Got banned at Wikipedia for asking about The Daily Stormer mentioning that Al Moor mosque was a terrorist recruiting center
en.wikipedia.org
TLDR: even mentioning The Daily Stormer strongly prohibited by Wikipedia rules. Despite that the article DS cited were just retelling official US statement about terrorists liquidated by drone strikes.
Posting words "Daily Stormer" is now like posting hardcore a child porn with toddlers.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
And despite me swearing that I'm not a nazi or a racist, I was still banned for being a racist troll, because I recommended people chatting with real Muslims and reading Quran, instead of visiting the hate filled Nazi sties, like 8ch.
Racist Nazi in 1940: "Gas teh Jews!!!!"
Racist Nazi in 2019: "Hi! Folks, why wont you watch these beautiful Islamic Qurbani videos youtube.com
They also got offended about me linking to the following Ashura footage youtube.com
despite it could be very educational if you edit articles on Islam. So who is racist now?
Of course they got mad. Wikipedia is about establishing a "liberal" orthodoxy not cataloging truth
Also learned recently that in Pakistan you can buy a lion just you buy a cat or a dog in a civilized country. They literally have lion farms for richer Muslims to decorate their houses.
Dunno if that can be considered animal abuse. It seems PETA never visits these countries.
I want to liberate them
Nobody cares, boomer.
And while Christchurch is widely covered, Wikipedia says no word about the ISIS slaughter house, where just in one video they butcher like 20 people on camera in Qurbani way. I.e. that is literal human sacrifice.
The daily stomer is a semi-parodic site, it isn’t really suitable for that kind of application.
However, the response of these people in unacceptable, it is effectively the medieval authority principle that slowed down science and philosophy for millennia.
The point I haven't used it as a source, just asked about this whole story at the talk page. That was enough to start a shitstorm and get me banned for no reason.
In fact I rarely edited article, and mostly gaming ones.
No fucking shit. Why would you give them such an easy out by linking the data to a secondary source that's completely tainted in the eyes of normalfaggots when the original sources are available? Why didn't you just cite to the official US statements? Have you been asleep for the past 10 years with regards to wikipedia's general culture of faggotry? Even the children over at /v/ got completely wise to what you can and can't get away with on wikipedia, and the steps necessary to get anything close to wrongthink on their platform back in 2014.
And ignoring completely the issue of the specific source you used and how your fellow editors would view it, why would you ever use a secondary or tertiary source for citation when that source itself links directly to the primary?
That is just a sewer right? They don't do anything with all the blood they collect?
I had no idea they get mad over a single mention of Daily Stormer, and it was telling the stuff.co.nz censoring its article in the first place. It is not like I spammed Wikipedia with like 9000 links to it. I posted it in single relevant place. And it got me banned for "indecency" and being "racist troll".
Nope. That is real slaughter house. And no they don't collect blood in Islam, it is considered impure or something like that.
Another mass murder, that for some reason is not covered at Wikipedia.
You should have cited a more normie-friendly site like the Onion, Babylon Bee, or Duffel Blog.
Attempting to take Diaper Boy seriously…
Begs the question: Is there any evidence linking this mosque to al-Qaeda?
Is there any evidence that the shooter was white supremacist? Didn't he deny it?
Are there sources on either point that would pass Wikipedia's sourcing policy?
>(((for some reason)))