This page lists Wikipedia pages by the total amount of text in all of their talk page archives put together. It is the best measure there is for determining how much squabbling has gone on behind the scenes for a given page.
Here is a ranking of all 63 of the listed pages that are actual articles (as opposed to policy/administrative/user pages), in descending order:
- Donald Trump
- Intelligent design
- Climate change
- Barack Obama
- United States
- Jesus
- Race and intelligence
- Catholic Church
- Circumcision
- Homeopathy
- Muhammad
- Gamergate (harassment campaign)
- Chiropractic
- Abortion
- Monty Hall problem
- Gaza War (2008-2009)
- Evolution
- Prem Rawat
- Sarah Palin
- India
- Israel
- World War II
- Christ myth theory
- Mass killings under communist regimes
- Jehovah's Witnesses
- September 11 attacks
- Cold fusion
- Climatic Research Unit email controversy
- Armenian genocide
- Anarchism
- Atheism
- Falun Gong
- Neuro-linguistic programming
- Jerusalem
- Control of cities during the Syrian civil war
- Kosovo
- British Isles
- Transcendental Meditation
- United Kingdom
- George W. Bush
- Christianity
- COVID-19 pandemic
- Libertarianism
- Acupuncture
- Thomas Jefferson
- International recognition of Kosovo
- Israel and apartheid
- Adolf Hitler
- United States and state terrorism
- Syrian civil war
- List of best-selling music artists
- Julian Assange
- Russo-Georgian War
- Historicity of Jesus
- Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
- Tea Party movement
- List of common misconceptions
- Murder of Meredith Kercher
- Genesis creation narrative
- Taiwan
- Hillary Clinton
- Electronic cigarette
- Michael Jackson
Bubbling under (present in earlier versions; I have gone back to 2015 so far here, though the page history goes back to 2010):
- 0.999...
- European Union
- Chronic fatigue syndrome
- Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections
- Shakespeare authorship question
- Fascism
- Astrology
- The Holocaust
- Joseph Smith
- Chelsea Manning
- List of scientists who disagree with the scientific consensus on global warming [NOTE: now deleted]
- Gibraltar
- Ayn Rand
- Fox News
- Shooting of Trayvon Martin
- Human
- Canada
- Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
- Race (human categorization)
- Iraq War
- Elvis Presley
- Islam
- Philosophy
- Terri Schiavo case
- Black people
- White people
- Palestinians
- Mitt Romney
- HIV
- Occupy Wall Street
- Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy
- Elizabeth II
- Asperger syndrome
- Centrifugal force
- Transnistria
Monty Hall problem
Really not sure where there can be any controversy.
Israel
How could a page about a math problem end up more controversial there than a page on Pissrael?
0.999...
This is hilarious. How is this in any way controversial? Every person who diligently studies calculus for just a few weeks understands that 0.999... = 1, and why.
I haven't actually read any of the talk pages but I'm reckoning that the Monty Hall problem and 0.999... is just people going
You don't even need calculus, you need fractions. 1/3 = .333..., 2/3 = 0.666..., then 3/3 = 0.999...
You need to prove that 0.333... is, indeed, 1/3 (and also that 0.999... = 0.333...*3) for that. Without being familiar with any sort of construction of real numbers, i.e. without understanding what real numbers are, you are just going to be doing a lot of hand-waving.
But yes, if one already accepts that 0.333... = 1/3, then that proof works. However, if one understands the reasons why 0.333... = 1/3, there are easier ways to prove that 0.999... = 1. Or, rather, why 0.999... = 1 is obvious to such people.And sure, one might be familiar with any of those constructions without studying calculus, but if one does study calculus, they are going to study what real numbers are.
Also, fun fact for the onlookers: every repeating decimal represents a rational number, and every rational number can be represented by up to two repeating decimals (counting terminating decimals as repeating here). This can be generalised to natural bases other than 10, as well. Furthermore, if you have a repeating decimal that represents some rational number x, such that -1 <= x <= 1, then x = p/10n+x/10n, where p is some integer and n is a natural number, from where it follows that x = p/(10n-1).
Some examples:
-0.999... = 9/10+0.999.../10 => 0.999... = 9/(10-1) = 9/9 = 1
-0.123123123... = 123/103+123123123.../103 => 0.123123123... = 123/(103-1) = 123/999More generally, when working with other natural bases, we have (x = p/bn+x/bn) => (x = p/(bn-1)), where b is the base. As such, 0.111... (base 2) = 1/10+0.111.../10 (base 2) => 0.111... (base 2) = 1/(10-1) (base 2) = 1/1 = 1.
Yeah 1/3 being periodic is just an artifact of using base 10, because 10 isn’t evenly divisible by 3. If you use say base 60 as the Babylonian did then the artifact vanishes.
Not sure about calling it an 'artifact'. Repeating digital representations of numbers are still a thing in every relevant base.
Yes repeating happens in every base because every base has integers not evenly divisible by its base. Whether a fraction repeats is a particularity of which base is chosen to represent it.
race and intelligence being 7th most controversial Wikipedia article is crazy
Weekly reminder that Wikipedia was created by a bunch of libertarians and that outlook is 100% present in their power user community.
Mass killings under communist regimes
Is there one for capitalism?
Centrifugal force
"Fucking gravity"
Is there one for capitalism?
Nope because capitalism just happens lol. It's never consciously implemented heheh. It's just human nature hahaha. stop asking questions lmfao. nobody's ever been killed for profit muahahaha
- Transnistria
This is that tiny country that is self governing and their president takes the average salary and drives around in a 40 year old rust bucket right?
Transnistria
Ah yes, the, as western liberals call it,
Russian-occupied territory in Moldova
Yes, and recently the country was removed from Google Maps and now it appears as Moldavian territory (cope mechanism)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Monty_Hall_problem/Arguments
I don't have any meaningful commentary on this other than "lol"
I just learned about this problem now. Took me a minute, but it makes sense when I think about my logic in certain card games where you're making decisions based on new cards being entered into play.
I would switch but I also feel in my bones with 100% certainty that if I ever got on a game show I would do all the correct things and lose anyway just through bad luck.
JFC, I remember having online arguments with people over this twenty years ago lmao
I'm not even exaggerating, it's been twenty years and people are still going on about this fucking thing
the funniest thing I've read is that if you present the monty hall problem to pigeons they get it immediately and switch every time because they literally dgaf and just want the food reward
I read one attempt at the refutation of the widely-known solution, and it's quite hilarious.
yeah I was wondering about that too. she probably has someone hired to scrub her record clean. I can't think of any other reason why she would still be that relevant in this metric.
The most confusing one to me is the best-selling music artists. It’s just an amalgamation of record sale data, not sure where the controversy would be coming from.
I actually had a conversation about this on another forum just the other day and it was surprisingly difficult to find a clear answer. Like every single source people looked up said something different, kinda strange really.
wikipedia mods who police their favorite articles will literally just archive the talk page if the conversation isn't going their way. it's amazing how some articles you can get away with shit talk for years but other articles it gets scrubbed day 1. Some articles you'll get banned for vandalism on the fucking talk page and they'll invoke the "wikipedia is not a forum" nerd rule, while other articles you'll see completely forum-tier discussion going on for years and years in the talk page, dating back to like 2004.
On the F-35 talk page I complained about what was missing. It's my custom to complain on the talk page. If stuff gets fixed - great. If not - oh, well. I don't want to argue or get into an edit war. It works well for me. But that talk page was different. Within about an hour my comment was - I don't remember the term - "refractored" or something. They hid it.
curious, so there is a sizable amount of editors arguing in favor of Homeopathy?
Some of these have to just be because the defenders are rabid, even if there's not a lot of them.
Most people who have it know why, and it has to do with the large swathes of chuds (and libs too) who insist it isn't real, just in your head, an excuse to be lazy, etc. etc. Almost any chronic illness that is hard to diagnose and can't be pinned with complete unambiguous medical certainty to a single clear cause gets that sort of treatment. There are still so many people who don't even believe Lyme disease is real.
Yeah, and it isn't a problem that there are so many people who don't believe Lyme disease is real, because it isn't.
Neither is long Covid. Just a big hoax by lazy whingers. 🙄
Stop trying to hook the chronic lyme scam bandwagon to other stuff. Your posts are very much "one of these things is not like the other".
Um... stop accusing me of weird bullshit while denying reality and calling a medical reality and the experience of countless disabled people pseudoscience?
Anyway, ashiniadash, here you can see why that topic is high on the list of controversial wikipedia pages. Libs gonna lib ig.
The medical reality is the symptoms people experience. The complete bullshit is telling people this is due to mystical nonexistent spirochetes in their blood that can only be treated with a long course of IV antibiotics. This has absolutely fucking nothing to do with liberalism, jfc.
telling people this is due to mystical nonexistent spirochetes in their blood that can only be treated with a long course of IV antibiotics.
Right, that's exactly what I said. Just like I said Long Covid is actually the result of vaccines. Seriously, you're telling me "my posts" (btw, what are you even referring to? Do we have a history or something?) are this thing you've made up in your head about me because I am pointing out the FACT that a condition exists despite many misled denialists. Chronic Lyme is as real as long covid is even though we don't know what the underlying cause of it is.
The medical reality is the symptoms people experience
No shit! Which is because Lyme Disease is real! Fucking hell, what is your problem?
Calling it chronic lyme links it to a mechanical explanation that is totally nonsensical. Just call it chronic fatigue syndrome then, or fibro. You can't play games here, you know what calling it chronic lyme means. There isn't even a coherent agreed-upon set of symptoms.
No, because that denies that it is linked to the initial Lyme infection somehow and may well have a completely different cause than the more general chronic fatigue or fibromyalgia. Again, that would be like telling people just to call long covid "chronic fatigue."
Those other conditions can be triggered by infections so I don't see what the issue is given the enormous amount of bullshit baggage brought in by calling it chronic lyme.
I had already typed up a response to this when I noticed you went back and edited your previous comment to add shit about me "playing games." So nevermind, not worth it. I'm tired of this obnoxious thing where you make these personal accusations like how I'm "playing games" and about "my posts" (while repeatedly editing your own!) when you don't even know what you're talking about wrt to me or the topic. It's not worth trying to engage with someone who pulls that comment editing shit and attacks me personally for things they made up whole cloth. I'm not playing games here and anyone reading this who wants to learn more about the reality of Lyme and the very real long term problems it causes in many patients diagnosed with it, as well as the hype around unsupported explanations for them that are almost certainly garbage (which I never denied) are welcome to do so without me having to defend myself against your weird toxicity.
All my comments were edited seconds after posting them when I noticed things I wanted to change. imo it's toxic to ascribe doubt of pseudoscientific bullshit to liberalism. As though our scientific view of society isn't what puts us above liberal magical thought about how the market solves everything. I almost certainly know more about lyme than you do.
Acute Lyme disease is 100% unarguably real, the issue is chronic Lyme disease which is based on pseudoscience. The people are most likely suffering from some other idiopathic disease and are being taken advantage of for profit
