Wiki

An absolute polish "wiked" legand... Wiki washaleskivdndndsiwnssks. A man who's intelligence is better than all of the huxlow world
"An abbreviation of Wiked used in reference to a polish teen"

Guy (Evan) Yo that kids so cool his so wiked what a will
Wiki (Guy in reference) I know I am!!!

by Mannock May 12, 2024

project sekai wiki

Otherwise known as “Thee Weekee” the project sekai wiki is a group of people, known as Wikians, who make posts daily and talk a whole lot. They are fans of the mobile rhythm game Hatsune Miku: COLORFUL STAGE/otherwise written as Project SEKAI: COLORFUL STAGE

Person 1: What’s your favorite rhythm game?
Person 2: Project SEKAI!
Person 1: Oh, is that the one with the Project sekai wiki?
Person 2: Huhehe…

Person 1: I knew those Wikians were crazy.

by A localized breakfast item March 6, 2024

Wiki Bias

A subset of Encyclopedia Bias specific to wiki-style platforms, exacerbated by their open but anarchic structure. Bias emerges from administrator fiat, the tyranny of persistent editors with too much time, and sourcing rules that favor established publications (which have their own biases). The result is an illusion of crowd-sourced neutrality that actually codifies the prejudices and blind spots of a specific, digitally-enabled managerial class.

Example: A wiki page for a recent scientific controversy locks as "settled" the viewpoint supported by major institutional press releases. Dissenting studies from reputable but less famous journals are removed for "lack of reliable sources," enacting Wiki Bias. The open platform becomes a tool for enforcing a specific orthodoxy under the banner of procedural rigor.

by Dumu The Void February 4, 2026

Biases of Wiki

The systematic editorial skews inherent to Wikipedia and similar wikis, stemming not from malicious intent but from the inherent characteristics of its volunteer base and collaborative process. Key biases include: systemic bias (over-representation of topics popular among young, tech-savvy, English-speaking Western males), citation bias (over-reliance on sources that are digital and in English), conflict-of-interest bias (covert editing by PR firms and political operatives), and consensus bias (controversial truths that challenge established narratives are often edited out in favor of bland, "settled" accounts that won't provoke edit wars). Wikipedia's biases are the map of the world, drawn by a specific, non-representative cartographers' guild.

Example: The Wikipedia article for a major video game franchise is detailed, meticulously sourced, and updated hourly. The article for a crucial Indigenous agricultural technique, equally significant to human culture, is a stub or non-existent. This reflects the Biases of Wiki: the contributor base writes passionately about its hobbies, while crucial indigenous knowledge languishes due to a lack of editors from that community.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Metabiases of Wiki

The biases about Wikipedia's biases. This includes the bias blind spot of the Wikipedia community itself—the belief that the NPOV (Neutral Point of View) policy inherently corrects for all skew, or that because anyone can edit, the result must be balanced. Another key metabias is the authority inversion bias, where critics dismiss Wikipedia entirely due to its biases, failing to see it as the unparalleled starting point for knowledge it is, while acolytes treat it as an infallible oracle, missing its curated nature.

Metabiases of Wiki Example: A Wikipedia administrator swiftly bans an editor for citing "unreliable" alternative media, believing the NPOV policy guarantees neutrality. They are blind to their own Metabias of Wiki: the policy's reliance on "reliable sources" often enshrines mainstream media bias as "neutrality," and their actions protect that systemic skew while believing they are merely enforcing quality.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Metacognitive Biases of Wiki

Flaws in Wikipedia editors' and readers' self-awareness about their own knowledge and judgment while using the platform. These biases distort how contributors assess their expertise, gauge the reliability of their edits, and monitor their comprehension of policies. Key examples include the Wikipedia Illusion of Explanatory Depth (believing you understand a topic fully after editing its article, when you've only mastered its presentation), and Procedural Overconfidence (thinking that strictly following citation and NPOV rules guarantees you've produced a "true" article, mistaking process-compliance for substantive understanding). These biases turn the wiki-editing experience into a metacognitive trap, where the act of curation is mistaken for mastery.

Metacognitive Biases of Wiki Example: A Wikipedia editor spends weeks polishing the article on "Quantum Entanglement," meticulously sourcing every claim. They develop a strong Metacognitive Bias of Wiki: the "feeling of knowing." They now believe they deeply understand quantum physics, confusing their hard-won skill in encyclopedic summarization with actual expertise in theoretical physics, and may start arguing authoritatively on physics forums, leading to embarrassing corrections.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026

Cognitive Metabiases of Wiki

Biases in how the Wikipedia community collectively thinks about the cognitive biases present in the wiki system. These are flawed assumptions or beliefs regarding the nature and remediation of bias on the platform. A prime example is the Bias Neutralization Fallacy: the belief that the collective, consensus-driven editing process inherently cancels out individual cognitive biases, akin to a "wisdom of the crowd" effect for truth. This metabias ignores how systemic biases (like contributor demographics) can be reinforced, not mitigated, by group consensus. Another is the Source Fetishism Metabias, where the community believes that any statement backed by a "reliable source" is therefore free from cognitive bias, ignoring the biases embedded within the media and academic publishing industries themselves.

Cognitive Metabiases of Wiki Example: When faced with criticism that Wikipedia's coverage of feminist theory is skewed, a longtime administrator responds, "Our NPOV policy and reliance on peer-reviewed journals correct for any individual editor's bias." This reflects a Cognitive Metabias of Wiki. They assume the process (policy + academic sourcing) is a perfect antidote to bias, failing to see that the pool of academic sources itself may have a systemic bias, and that the consensus of a homogenous editor pool can amplify, not correct, that skew.

by Abzugal Nammugal Enkigal February 4, 2026