User:Brainmuncher/Criticisms

Although I strongly admire wikipedia, I object to the following things associated with it:

• Ubiquitous trivia;
• Wrongly advertising Featured Articles as "perfect prose", or "compelling, even brilliant [prose]";
• Journalistic prose, with heavy use of associated devices;
• Wiki-language on talkpages;
• Over-linked text, especially dates;
• Randomly inserted ideas, introduced by, for instance, "A noteworthy example of...";
• Stubs with no more than two sentences — uninformative, pointless additions that survive merely on the promise of more to come;
• Constant vandalism;
• Self-appointed experts who write articles in accordance to their interests (political interests, for instance);
• Irrelevant chatter on talk pages;
• Incorporating pop-culture (TV, computer games, modern books, etc.) with subjects that have nothing to do with it;
• People using userpages to advertise their unimportant blogs;
• That horrible, horrible 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica being the basis of so many articles;
• Sloppy edits made by anonymous "contributors" eager to seize the glory of editing;
• Many prolix articles.