wikipedia is biased,and is runned by a pornographer.the site claims
anyone may edit its pages but the site is a biased source of
info.please see the sites below.
See www.WikipediaSucks.com
See http://www.247news.net/2004/20041211-wikipedia.shtml
.
|
|
| User: "Cardinal Chunder" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
12 Dec 2004 03:13:17 PM |
|
|
wrote:
wikipedia is biased,and is runned by a pornographer.the site claims
anyone may edit its pages but the site is a biased source of
info.please see the sites below.
Let me guess. Your own psychotic ramblings were rejected or rolled back
when you tried to submit them.
What a big surprise. Take the meds mental boi.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sollog Fan" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
13 Dec 2004 06:30:32 PM |
|
|
Even funnier. When his original psychotic ramblings got listed for
deletion, a whole multitude of unheavenly socks fought tooth and nail
to have it kept (despite the fact the puppetmaster couldn't quite grasp
that anonymous votes weren't going to be counted anyway).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Sollog
Then when the vote supported keeping it and the article got turned into
a semi-decent entry on a famous net.kook, he pulled out all the stops
and started screaming for its deletion...
The best bit of all is that Ennis' socks have done a far better job of
portraying him as completely bananas than anything that any wikipedian
has written has. :D
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
13 Dec 2004 07:37:59 AM |
|
|
Considering what you have got up to in the past, Ennis, it's damn
polite. I mean, they could have included a great deal more about your
many slanderous posts and your attempts to stop people posting here by
spamming work places and the like.
So, if I were you I'd stop whining. You've got off lightly.
Lazi
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Flash Bazbo" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
12 Dec 2004 12:33:18 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2004 09:50:14 -0800, <theseeker56@yahoo.com> wrote:
wikipedia is biased,and is runned by a pornographer.
Wikipedia is run by Sollog?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Flash Bazbo" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
12 Dec 2004 01:04:48 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2004 09:50:14 -0800, <theseeker56@yahoo.com> wrote:
wikipedia is biased,and is runned by a pornographer.the site claims
anyone may edit its pages but the site is a biased source of
info.please see the sites below.
See www.WikipediaSucks.com
See http://www.247news.net/2004/20041211-wikipedia.shtml
Judging from the forum "discussions" I'd say P.ennis got himself banned
from Wikipedia.
What happened, johnny? Didn't you like your listing?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wally Anglesea™" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
12 Dec 2004 04:36:18 PM |
|
|
On 12 Dec 2004 09:50:14 -0800, wrote:
wikipedia is biased,and is runned by a pornographer.the site claims
anyone may edit its pages but the site is a biased source of
info.please see the sites below.
See www.WikipediaSucks.com
See http://www.247news.net/2004/20041211-wikipedia.shtml
AWWW, poor Pennis. You got ***** whupped from Wiki, huh?
BWAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAH.
Well, that puts wikipedia up about 4 notches in my book. :-)
--
"FOR I HAVE BECOME VENGEANCE AND YOU WILL FEEL THE WRATH"
"YOUR DOOM IS WRITTEN IN THE STARS...."
"THE DREADED NAME HAS BEEN REVEALED...YOUR DOOM IS NEAR..."
DM in meltdown mode, February 2003
.
|
|
|
| User: "Howard Goldstein" |
|
| Title: Re: wikipedia is biased |
12 Dec 2004 06:49:26 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:36:18 GMT, Wally Anglesea™ <"<wanglese"@spammersbigpondareparasites.net.au> wrote:
: On 12 Dec 2004 09:50:14 -0800, wrote:
:
: >wikipedia is biased,and is runned by a pornographer.the site claims
: >anyone may edit its pages but the site is a biased source of
: >info.please see the sites below.
: >
: >See www.WikipediaSucks.com
: >See http://www.247news.net/2004/20041211-wikipedia.shtml
:
:
: AWWW, poor Pennis. You got ***** whupped from Wiki, huh?
Maybe it doesn't like competition? Compare whois 247sex.net
wikipediasucks.com.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
