll deny it but then it's quite subtle. Now, the novelty of that Web site has worn off and I'm rather turned off by the site.

Wikipedia 2

This website sucks! It's advertised as an encyclopedia that everybody in the entire world can contribute to.

Too bad the fascist moderators fucked it all up. They secretly delete parts of articles they don't like, and erase all traces of both the evidence that the information was there, and the criticism that people give over this censorship.

Eighty million people supported this fascism last month (December 2010 according to People donated millions of dollars during the holidays so this fucking trash can continue to exist!

I guess people are lazy and would rather go to a website that gives them information on nearly everything, no matter how watered down and piss poor it is. Internet users should start visiting actual websites with information written by experts, and backed by a knowledgeable community of fans.

Wikipedia 3

Wikipedia is trash. Its entire community consists of self-important genderless moderators that are fiercely protective of the wikipedia 'brand' and spend their days deleting anything they don't agree with (and many of whom falsify their credentials), and people who join up only so they can upload pictures of their dicks. There really doesn't need to be eight photos of dicks on on every page that loosely pertains to human sexuality. "Here's a picture of my dick. This is the head. This is the shaft." And whenever someone uploads literal pornography there's always a shitstorm of drama with people screaming "WIKIPEDIA IS NOT CENSORED." The article for Sperm really doesn't need a screengrab of some old lady drinking a jizztini, people. That's not encyclopedic. It doesn't require a debate. That's retarded, just like your idiotic, inaccurate website.

*Note from Anger Central
With regards to your last sentence. If you were referring to Anger Central, We never made any claims to being accurate. If you are referring to Wikipedia, you are correct.

Home | Add Rants | Bosses | Companies | Groups | People | Places | Politics | Things

About Us | Blog | FAQ | Immigration | News | Legal Stuff