Talk:3 Orangutans 1 Blender - Revision history

Clener74 at 01:23, 19 December 2020

2020-12-19T01:23:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:23, 18 December 2020
Line 10:		Line 10:
	no, the wiki has spiked again because of this, the view count is currently now 45,000 views, we could not delete this, since its may be the third thing that come up on the search results by searching up its name, so people will gonna enter here.		no, the wiki has spiked again because of this, the view count is currently now 45,000 views, we could not delete this, since its may be the third thing that come up on the search results by searching up its name, so people will gonna enter here.

	I see...so you'd be willing to trade principles for views. Well, I'm not the administrator of the wiki, so I suppose it's how it'll have to roll. --[[User:Clener74\|Clener74]] ([[User talk:Clener74\|talk]]) 01:22, 19 December 2020 (UTC)		I see...so you'd be willing to trade principles for views. Well, I'm not the administrator of the wiki, so I suppose it's how it'll have to roll. To be fair, if that's the reasoning, then the false details that got added make sense. --[[User:Clener74\|Clener74]] ([[User talk:Clener74\|talk]]) 01:22, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Clener74 at 01:22, 19 December 2020

2020-12-19T01:22:57Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:22, 18 December 2020
Line 9:		Line 9:

	no, the wiki has spiked again because of this, the view count is currently now 45,000 views, we could not delete this, since its may be the third thing that come up on the search results by searching up its name, so people will gonna enter here.		no, the wiki has spiked again because of this, the view count is currently now 45,000 views, we could not delete this, since its may be the third thing that come up on the search results by searching up its name, so people will gonna enter here.

			I see...so you'd be willing to trade principles for views. Well, I'm not the administrator of the wiki, so I suppose it's how it'll have to roll. --[[User:Clener74\|Clener74]] ([[User talk:Clener74\|talk]]) 01:22, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

119.95.162.153 at 01:07, 19 December 2020

2020-12-19T01:07:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:07, 18 December 2020
Line 7:		Line 7:

	Since this article is no longer fulfilling its purpose of describing a potential shock video due to the abundance of unsourced information, I'm asking if it is eligible for deletion. --[[User:Clener74\|Clener74]] ([[User talk:Clener74\|talk]]) 00:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)		Since this article is no longer fulfilling its purpose of describing a potential shock video due to the abundance of unsourced information, I'm asking if it is eligible for deletion. --[[User:Clener74\|Clener74]] ([[User talk:Clener74\|talk]]) 00:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

			no, the wiki has spiked again because of this, the view count is currently now 45,000 views, we could not delete this, since its may be the third thing that come up on the search results by searching up its name, so people will gonna enter here.

Clener74 at 00:06, 19 December 2020

2020-12-19T00:06:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:06, 18 December 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
			== This article has been led astray. ==
	When I edited almost the entirety of the article - 14:31, 22 February 2020 (revision is lost, not surprising given how many times it's been edited) - I did so because I had found a source of information that was at least moderately credible for a shock video. However, since then, the page has been edited so many times with details that were 'not' in the comment I had taken the information from; changes that only god knows where they came from. I wouldn't be surprised if they were all made up.		When I edited almost the entirety of the article - 14:31, 22 February 2020 (revision is lost, not surprising given how many times it's been edited) - I did so because I had found a source of information that was at least moderately credible for a shock video. However, since then, the page has been edited so many times with details that were 'not' in the comment I had taken the information from; changes that only god knows where they came from. I wouldn't be surprised if they were all made up.

Clener74: Is this page worth keeping anymore?

2020-12-19T00:04:10Z

Is this page worth keeping anymore?

New page

When I edited almost the entirety of the article - 14:31, 22 February 2020 (revision is lost, not surprising given how many times it's been edited) - I did so because I had found a source of information that was at least moderately credible for a shock video. However, since then, the page has been edited so many times with details that were 'not' in the comment I had taken the information from; changes that only god knows where they came from. I wouldn't be surprised if they were all made up.

My point is, not only has this video been a potential hoax from the very beginning, but it went from a serious article on something that may or may not exist, to something that looks like it came straight out of Creepypasta Wiki. In other words, a hoax that was in turn fed with even more false details, turning into what it is now; a creepypasta with mangled grammar and structure.

To name an example, the body of the article has quotation marks as though these were literally Martinez' words, when I know that it's actually my own summarization of the comment, as the comment itself is a huge wall of text that would be a disservice to copy and paste onto the article unedited. Though that's a very small thing compared to all the extra details I noticed in these newer edits; these really make the video sound like the fiction it may actually be.

Since this article is no longer fulfilling its purpose of describing a potential shock video due to the abundance of unsourced information, I'm asking if it is eligible for deletion. --[[User:Clener74|Clener74]] ([[User talk:Clener74|talk]]) 00:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)