Replying to nobody

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animals_aboard_the_Titanic

i simply do not trust this article in its entirety

i am engaging with it like it is a pleasant fiction math problem and writing prompt

if i do not trust this article that means what

i dont trust wikipedia, i dont trust the editors of wikipedia although i do trust one editor from wikipedia cos i followed her on twitter for awhile, molly

so if i dont trust wikipedia and i only trust one editor

that's ok cos i can start to verify this article with primary sources

however, who would write this article if it was 'not real' and why

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

cos that's weird too

who would write a 'fake' article for who

cos if it was for me

that is

idk what that is

am i supposed to thank someone or fight someone like what

fight someone on the grounds of:

why are we putting fake stuff on wikipedia

not fight fight

word fight

who on earth cares about the pets on the titanic

and why is the article written way less dry

it isnt in wikipedia voice

on balance of scales

and i dont mean this in a whatever way

i just mean actual

there is simply no way that someone wrote a fake article on wikipedia for me specifically

no one cares about me that much

so that option is out

it is not that.

it is something else

why is this article psycho

no smithsonian magazine

i cant imagine that cos that is weird as fuck to imagine

no one should ever imagine dying for anyone's dog

the fuck is wrong with the author?

what does this mean to me?

nothing at all. like zero flat nothing.

except to remember this author is unsafe and sketch

that's what weird questions in an article

means to me

that the writer must be fucked in some way

many people are.

moving on