Wikipedia Incel article: Difference between revisions

The '''Wikipedia incel article''' on [[Wikipedia|the world's third largest online encyclopedia]] ''should'' cover the topic of [[involuntary celibacy]], i.e. the condition of not being able to get laid, but in its current state, it is, in fact, the highest-profile [[virgin-shaming]] article on the world wide web, beating even Encyclopedia Dramatica's incel article in terms of sensationalism. It is typically the first or second search result on Google when searching 'incel' in Anglo-Saxon countries. The politically [[apex fallacy|biased]] representation of incels, broad-brushing them as terrorists and [[misogyny|misogynists]], lead to the creation of this wiki which aims to provide actual information on inceldom. Wikipedia's incel article used to be more on-topic and accurate, but the tone shifted substantially and useful information and references have been removed since 2010:

The incel article was deleted on 13 August 2015, and then again on 8 October 2015, and then finally on 29 December 2015, at which pointed it was also protected against re-creation. After the [[Toronto van attack]], english Wikipedia admin [[GorillaWarfare]] re-created the article against broad Wikipedia consensus on 24 April 2018 and wrote most of its content from scratch over the course of 5 months as of mid-2018. This was after they couldn't change the 'involuntary celibacy' article enough as the Wikipedia admin's edits on that article were breaking countless wiki rules so it was moved to 'Incel' so they could break less rules. However, the incel page seems to break a rule just from the name of the page alone, specifically, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary#Neologisms. WPNID] which says to avoid neologisms if longer terms can suffice.

[[GorillaWarfare]] owns (not just stewards) the incel Wikipedia page as of mid 2018 against [[wikipedia]] conduct policy, writing most of the article and constantly reverting unorganized registered users on technicalities about sources like the [[Donnelly Study]], but then allowing those sources to be used later as long as it was introduced by editors she liked. Her actions were alerted to Wikipedia's Arbcom team. After the person went to ANI as told to complain about individuals involved, the person was accused of harassment. [https://incels.is/threads/william-gets-accused-of-harassment-for-filing-an-official-complaint-about-gorillawarfares-edits-to-the-incel-wikipedia-article.78215/]. Gorilla had served as a member on Arbcom before, as well as the Wikipedia ANI board, which revealed that the only Wikipedia admins or high-profile editors who hadn't given up on the incel article were explicitly and proudly [[anti-incel]], including former senior designer of the Wikimedia foundation [[Jorm]] and fellow Wikipedia admin [[Gamaliel]] who posted this [[misandry|misandrist]] and activist banner on Gorilla's talk page after the Arbcom submission was rejected for review. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GorillaWarfare&diff=858543044&oldid=858509008 diff]

 

 

The degree to which '[[anti-incel|anti-incels]]' are open about their internal Wikipedia activism, shows an internal bias and perhaps an internal coordination (maybe not involving Gorilla) to keep the article non-NPOV that extends to the very top of Wikipedia, empowering [[anti-incel]] wiki editors to be open about their article bias. Which would be remarkable given the encyclopedia has over 5 million articles. But nonetheless it is a hot-topic now.

The mention of the [[SPLC]] article in the intro tries to make all incel communities seem like moral equivalents to the taliban or the KKK, even communities like [[Incelswithouthate]], [[Incelistan]], [[Braincels]], and [[Love-shy dot com|love-shy.com]]. This is political smearing of incels. The intro also makes it seem like most self-identified incels encourage violence, when this is a vocal minority of users on [[4chan]] related sites. There is a negative feedback loop where authors for incel pieces come to [[wikipedia]] first, get the notion that all communities advocate violence, write another piece, which [[wikipedia]] then cites again as another citation of evidence of incels advocating violence. This is also why anti-incels jumped so hard at the chance to re-write the involutary celibacy article, stuff the entire article with news against [[wikipedia]] policy, then move the page when they couldn't change it enough.

Much of this problem with the page lies in the faulty assumption that "incel" is a subculture rather than a life circumstance. Because if it's a subculture than it can only be defined in it's relation to [[4chan]] culture and the [[PSL]] scene, when it's usage expands beyond [[4chan]] culture and the [[PSL]] scene.

The article stated for all of 2018 that, "Self-identified incels are mostly white", a claim many incels find dubious given [[demographics of inceldom|internal demographic research done by forums has shown their forums are almost or at least half non-white]]. [[demographics of inceldom|As well as a peer reviewed study that concluded that incel forums were highly ethnically heterogenous]]. '''The mods of [[incels.co]] are pretty much all non-white for the record.''' This has since been somewhat corrected.

<references/>

 

*A big shitfest on Wikipedia on whether of not involuntary celibacy is a thing [http://archive.is/CT95w]

*[http://archive.is/06Tro Declined Arbcom case about those involved with the 'incel' page breaking Wikipedia rules]