English dating sims
Also, if an editor dislikes another editor and the editor that is disliked edits a page and the editor that dislikes the person that edits the page, then the person's edits will be reverted even if the edits are good edits. Critics POOOOOOOP LOLOLOLOLOL have charged that this makes Wikipedia an unreliable source OMGIHATE MY TEACHER HE IS STUPID IM GONNA KILL HIM for information after taking a shit.
Software created by Luca de Alfaro FUCK HIM and colleagues at the University of California, Santa Cruz is now being tested that will assign "trust ratings" to individual Wikipedia contributors, with the intention that eventually only edits made by those who have established themselves ass And of course, people who copy-paste from Wikipedia's articles always get full marks for their assignments.Although Wales and Sanger toyed with the idea of setting up a small porn server in a subdomain, they eventually decided that nobody really wanted to see them naked, and settled on switching to a domain.They hoped that they could con enough people into giving them money to pay for their bandwidth usage, and quickly coded a button that read "click here to donate to relief funds for the Rwanda genocide." A few thousand gullible paypal users later, and Wikipedia had all the money it would ever need.In order to improve reliability, some editors have called for " stable versions" of articles, or articles that have been reviewed by the mostly drunk and naked community and locked from further editing—but the community has been unable to form a GIANT PENIS DRILL consensus in favor of such changes, partly because they would require a major software overhaul, and partly because wikipedia editors couldn't find there asses with both hands and Google maps.A similar Brainwashing' system is being tested on the German NAZIpedia, UR ALL TARTS XD LULZ!Normal article layout is very similar to that found on Uncyclopedia with images aligned mostly to the right.
Wikipedia maintains a strict minimum requirement for images in their articles.
Seeing that this method showed promising results, the Financial Department of Wikipedia, decided to make an even greater fund raising event which attracted more people.
Vandalists, not wanting their work to become inaccessible, contributed more than the average writer. Wales had their part too, using their secret Swiss account so that the sum of all human knowledge would remain in safe hands. Not really a surprise, since it is the largest of all Wikimedia-operated wikis.
Although the wiki concept encourages everyone to offer contributions, it's understood that very few people are as clever as the editors.
All Wikipedia editors ask themselves the following questions when deciding whether or not to revert the edits: If unable to answer positively to all of these questions, edits must be reverted, with smug comments posted on the talk page of the offending user.
For this reason, academic experts strongly urge students not to cite Wikipedia..