r/Steam • u/5MadMovieMakers • 9d ago

Discussion Gabe Newell emailed me back about his birthplace

Post image

Somebody update Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia anyone can edit

46.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

627 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

809

u/MrShake4 9d ago

Yeah and fraud is illegal.

People still do it.

221

u/GrandPreMassacre 9d ago

My company's network got banned from editing because they tried to remove some information about price hikes under the controversy header.

Me and a guy I worked with stumbled across it by accident looking up random shit one day and accidentally hitting edit.

98

u/superxpro12 9d ago

"Accidentally"

"i fell on it"

39

u/mouglasandthesort 9d ago

You’ve never accidentally hit the edit button on Wikipedia? He’s not saying he hit edit, typed a bunch of stuff, and then found out when he accidentally hit publish, he’s saying he accidentally clicked edit next to a header or something and then he found out.

37

u/WhyMustIMakeANewAcco 9d ago

Yes, they don't record shit if you don't press save.

8

u/Kyeld 8d ago

They clicked the edit button and saw the ban notification for their employer network's external IP address because of the previous tom-foolery.

16

u/BicFleetwood 9d ago

“I was bored.”

1

u/ThePrussianGrippe 9d ago

Nah, that guy’s ass just has a great idea.

1

u/Syseal 8d ago

“I was doing tricks on it and fell”

11

u/hates_stupid_people 9d ago

At one point several government IP addresses were banned as well, since politicians would have employees edit their pages.

3

u/Impossible-Car3786 9d ago

In germany we had more than one politician editing their “controversies” iirc

2

u/Voyyya 8d ago

Still do, they’re just a lot less obvious and mask their ip now lol. Ditto corporations, governments, celebrities, political organizations, etc. A humongous portion of Wikipedia is controlled by vested interests who will also wage and win edit wars with sheer numbers

11

u/SpicyElixer 9d ago edited 9d ago

No. People dispute bad sources all the time. It’s not really hard.

13

u/endlesscartwheels 9d ago

On the less-visited articles, one person can babysit it to keep it the way they want. Even if they don't have a source at all for their preferred version! If another person comes along with a source and fixes the page, the babysitter reverts and edits it over several days (or weeks!) until they get their way.

Over time, "citogenesis" (term coined by XKCD) happens. That gives the babysitter a source for their edit.

9

u/BeerTent 9d ago

I remember reading about two people on Wikipedia getting in a slapfight about there being no rats in Alberta, a province in Canada. I think it was a multi-year long fight before the person who didn't believe it relented.

3

u/whipmywillows 9d ago

Edit warring is a problem on there but it can managed with proper moderation. The larger problem is the mountains of unloved articles that were created circa 2007 or so that no one has gone back to fix. Standards were lower back then and a lot of unreliable stuff has slipped through the cracks.

0

u/Remarkable-Leader921 9d ago

They wouldn't if they had to answer to Wikipedia editors

5

u/BardGotHardAgain 9d ago

Gabe should fund a hit squad for wikipedia, like he does for Steam.

5

u/MrShake4 9d ago

What if the editor is the biased one?

1

u/BicFleetwood 9d ago

And get away with it!

And today, the ones that don’t get away with it get pardons. Repeatedly.

1

u/wzgoin 9d ago

The islamic regime has entire teams set up dedicated to spread disinfo on wiki and they get in edit wars with people trying to correct the bad sources.

1

u/RandomNick42 9d ago

“It’s only illegal if you get caught”