The original essay can be found here.
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
55 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
874 readers
507 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Correct me if I'm wrong, Prolewiki DOES require you to cite sources right? Also, bold of wikipedia to talk about "reliable sources".
Yes but some of those sources are Chinese so they don't count /s
Anyway they do but it isn't super uncommon for their source links to be dead which has been very frustrating for me
I feel like part of Prolewiki's dilapidation is iirc the forum to become an admin is pretty extensive. So there's a shortage of editors on there. So pages get left unedited for months or years and source links die off.
I wanted to make some minor edit months ago and got a page telling me to write half a bachelors degree thesis worth in Marxist questions. Noped out pretty quick, since I only wanted to edit like 2 lines. It feels much more involved than Hexbears "Are you a chud on any of these 4 topics?" that it feels okay to give oneliner responses to.
I'm sorry but that is ludicrous shit, I sadly shall never be a PW editor.
I think, on top of what others have commented, they also had to defend themselves from a bunch of ACP infiltrators at one point as well. So there's also need to screen out bad faith actors who are more familiar with leftist language.
Prolewiki has had wreckers infiltrate and mess a ton of stuff up.
I do get that, but the wiki has run into a problem of having pages that haven't been updated in years. Maybe if the application was loosened up a bit and you would just need to get your edits screened before posting for awhile after you join could make it a bit more active.
It's a balance, as I understand.
I think you don't have to perfectly answer all the questions, they will take you on board as a sort of learning editor even if you don't have a perfect understanding of theory. (Source: am library editor)
Also you can edit a page without an account.
ⓘ This user is suspected of being a cat. Please report any suspicious behavior.
I’m guessing the “sometimes, any source at all” is only a conservapedia problem and he’s just conflating the two.