/gamergatehq/ - #GamerGate Headquarters

You must be new. The "Gamergate controversy" page (even the name itself a tool to prevent a clear description of what GG is to readers) has been owned by partisan anti-GG faggots since roughly October of 2014. The reason it is still the same piece of shit it's been for over a year and the reason you may have some difficulty doing anything about it is because of blatant favoritism and outright corruption on the part of the admins trolling around the topic area. Also you know we already have a Wikipedia thread.

>>318462

Let me rephrase what >>318474 said in a slightly less caustic tone:

If we could edit the "GamerGate Contiversy" page without getting our edits reverted, unstabanned, and all records of he edits being memoryholed by Wikipedia Administrators who have blatant Conflict of Interest issues with the entry, we would.

The problem with the "GamerGate controversy" entry is representative of the systemic problems of Wikipedia itself with cliquishness, collusion, corruption, and lack of transparency, running roughshod over Wikipedia's own stated mission and goals.

Engaging SJWs on mediums they control, for the most part, is a waste of effort, as the best you can do it "Play to the Audience" to appeal to fairness, as you will never, ever, convince a feminist that their weird vagina-cult is wrong

They CAN be turned when they are inevitably attacked by other SJWs for lack of ideological purity to the cunt-cult, but that's a personal journey that can't be forced by cunt-cult outsiders like us.

>>318462

A few months back someone made a Gamergate controversy controversy page.

Which covered the controversy surrounding the wikipedia article in OPs post.

That page was swifly deleted even though it met wikipedias standards for sourcing etc.

Afterwards I was thinking it might have been a good idea to make a gamergate controversy controversy controversy page to discuss the deletion of the gamergate controversy controversy page.

We could have kept that going forever

We've tried everything to remove the bias from the article, but at this point, it's become obvious that it's a lost cause.

When the article was first created, Wiki's SJW crew flagged it for deletion a few times. After it became clear that that wouldn't work, they claimed a stranglehold on the article and immediately reverted any edit that may be construed as slightly neutral or pro-GG. They use bans to make sure that their POV remains absolutely dominant.