TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Wikipedia-Kyohyi Archive

View 1 posts and 18 comments by Wikipedia-Kyohyi on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
23

DiscussionWikipedia-Kyohyi/r/MensRights29/08/14 02:17 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Alright, your first position is that women are naturally oppressed in our society, do you think that position is mutually exclusive from a position that men are naturally oppressed in our society? You assert that women are more frequently raped. I would say that the position on this sub is that this assertion is false. That the statistics regarding male rape are not thoroughly investigated, and they use methodologies that would hide the prevalence of rapes of men. I believe your statement "and a…
/r/MensRights11/01/17 07:20 PM
5

Not a typical MensRights poster, but I think it's a fair observation that you have not provided any justification for your views. As such, it is pointless to attempt to change it. In essence, if you want someone to engage with you on good faith provide your own reasoning as to why you believe what you believe.
/r/MensRights11/01/17 05:41 PM
27

The article says nothing about Self-professed MRA's. Only the last paragraph mentions "Men's Rights Activists", and that's just the authors unsupported rhetoric.
/r/MensRights22/09/14 07:55 PM
6

The unfortunate reality, is that some people don't care what is factual, or they think that what you posit as factual is not factual. And most people don't have the time/energy/interest to dig through the mud and crap to figure out who's in the wrong.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 04:44 PM
2

High conflict areas are areas that have people with strong and very differing opinions. Invariably people have strong disagreements with what is right and what is wrong.
/r/MensRights10/09/14 01:42 PM
4

I'm unfortunately going to going offline soon, so I don't have time to really dig into this. But if it's generic vandalism it's usually just better to revert and ignore. If it's repeated vandalism it's revert and report to admins. However you have to be careful that it is actually vandalism, and not just someone who disagrees. If you've got good sourcing, are written neutrally, and they are still causing problems then they are doing disruptive editing. One thing to note about the Men's rights sa…
/r/MensRights29/08/14 09:28 PM
2

I can't really say much that would help. Circumcision is under Wiki Project Medicine, and they've created a stricter content guideline called WP: MEDRS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine) Wiki project Medicine is a fairly well respected project at Wikipedia, so you'd have to convince them of the point you're trying to make. I don't have much experience interacting with that wiki project, but I think it would be fairly hard to change their mind on some…
/r/MensRights29/08/14 09:07 PM
2

Criticism sections are usually (though not always) frowned upon. In this case I believe that section is in the lead of the article. Content in the lead should reflect and paraphrase major points in the article. In this case a reading of the body should reflect "by whom". I do know that the particular sentence highlighted has been changed numerous times, and I don't think it's considered a "good" sentence. Sorry, I can't really come up with a good answer.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 09:01 PM
4

If you're suggesting that Wikipedia isn't a scholarly work, and that you can find Gaping flaws in the content throughout the encyclopedia then you're right. I don't follow literature on Wikipedia, so I can't say if sources used are found in academia. However I have to ask, do you know of anyone who has tried to add what's used in Academia to that article?
/r/MensRights29/08/14 08:39 PM
2

Well, my first bit of advice is to first edit outside of high-conflict areas. The reason being is to get used to the Wikipedia process. Then if you do start editing in a high-conflict area, expect that no matter how good your intentions are somebody is going to assume you're part of the other side. Particularly when you first start editing there. Then make sure that you're edits comply with the content policies on Wikipedia. Note: The more conflict there is on an article the more likely you're e…
/r/MensRights29/08/14 08:31 PM
4

I'm sure there are articles that don't have much by the way of academic sources. The bias is more about when sources come in conflict with what is used in academia. Wikipedia will generally (I'm sure you can find an exception) err on the side of what is used in academia.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 08:09 PM
3

I don't think it's fine that rules are not enforced evenly. However one person's even, is another person's uneven. Particularly if both parties feel that they have been wronged.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 07:54 PM
2

English Wiki has a US-centric bias to it. I'm fairly certain the other language Wikipedia's treat it differently.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 07:33 PM
11

Y'know I'm going to respond to this the same way I respond to this on Wikipedia. Putting people into groups into which they don't identify says more about you than it does about them. And in this case it says "I'm going to see you as an enemy no matter what you do or what you say. I've closed my eyes, my ears, and my mind."
/r/MensRights29/08/14 07:23 PM
3

Not exactly, I'm going try to answer this comment and the one by JohnKimble111 at the same time. Circumcision is considered a medical procedure. As such, whether it is good or bad is determined by the medical community. If the general position within the medical community is that circumcision should not be called Male Genital Mutilation, then Wikipedia will not call it Male Genital Mutilation.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 07:14 PM
9

Who is this You, you are referring to? I do not, nor have I ever, claimed to be a feminist. Well, one, men can be feminists, or at the very least pro-feminist. As such we could have a group which is feminist or pro-feminist which in turn is a "boys club". And two, NPOV means that Wikipedia records what is said in "reliable sources" (and wether a source is reliable is discussed on wikipedia, and I can provide a link to the guideline if you like) with a level of dispassion. If "reliable sources" h…
/r/MensRights29/08/14 04:40 PM
16

Wikipedia has an academic bias, and a consensus bias. Any other bias'es stem from that (is bias'es even a word?). I do accept that rules are not always followed, however a tit for tat approach will not help. It only further's the battleground behavior which created the men's rights probationary sanctions in the first place.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 03:12 PM
-3

I'd say that's a pretty good shorthand paraphrase.
/r/MensRights29/08/14 02:51 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter