The Shadow Broker

A character from the Mass Effect video game series.^[

Matt Suiche quoted the following description of that character: "The Shadow Broker is an individual at the head of an expansive organization which trades in information, always selling to the highest bidder. The Shadow Broker appears to be highly competent at its trade: all secrets that are bought and sold never allow one customer of the Broker to gain a significant advantage, forcing the customers to continue trading information to avoid becoming disadvantaged, allowing the Broker to remain in business."^[13]

While the character has no article, the above is from an article about The Shadow Brokers

Build you own meat comics

 http://www.monkeydyne.com/rmcs/buildmeat.html

Based on the Red Meat comics of Max Cannon

Max Cannon is not found on Wikipedia, but you can read about him here

Susan Shannon (blogger who falsely accused Col. David "Wil" Riggins of rape)

 A woman who accused a former Army colonel of raping her when they were both cadets at West Point in 1986 has been ordered to pay him $8.4 million. A jury in Virginia sided with Col. David "Wil" Riggins against blogger Susan Shannon in Riggins' defamation lawsuit, the Washington Post reports. Riggins was about to be promoted to brigadier general in 2013 when Shannon made the accusations on her Short Little Rebel blog. He was removed from the promotion list, despite the Army's Criminal Investigative Division concluding that it could not "prove or disprove Ms. Shannon’s allegation she was raped." Riggins retired soon afterward and sued Shannon, saying her account was "provably false."

https://www.newser.com/story/247147/blogger-who-accused-colonel-of-rape-ordered-to-pay-84m.html

She will never be found on Wikipedia

Go ahead, try it and watch what happens.

Like so many people, or events that are not allowed to have an article, you will not be able to find updates to the case, or any info about Susan, or David Riggins.

Col. David "Wil" Riggins is another person who will never be allowed to have an article.  And yes, it's censorship.  

1969 New York Times article - "the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two..."

 New York Times - Feb 20, 1969

"the Arctic pack ice is thinning and that the ocean at the North Pole may become an open sea within a decade or two..."

"A number of specialists believe that an ice-free Arctic Ocean would not freeze again If so, it has been predicted that storm paths would change and the food-producing areas of the United States and Eurasia might become deserts..."

source

I tried finding a second source for this, and of all things, found the complete article in a textbook.

It's quite interesting for many reasons.

And then I found an actual image of the article here

Will never be found in Wikipedia

Due to the AI revolution, Chat GPT and such, this blog may become redundant

 If it's not found on Wikipedia, using an AI to learn is quick, easy and pretty much everything not found on Wikipedia can be found.  But not everything.

The place that inspired the start of this blog can be found and studied using a CHAT GPT now

You still have to know the name, but the info is there.

I no longer need my own private Wiki, the uncensored AI chabots (like GROK) can explain almost everything.  

Almost

4 teh lulz (for the laughs)

 Unlike some slang, like mudda fukka, 4 teh lulz only has a redirect, to a page that doesn't even mention 4 teh lulz

That would be the LOL page.  While the following definition isn't complete, if you actually don't know about 4 teh lulz it will help

"4 the lulz" means "for the laughs," essentially indicating that someone is doing something just to cause amusement or stir up a reaction, often with a slightly mischievous or playful intention, and is typically used in online contexts where "lulz" is short for "laughs."

Internet Pundit, Internet pundit, internet pundit

 You have come across one, (some would say I am one!), but Wikipedia has nothing

Like so many things found on Wikipedia, we don't actually need an article on this. Because the meaning of the two words is obvious.

A pundit is a person who offers opinion in an authoritative manner on a particular subject area (typically politics, the social sciences, technology or sport), usually through the mass media.

Explaining it could be viewed as condescending.  (condescending, that means talking down to people like they are ignorant). (<-- Bob Newhart joke)

Should Wikipedia have articles on common phrases, or even words that everybody knows?  

Well, like so many things, some are OK, and some are not allowed.  "Soapfish" is an obscure term for a type of fish, but an article on "soapfish" cannot be found.

But "water" has a very long article.

"Daisy flower" has no article, nor does Daisy have a redirect to Bellis perennis, which is actually the article for daisy.  It gets complicated and stupid (of course) at this point.  Because Wikipedia doesn't actually have an editor.  

Originally daisy had an article, and Bellis perennis redirected to daisy

Now the daisy article, which was about the flower (the origin of all other daisy names and such) is a page with a hundred different things on it.

It's wikigroaning level annoying.

Boba Fett, a fictional character has a very very long and detailed article,  Even though most people in the world never heard the name.

While The Subway Vigilante, or Bernhard Goetz, no article.  A billion people know those names.  No article.

If you think that's absurd, then you are probably a sane rational person who doesn't trust Wikipedia already.