What's with the injustice on wikipedia and the crazy users there? So many jerks on wikipedia! Why?

Editing wikipedia is so annoying because of the users there. I just spent a couple of days arguing with a bunch of idiots, and now one of them has acknowledged that I was right. This is after, one of them going off and telling his little administrator friend that I was causing trouble and insistent on controlling pages. I call them friends because after looking at their histories, they have had a bunch of friendly chats together. When someone corrects an edit summary of yours, they leave rude comments in the edit line and then when you respond to it, they go find the administrators they are friends with and tell on you. People act like the biggest assholes on there. Is it just particular wikipedians or people in general who like being annoying on there? I don't get it

U r right. And the information given is also many times wrong. Especially the pages concerning history, mythology and films.

It's just people who are naturally assholes. It's not WP's fault.

Coming from someone who is considered a jerky editor there, I can see why they don't like you. If you're going to insist that editors are teaming together, or be rude by calling them assholes, jerks or anything else, then I would support not helping you too. Wikipedia has guidelines and policies about behavior. Namely the pages 'Wikipedia:Civilty' and 'Wikipedia:No personal attacks'. If you don't understand how something is done, then feel free to ask someone on a discussion page why they changed it they way they did, and why they said the things they said. Some editors are dillholes, but most editors there aren't as bad as they seem to be, so try and talk to them first. In fact, my userpage on Wikipedia is under the same name, so feel free to contact me if you are having trouble.

It's probably because people are bored and they want to post something stupid

I hear you. Let me tell you a story with a particular idiot I had to deal with. It turns out a couple months ago I nominated a non-notable article for deletion, called BulletBall (don't search for it's history since it's now deleted thanks to me). So I nominate it and, yes, I'll admit it, I close the discussion with a wrong concensus: re-direct to another article. So a couple of months pass of peace and harmony in the article and suddenly this guy shows up and says "No, your concensus was wrong, it was actually keep" (while the correct one had been delete) and recreated the article. So we start an edit war where I revert his edits and he makes false claims that I'm disrupting talk pages and other varied types of bullsh-t. So, finally, this other guy re-nominates it for deletion, the concensus is delete, and the article gets deleted. Keithn (the idiot) still hasn't answered the "Take that, b-tch, I told you so, eat your f-cking words!" message I left on his talk page cleverly disguised as a request for friendship. I still chuckle when I think of the poor moron.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ABF