Encyclopædia Dramatica

From RationalWiki

Encyclopædia Dramatica (ED in internet shorthand) is a wiki project that documents internet culture, memes and "drama"^[1] for the lulz.

Although it has its moments of comedy, it's hardly as addictive as TV Tropes,^[2] and the "jokes" become a little bit repetitive. Despite its main source of humour lying in its being astoundingly retarded ("on purpose"; not even people who make that claim take it seriously), it actually has its infrequent, but enjoyable, nuggets of wit here and there. It's not Jane Austen and it's not Monty Python. If you've gone there expecting either, you deserve the drop in IQ.

Contents 1 Yes, but is it art? 2 Userbase 3 See instead 4 External links 5 Footnotes

[edit] Yes, but is it art?

In short, ED documents everything that is wrong with the internet, although it does this in a style that is certainly one of those things that is wrong with the internet, and proud of it. As such, it can prove quite useful in documenting memes, events on the internet and giving frank reviews (read; "scathingly horrible hatchet jobs") of popular websites. Its article on the heavy metal site metal-archives.com is more informative, accurate, and useful than the Wikipedia article, and its extensive section on DeviantART is a must for anyone who ever wonders what the fark happens at that site.

Where ED fails is mostly due to its own obsessions with goatse, "over 9000", furries, and most of all, itself. This is hardly surprising given its close association with 4Chan and anonymous.^[3] If you find that RationalWiki's funspace just isn't lowbrow enough, ED will certainly satisfy your needs, or break you in half and make you regret ever going there. There is however, something to be said for its terse and sometimes vitriolic handling of even the most mundane subjects.^{More detail.}

[edit] Userbase

It attracts an odd mix of mediocre-to-horrible writing talent and mean-spirited, controversialist tools, and consequently its editorial style lurches queasily from utter garbage to frankly bilious spite. Crap like Project Chanology, however, shows what can happen when it tries to direct its attention to genuinely deserving recipients. It loads slowly, isn't very well written and mostly has ads for pornography and sex toys^[4] that includes pop ups; not worth the trip. Oh well.

Additionally, it has articles on Conservapedia and Andrew_Schlafly himself (warning: Not Safe For Work). But nothing on RationalWiki… although, typing "RationalWiki" in the search box will redirect you to "TL;DR".

[edit] See instead

• This well written article!

[edit] External links

• Ah, who cares? Really?

[edit] Footnotes

1. ↑ For drama, read the epic hubris of most internet arguments and flame wars, or simply folks making tits of themselves on the innertubes. For the latter, see any web discussion group with people gloating over the Patriots losing Super Bowl XLII (but not for very long because your IQ will drop rapidly).
2. ↑ Tab explosion
3. ↑ ED's article on 4Chan is quite favourable and possibly the only article that isn't so full of meme-fueled hatred that it's completely unreadable.
4. ↑ The left side bar is especially impressive, although they haven't yet stooped so low as to have a link to child porn disguised as the search box… yet.

Welcome to the Wikisphere. Please proceed with caution:
	-  A Storehouse of Knowledge  -  Christopedia  -  Citizendium  -  Conservapedia  -  CreationWiki  -  EvoWiki  -  Left Behind Wiki  -  Liberapedia  -  Metapedia  -  New World Encyclopedia  -  Palaeos  -  RationalWiki  -  RationalWikiWiki  -  RationalWikiWikiWiki  -  TinWiki  -  Uncyclopedia  -  Wiki  -  Wiki4CAM  -  wikiFactor  -  WikiSynergy  -  Wikipedia  -