>>124668 Wikipedia is funded by every intelligence service and corporation with big enough public relationships department ever, but they still want more shekels so they can save for a yacht or whatever wikipedia admins like spending their savings on. May

Name
Options
Comment
File	Or URL:
Whitelist Token

Video Stream Embedding
Advanced Options	Always Noko Always Sage
Video Timestamp
Captcha Type	Captchouli
Spoiler	Unset Spoiler Image NSFW Image
Password	(For file deletion.)
Markup tags exist for bold, itallics, header, spoiler etc. as listed in " [options] > View Formatting "

File:C-1790780320193.png (445.94 KB,719x1006)

Anonymous 09/30/26 (Wed) 20:33:17 No.33815

>>124668
Wikipedia is funded by every intelligence service and corporation with big enough public relationships department ever, but they still want more shekels so they can save for a yacht or whatever wikipedia admins like spending their savings on. Maybe they beg for money to people, not to gather an alms from random peasants, but to say to their bosses "hey guys, you aren't paying us enough". I like to think that Wikipe-tan is a bratty tsundere ojousama.

Pic not related (maybe).

Deleted by cool-guy from >>>/jp/124640 Post No. 124670 from thread 124640

Anonymous 09/30/26 (Wed) 20:38:31 No.33816

Sorry I was passed out or I would have cleaned this garbage up sooner.
3 deletions from three different people for a thread about wikipedia because of their contrarian indoctrination. This is a sign that I need to be harsher in the future.

Anonymous 09/30/26 (Wed) 21:14:44 No.33817

i believe them but in the thermological sense not the antropological one

Anonymous 09/30/26 (Wed) 23:33:40 No.33818

>>33816
he's right though

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 03:00:32 No.33893

>>33818
English wikipedia is one of the most heavily scrutinized things in the world since it's the lingua franca and people from 150+ countries regularly have edit wars over everything on it. It's a popular thing for adolescent contrarians to hate because of (((experts))) stating (((facts))) and stealing their "shekels" to plot the downfall of us based free thinkers that get our opinions from youtubers and influencers.
OP wanted a silly thread but you retards couldn't restrain your redpilling, assuming this was the same as every other kuso place you make your home.

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 08:31:16 No.33932

>>33893
But I could restrain my redpilling and I don't get my opinions from youtubers and influencers. So eat my kuso, nigger.

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 13:53:20 No.33934

>>33932
I know what you are.

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 14:01:12 No.33935

>>33934
You know I'm someone smarter than you who you should listen to.

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 14:02:47 No.33936

>>33932
>I don't get my opinions from youtubers and influencers
Fine, I'll also include twitter screenshots from blue checkmarks and unsourced infographs posted on imageboards and telegram

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 14:09:25 No.33937

>>33936
Keep expanding that circle until you concede, before you even realize it, that I have an open mind and look for people more intelligent than me and read their criticisms of each other.

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 14:20:26 No.33938

the main issue with this post is positing idea of wikipe-tan as anything other than a maid

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 18:50:33 No.33939

>>33935
>>33937
Something tells me you're just a narcissist and a pseudointellectual.

Anonymous 10/01/26 (Thu) 22:39:15 No.33940

>>33935
I pasted your text into https://www.writingtoiq.com/ and it scored 84 IQ, which is below average intelligence.

>How accurate is the algorithm?
>As accurate as one would expect such an algorithm to be. As "proof" I have run the algorithm on a few examples, and you can see that the results aren't surprising (nor should they be).
>Stephen Hawking, using his last paper as the sample, achieves an IQ of 151.
>Alexander Hamilton, using Federalist paper number 6 as the written sample, achieves an IQ of 166.
>Testing different CNN reporters using their articles, I got IQs ranging from 102 to 127.
>Testing different 5G-coronavirus conspiracy theorists using posts from one of their Facebook groups, I got IQs ranging from 75 to 89.

Seems like you are within that “5G-coronavirus conspiracy theorist” range.

Anonymous 10/02/26 (Fri) 00:04:28 No.33941

>>33937
>Keep expanding that circle
Unmedicated doomsayers on street corners and ol' crazy grandpa at the Christmas dinner.

Anonymous 10/02/26 (Fri) 03:41:58 No.33942

>>33940
I should clarify that I meant OP's text by this post. I didn't follow the reply chain correctly. OP scored 84 IQ and this post scored 85: >>33893 So both sound below average intelligence, but the latter can be interpreted as trying to intentionally sound dumb to make fun of OP.

Anonymous 10/02/26 (Fri) 03:50:03 No.33943

>>33942
As for this post itself, it scores 128.

Anonymous 10/02/26 (Fri) 12:55:17 No.33948

>>33940
>>33942
>>33943
It loops back around to just being impressive, the lack of shame required to earnestly post about this in such a manner, that is.

Unless this is extremely high effort satire, I can only laugh at you for living like this.

Anonymous 10/03/26 (Sat) 04:33:11 No.33969

>>33948
It appears, based on your tone and inflection, that you're having issues coming to terms with the presupposition that you've uttered some utterly foolish statements. It is the algorithm who determines the intelligence approximations. I simply paste the texts in order for them to be analyzed.

Although you're correct in affirming that the post(s) you're referring to in particular imply a certain degree of sarcasm.

Anonymous 10/03/26 (Sat) 10:00:58 No.33971

>>33969
It appears, based on your tone and inflection, that you're having issues coming to terms with the presupposition that you've uttered some utterly foolish statements.
That you immediately think I'm that anon and not someone else can only be referred to as a QED of this entire situation

Anonymous 10/03/26 (Sat) 10:42:04 No.33972

>>33971
It can be assumed, with a relatively high degree of accuracy, that you've perhaps uttered statements of similar character in past discussions if you are this invested in attempting to defend that particular position.

And the lack of creativity and wit in your post(s) is being demonstrated by the fact that you scored significantly lower than me according to the algorithm's approximations.

/trans/ - Transparency and Moderation

New Reply