Fallacy of Red Bull

The fallacy presented in Red Bull's commercial more in depth this one they made in particular https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAiXlxtEd2k is that it is a false cause, (A false cause fallacy is when the argument assumes that because you do something or in this case drink Red Bull then it will give you wings.) because when you drink red bull it does not really give you wings or if anything drinks it, it does not give you wings. They play off of pathos, by evoking emotion in this by getting the consumer to think oh my god if i drink this it will "give me wings" when in fact it will not but it can "give you wings" in a certain context if you think about it as more energy. When in fact we all know that Red Bull does not actually give you wings. In the commercial the little boy gives his pigs Red Bull to drink so that they can get wings, so that when he asks his mom if he can go to the "Gentleman's Club" she will say when pigs fly and then when she looks out the window the pigs will be flying because they have gained wings by drinking Red Bull. Then he can go because pigs are flying. This is just one example of a fallacy used in a commercial there are a ton of them used in almost every commercial to sway you for their product and not the competitors product. They also have to use this fallacy to help promote that the product they have will actually do its job by providing you with more energy. It also makes an impact on the consumer by having the commercial be funny and entertaining it helps keep the image and slogan in their head so that they are more likely to buy that product than another product.

Revenge,Ego and the corruption of Wikipedia

I feel like it is crazy that anyone can just edit whatever they want on this website and all they have to do is set up an account and edit. So for example if you had a personal vendetta against someone, you can just edit all of the stuff that person posts and not only that but you can make them look bad by editing all of it. It just shows that just about anyone with very little to no knowledge and they  can do what they want with the blog and people will believe the information. In no way does this make it right but at the same time, we all know that Wikipedia will not change the way they are no matter what the cases are and how they appear. Wikipedia does have people that can watch over this stuff but with all the information on there, it would be impossible to be able to track it all and fix and edit it all, all the time constantly so some things will slip and not be caught and in return can hurt many people. You also never know either because the editors could also edit and change things based on how they want it to sound or be worded or if they dislike the person personally. This changes my view on how it works and the information from it because normally it is pretty reliable but from now on maybe ill use it as a starting point and use the references they give to help further my knowledge on certain subjects.