108

Somebody was salty on the F-35 Wikipedia page. (hexbear.net)

submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by InevitableSwing@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Talk page

All-weather?

Aren't most planes weatherproof? As a layman, the inclusion of "all-weather" in the lede is puzzling, especially as there's no other mention of "weather" in the article and no link for context. I gather from a search of the Talk archives that the plane has been accused of being vulnerable to lightning (ironic or what?), and this could be in response to that accusation? AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 09:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] quarrk@hexbear.net 24 points 6 months ago

lol. I only recently discovered Wikipedia talk pages. They can be a good source of entertainment.

[-] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 19 points 6 months ago

The Stanley Kubrick infobox drama is classic.

Stanley Kubrick Gets His Infobox : wikipedia

Nov 17, 2021

Noticed this too the other day haha. I was so surprised how the editors came into agreement last month, especially since I discovered the whole infobox fiasco no more than two months ago. Surprised tf out of me how much crazy drama Wikipedia editors have over the simplest things.

Also checked out the page’s edit history and found out that the infobox was removed on August 16, 2015. The fact it really took them more than 6 years worth of internet arguments and debates to add back a bio summary box sounds insane lmao

Getting too deep into this topic will drive you to madness. Glad it's finally resolved. The whole debacle was foolish and self-inflicted.

His talk page is 15 pages. The drama went on an on and on.