Editing Wikipedia to make it funny-Good or right?

[El Gatopod]

Do you think it's ok to edit Wikipedia even if you know the information is false? You know, to be funny.

[Fate]

If you edit something in Wikipedia to make in inaccurate but funny, chances are someone will catch it and fix it shortly. As for myself, I don't think it's funny because some people trust what Wikipedia says, and editing something true just for laughs is...uhm, well, not funny for people who use that information and fail. Still, their fault for trusting the site, but it's not like Wikipedia existed in the first place so people could feed stupid information to each other. (Actually, it might have been; I have absolutely no idea why Wikipedia was started.) But yeah, I do tend to go with what Wikipedia says. <.< Not the brightest thing, but I don't care. =S

[Dodie16]

Wikipedia has an article about editing false information on Wikipedia.

Reliability of Wikipedia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the topic, if you want to be funny and post false information about stuff, there's other sites you can do it that is suitable for such a thing. Places like Encyclopedia Drammatica and Uncyclopedia come to mind. Go there instead of doing it in Wikipedia. People spend a lot of time making that site as credible as possible, and when others come in and try to be "funny", it's just showing disrespect to the people who are trying to make all the information as accurate as possible.

[Jin]

Wikipedia along with the falsifiers in question make an excellent case against democracy.

[El Gatopod]

I think some people are real hardasses when it comes to making funny edits to Wikipedia, but regardless, it's still humorous to put something false up and seeing how long it takes before someone notices and fixes it.

[ZantetsukeN]

It's a bit childish though isn't it? As previously said, a lot of people do put a lot of effort into wikipedia to make the information easily accessible and as accurate as possible. Depite what some people do say, wikipedia is pretty reliable, and it's nice to have one place where all the information is. I just don't see the fun in changing something, chuckle to yourself about it, and then keep checking to see if it has been changed.

So no, not funny.

[DragonHeart]

Wiki would be more reliable if people stopped doing crap like that simply to be funny. I honestly don't see where the humor is. Deliberately misleading people is not amusing in the least, particularly when many people may not even recognize that Wiki itself is not always the best source for information. Why not amuse yourself by adding useful, legitimate information to it instead? I hope no one who does this complains about people being stupid since you're contributing to the problem yourself.

There is a time and a place for humor. An online encyclopedia intended to help inform people is not that place.

~DragonHeart~

ETA: Also, falsifying information is no laughing matter. Have you heard of a little something called Tiananmen Square? You might want to look into that sometime.

[Jin]

I think some people are real hardasses when it comes to making funny edits to Wikipedia, but regardless, it's still humorous to put something false up and seeing how long it takes before someone notices and fixes it.

Can you elaborate on that?

[Treize]

ETA: Also, falsifying information is no laughing matter. Have you heard of a little something called Tiananmen Square? You might want to look into that sometime.

I think this is a little too extreme of an example. I don't think the people who put "funny edits" on Wikipedia have something like that in mind.

I picked the "Depends on how funny the edit is." option. This may just be because I don't use Wikipedia that often, but when I use Wikipedia, and I see something totally unbelievable, I'll check another source. I don't mind seeing something that is pretty funny because there are countless reliable sources that I can check; however, if I see an edit that is just stupid, I'll think "Why is someone wasting their and my time with this?" I guess I don't mind if I get a laugh out of it, and it isn't something trying to deceive others, but if it is just stupid, I'll get annoyed. I didn't know people were so passionate about the reliability of Wikipedia. I usually don't treat Wikipedia as a credible source. I'll check it, and if what it says makes sense, I'll believe it, otherwise, I'll just use a source that is more reliable.

[DragonHeart]

Perhaps, but I am using it as a contrast and really, that's the sort of path things like this leads to. Revisionist history starts here, as it were.

And perhaps not everyone realizes just how valuable information, or the ability to obtain it, really is. That anyone would ever conceive of or find amusement in manipulating and falsifying information is both abhorrent and disgusting to me. I may write fiction but damned if I'd ever be so arrogant as to just edit information at my own whim. All of us who post here have the privilege and sheer luck to be born in the right countries at the right time. No one can tell you what to read or what to think or what knowledge you are allowed to possess. Not everyone is so lucky and that anyone would abuse that privilege for something as trivial as a laugh on a slow afternoon...yes, it does make me angry. Of course, I am fully aware that El Gato up there is just trolling, but I cannot let something like this slide by without comment.

~DragonHeart~

[Ralz]

People make funny edits? I've never seen any. For me, all I've seen is bogus information no one would ever believe.

As far as these so-called "funny edits" go, I don't think it really matters. We're talking about a site whose information can't really be taken seriously in the first place. Its a place where ANYONE can edit, and the "cleaning" doesn't really do its job sometimes, apparently. I've seen a lot of wrong information, and sometimes, it lasted a long while. I don't know what people would be thinking with "funny edits." I don't see what satisfaction there is. Eh, maybe they're bored, who knows...

Oh well, I guess people will still be people, people who make odd decisions... but that's how it is, I guess. Still, I don't plan to trust Wikis... EVER.

[DragonHeart]

Wiki is a good starting place, especially if you use it to find cited sources and go from there. However, there are a lot of people out there who don't know Wiki is not reliable or, as I believe someone said upthread, they know it isn't but they're too lazy to go to a more reliable source. The latter people get no sympathy from me but that's their choice. As for the former, well, they're looking for information. Wiki was created with that purpose in mind; it's the brats and pranksters and well-meaning but uninformed people who have made Wiki unreliable. Should the people who aren't as internet savvy or educated as "us" be punished for that with inaccurate, false information? No.

~DragonHeart~

[Treize]

This may just be because I usually only look up obscure information that most people wouldn't bother editing, but I rarely find errors on Wikipedia, and when I do, they are quite obvious. I think that if you find a piece of information that is pretty skeptical, you should check another source. With the internet, there are so many other sources out there that is easy to find that will have correct information. I can't really sympathize with the people who are too lazy to check another source for information that is obviously wrong.

Wikipedia is not the be all end all source for information, and people should realize that Wikipedia is not always right. From what I've seen it is right like 90 some% of the time, but when it is wrong, it is pretty easy to tell.

I would agree that it is just horrible if someone would purposefully edit information to look real, but be misleading. I would see very little point to that. I think it is a different matter if it is just something funny, but obviously wrong.

[Jin]

I don't think anyone in this thread is saying that Wikipedia is the be all and end all of information. Wikipedia is a tool that serves a specific function; certain things it's good for, others, not so much. But a deliberate error, even an obvious error, renders the tool useless (or at least not wholly useful) for whatever topic one may need it for.

If I need a hammer and find that the hammer I normally use for a specific job is chipped so as to render it unusable, it's irritating, no matter how unimportant that job may be. To deliberately chip someone's hammer so as to render it unusable is just a **** move, regardless of how many similar hammers said person may have.

[Unknown Entity]

I don't see what's funny about editing wikipedia either. I honestly don't see the point in it if someone is just going to come along and edit it back to how it was before. Giving off misleading information isn't all that humorous either. What do you gain from it but a few moments of humour? Shit, your life must be that boring. Chances are it won't be remembered the following week/month/year anyway. >>;

I've edited a couple of times on wikipedia, and it's a lot more fun double checking the articles and adding in some additional/correct information. Somewhere at some point, what I edited could help someone.

The satisfaction of helping someone out is greater than doing someone over with false information. You'd have to be a real douchebag of a troll not to work that out.

[Che]

Never done it myself, but it's pretty funny, if done tastefully.

Does no one see the hilarious irony of editing a public information website? It's a check on the people who think anything on the internet is true.

[Block]

The point of Wikipedia is that you are supposed to check references to make sure that the information is credible. It's kind of like a forum where everyone has the same username, so the only way you can believe anything that's said is if there is a link at the bottom taking you to an accredited website.
Let Colbert control the heart of Wiki, it makes me laugh.

[Josh_R]

Editing stuff on wiki gets kinda ridiculous. Some school won't even except it as a source because of this fact.

Also I don't know if it still is but a few days ago editing was disabled. I saw something I knew for a fact was wrong, and went to edit it. It said that editing was disabled by admin. Prolly to keep people from doing shit like that..

[El Gatopod]

You people are right, it isn't funny.

It's hilarious.

[ViviMasterMage]

You people are right, it isn't funny.

It's hilarious.

Is something wrong with you? =/