Get your Groan On

I’ll admit, I am known to browse pretty carelessly through Wikipedia from time to time. I even use it in my work; when trying to define a concept or add context, I’ll do research via Wikipedia.
It’s an ever-flopping internet goldmine of facts, definitions and information and it’s simple and much more precise than typing it up through Google. You could even make the argument that because Wikipedia is constantly monitored by teams of dedicated geeks, it’s likely more accurate than most of the first page results Google will cough up. In this age of academic restrictions, which often forbade listing Wikipedia pages as sources, you can always just click through the list of sources that are typically listed at the bottom. I’d to say that Wikipedia is the Quiznos of the Internet: by no means is it “fast food” cheap, but it’s not exactly a high end bistro either.

I try to turn to old-fashioned books to do my proper research, but it’s just so hard when all your needs are at your fingertips, when the precise required chapter can be found within several clicks and a minute of skimming.

Still, Wikipedia really isn’t an end all to research, and will never find widespread recognition from the intellectual community: the information offered, some encyclopedia experts argue, is too one-sided and is far too heavy in fan-based material. Basically, that which is more historically relevant is outweighed by that which is popular. There’s no greater fact behind this belief than the acknowledged “Art of Wikigroaning”

If you’ve never heard of this before, I highly suggest clicking my hypertext. Wikigroaning, essentially, occurs when you pair together two Wikipedia pages side-by-side: one page containing hard-line, real world, educational material, the other matted with useless nerd trivia.

The catch to Wikigroaning is that two pages must be linked either verbally or topically, and the geek fandom page has(b) is to be the longer of the two. You might be surprised just how one-sided some of these topics are, here are some examples I’ve conjured on my own:

Rock band
to
Rock Band (video game)

Animation
to
Anime

Andrew Jackson
to
Ron Paul

Taylor’s theorem
to
Sean Taylor (American football)

Sailor
to
Sailor Moon

Doctor of Medicine
to
Doogie Howser, M.D.

Newspaper
to
Blog

Nightmare
to
A Nightmare on Elm Street

Carl Bernstein
to
Hunter S. Thompson

Fun, huh? I could probably do this for hours. If you’re looking for a special challenge, try grouping together Wikigroans: multiple important topics, all of which are smaller than the useless trivia page. Ch-ch-check it:

Ball
Sphere
to
Dragon Ball Z

Equation
Equilibrium
to
Equilibrium (film)

Thomas Paine
Painting
to
Paintball

Ideology
Aristocracy
Communism
Conservatism
to
Libertarianism
to
Libertarian Party (United States)


Video of the Day:
BAND: Animal Collective
SONG: Peacebone
RATING: B

This is a pretty good music video. It’s stylized, offbeat, and flaunts its high quality production, even in an era where music videos have taken a back seat to shitty reality television. The song flows along nicely with the video; we are given what we want when we want it, and I’m proud to say it delivers. This is a good video. But I’d hope that a band as offbeat as Animal Collective would be able to drum up something completely different.

I want music videos that are just completely different. It’s not impossible to do, really. The general concept of weird isn’t that hard to capture; I suppose I’d just like to see something completely different. No, it’s not easy to pull off, but I felt like this video wasn’t even trying to make that gap. Gnarly alien beings and speed-blur lights just don’t do it for me anymore.