Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
I did Rumpke Sanitary Landfill.
I'll be damned.
As someone whose grandma lived in Dunlap, I can smell this comment.
Ironically enough, starting with Philosophy gets you to a loop that includes "logic", "reason", and a few others, but never leads back to philosophy.
Something something small world networks
something something dense spanning trees
it looks like you have to skip the part in italics at the top of articles (disambiguation, "other uses", etc..) too for that to be effective
That is generally assumed to be the case, for the Wikipedia game as well
Don't let yourself be LIED to. BIG PHILOSOPHY is behind this, changing Wikipedia's RULES so that they can CONTROL YOU through YOUR THOUGHTS. Don't let big philosophy win, STOP THINKING.
reject thinking, revert to amphibian
doesnt work with Bradley Cooper
Either you get to Philosophy, or you get to Bradley Cooper
Just tried it, worked for me.
It does if you break out of the loop after the third article or so.
Looks like BAFTA doesn't either: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Academy_of_Film_and_Television_Arts
Yeah it does
But we live in a society
Bro WTF does the Wikipedia article on "Existence" say? Just "Yes"?
It's better than nothing
A long article with 9 dropdowns... Existence is, in fact, very hard to define.
I like the idea that in order to truly understand Taylor Swift, one must first also know about math, geometry, 3D space, the concept of awareness, existence, and reality itself.
"Do you know about Taylor Swift?"
"Who?"
"Oh boy... Do you know about this thing called reality?"
Well then, another project to do, DDOS wikipedia using a crawler that checks the average and maximum amount of nodes to get to philosophy
You can also just download the article dataset :)
Okay, DDoS oneself, then
Nice follow up game after the old “random article to Hitler“
I thought Jesus was the typical goal?
Whelp, it works on cow patties so... Confirmed?
Almost certainly because the most common opening sentence for an article follows the "[subject] is a member of [broader group]" structure and the more generalized you get, the more you get into entire areas of study, which are eventually classified as a kind of philosophy, which is just fancy-speak for "high-skill thinking."
Wrote a paper on this for a network theory class back in college and came to pretty much the same conclusion. Pages tend to lead to “funnels” of similar general topics, such as Earth, science, etc. and they all make their way upward into philosophy, which is the study of thinking, since thinking is at its core how we perceive the world.
Interestingly there’s two distances from philosophy that pages tend to hover around, the closer one of which is more full of technology and science stuff while the farther one is mostly places. It’s a pretty interesting deep dive
There have been some theories on this phenomenon, with the most prevalent being the tendency for Wikipedia pages to move up a "classification chain". According to this theory, the Wikipedia Manual of Style guidelines on how to write the lead section of an article recommend that articles begin by defining the topic of the article. A consequence of this style is that the first sentence of an article is almost always a definitional statement, a direct answer to the question "what is [the subject]?"
