Talk:The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Help Needed

Due to the fact that I don't have much experience (or skill) at creating original articles I need some MAJOR help in making this article match the standards that wiki requires. So could someone please help me? The Fading Light 8:52, 1 April 2006

"I'd Really Rather You Didn't"

If someone has read the book PLEASE put an explanation for what an "I'd Really Rather You Didn't" is.

Thanks :) --Revision as of 23:08, 5 April 2006 JoeBlowfromKokomo

This is Just my understanding of the "I'd Really Rather You Didn't". If it qualifies as original reserch it may not be able to go into the articel

Would it be total copyright infringement for me to simply include the eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts"? After finishing what was interesting of the book (which was most of it, I assure you) I came here and was surprised by their absence. Is there reason for that? Metalrobot

Someone with more Wikipower than me needs to change the numerals on #6 to letters A, B, and C which is how they appear in the book. Metalrobot 15:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I changed this as suggested. It is not pure wikicode, but is approved per wikimedia help sheets. If anyone knows a cleaner way to do this, please revert my changes. Ztras 04:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Ten Commandments

"I'd Really Rather You Didn't" (I think) could be referring to the Ten Commandments (8+2=10). (I think) This could be expanding on the old joke that Moses had 15 commandments and dropped one when saying "I give you these 15.....10 commandments" in History of the World: Part I - 1981 which (I think) could be making fun of the real event where Mosses Broke the original 10 commandments after seeing the golden calf. Ten_Commandments#Breaking_and_replacement_of_the_tablets. Why the last to are omitted (I think) could be because “These last two commandments govern private thoughts.”Ten_Commandments#Christian_understanding Because everybody should have a the right to think what they want to think (My take on the whole point of the religion) like believing in the flying spaghetti monster.

This is only my initial response to the joke. I came up with this myself. If you came up with this same though yourself then congratulations (I assume you all did think of this on you own and That’s why it’s funny) if you just figured the joke out because of me then please credit me as Yskyflyer for my analysis. Note I am explaining a joke. I am not stating my opinion on whether it is tasteful or not. I am not saying my description above is accurate ether. I have not read the book so I do not know the official analysis. Please tell me if I should include this in the article or if I should post It on a website and then include in the article or it is Original Research and so not qualifying including in a verifiable article. Wikipedia is not a place to include every bodies interpretations. I only posted my views because somebody requested it Due to farness I guess it would be appropriate to post your opinions under mine and not whether or not you are building off of mine or already though it out before reading mine. Be honest or the FSM will tell me your are lying and I will feel really sorry for you.--E-Bod 22:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I would put that (because its most likely true) and, considering you havent read the book (neither have I) that is really good insight, BUT since you haven't read the book it could be put as original research or POV or something like that and would probably be deleted shortly after anyway. So, as good as it is, its specualtion. --JoeBlowfromKokomo 23:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

They are ment to represend the Ten Commandments http://lbunion.com/article.php?973 Fosnez 14:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization?

do the "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" appear in the source material with the first letter in every word capitalized? makes it kind of hard to read. 192.223.226.6 18:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• I concur that the Title Case Capitalization is difficult to read in a paragraph of text. I can't seem to find a reference for "The Eight Condiments" anywhere, so I certainly wouldn't oppose a nondisruptive edit to change the capitalization. David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 20:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Schneider and Frederick

Does this deserve mention? Has any secondary source referenced this? It probably belongs in external links, but I'm not sure it merits mention in the article itself. I'm going to remove it unless there are objections. --Nscheffey^(T/C) 18:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Censored words

Does the Gospel itself use asterisks? Either way, be faithful (ha) to the original text. Wikipedia:Profanity --Femto 11:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I just got my copy of the gospel, and it actually does use asterisks for the 5th I'd Really Rather You Didnt. It reads "Then Go After The B*******". I hardly see how this could be nothing other then bastard, and it's clearly part of the global consPiracy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.149.1.51 (talk • contribs) .

Changed it. What about the "fuck" in item 4? And that's just your opinion. Perhaps He intended it to have not only one true meaning. Holy scriptures, of course, are open to individual interpretation. Femto 12:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The way I saw it, since other words (like fuck as you mentioned) arnt actually censored, then the likely hood of it actually being such an obvious word (bastard) is decreased. its probably just some godly curse word, that only His Noodleness is capable of understanding. Or He was drunk when He wrote it out —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.149.103.16 (talk • contribs) .

Re: [1] So, what the fuck :), is it censored now or not? Femto 12:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it IS censored. 71.181.241.199 (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violation?

The eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" are copied directly from the text. I may be mistaken, but isn't this blatant copyright infrigement? --Iamunknown 19:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Seems cool with [2] "It's ok with me if you're using the FSM images/content as long as it's not for profit, and you're doing it to further the Cause of the church." - If not, I'd say we still may reasonably claim fair use for the excerpt in the context of the article. Femto 20:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

If the 10 commandments can be displayed in the article, then these should be fine to display as well. It's a religious text and should be treated as such. RAmen. 24.96.242.143

No, it is not a religious text because it is pure parody and nobody truly believes there is an FSM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.168.30.213 (talk) 21:23, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, how do you define a religious text? The "Id Rather You Didn'ts" are a religious text, as much as the 10 commandments! -- Shitontheroad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.87.96.118 (talk) 21:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't presume that 'nobody truly believes there is an FSM'. 131.111.213.33 (talk) 13:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

agreed, his noodlyness is close to my heart,and my entire family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.237.140 (talk) 17:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

McPidgin?

This is probably incorrect, since a Google search turns up only two results. Maybe a McGriddle? I don't have the book, but maybe somebody who does could look up McDonalds? I'm deleting the reference for now, and somebody can correct it later. Tomhormby 05:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

The reference is actually in the book (I have it). There is no such thing as a "McPidgin" sandwich, and the author knows this, it's a joke and should probably be left; it shows the kind of ideas going on in the book. Squad51 01:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Book cover

The image of the book cover looks like it's a red, hardcover book with an in-built page marker. Do not be fooled. It's a common-or-garden paperback book, with a picture of a red, hardcover book with an in-built page marker on the cover. As great as the FSM might be, surely He should have come up with a better quality book. JIP | Talk 21:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

UK / Australian hardcover version

I'm not sure how to include it, but the gospel was released by HarperCollins UK in hardcover, as depicted on the US cover. The other version is unavailable here and this has a different ISBN. [3] [4] - Quolnok 01:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Well it *is* available as of 30/07/08 (in New South Wales - Sydney, at the very least) as I just ordered it 5 minute ago! not the easiest to procure though, coming in from another store. --Jaye001 (talk) 01:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Contents (section)

I've removed this excellent Contents section since (a) it clashes with the autowikily generated contents and (b) it seems to have nothing to do with the, er, contents of the article. If I'm missing the jok^h^h^hpoint may His Noodliness forgive me --John Stumbles 18:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• The Blunders of Science
  • The Need for Alternative Theories
  • An Alternative Viewpoint
  • Toward a New Super Science
  • What's the Matter with Evolution
  • An Alternate Vision
  • FSM vs. ID, an Unlikely Alliance
  • Communion Test
  • Unified Spaghetti Theory
  • More Evidence
  • Kiwi Birds: Flightless?

• Explaining Pastafarianism
  • A Condensed History of the World
  • Key Moments in FSM History
  • Bobby Answers the Big Questions
  • WWAPD?
  • The Holy Noodle
  • A History of Heretics

• Propaganda
  • The Pastafarian Guide to Propaganda
  • Pamphlets
  • Swag
  • Fund-raising
  • A Guide to the Holidays
  • Enlightenment Institute

I'm unsure if the section is needed, however that is the book's contents. - 124.189.138.172 12:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Aah! Maybe you'd like to restore the section with a note or section heading indicating that it's the contents of the book, not the article? (I'm suggesting you do it as I take it that yoou do have the book which I <cough!> don't.) --John Stumbles 23:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

The first i'd really blah blah blah thing says don't say you are "holier than thou ass". Normally, I would change this back to "art" but I know it's a parody religion. If this is vandalism, could someone let me know so I can delete it.211.30.132.2 08:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I have absolutely no clue what you're trying to say. It's like trying to read alphabet soup... 65.33.59.183 (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

immigrants?

What the hell is the second option in the 6th commandmnt? Eradicate immigrants? I would like to believe this is some form of vandalism. Otherwise I am confused and disappointed. --Manudosde 19:44, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Seeing how you're a Wikipedia user, that makes me feel good.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

* The definition of the book as a religious text needs a reference. I could not find any RS defining it so. It is defined as a parody in some places : Done

• Need neutral references and neutral RS facts. The ref used may be publicity (is non-neutral):
  • "The open letter was printed in many large newspapers, including the New York Times, Washington Post, and Chicago Sun Times"
  • "Henderson states on his website that more than 100,000 copies of the book have been sold."
• Nothing about the structure of the book like how many chapters, summary of each.
• Also, how is the book used by the practitioners (if I may say so) of Pastafarianism.
• One of the "I'd really rather you didn'ts" is repeated. Is the whole list needed? If yes, repetitions should be avoided.
• A section about direct comparison with the Bible (other religious texts, it parodies) is needed, like "Moses giving the Ten Commandments == "I'd really rather you didn'ts" ) Has any official representative of the Church reacted to it?
• the page numbers associated with particular sentences can be given for Van Horn, Gavin; Lucas Johnston (2007)
• In single references, "p." (eg. p. 58) should be used, not pp. 58.
• LEAD should have something about organization of the book: chapters etc. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:16, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Good luck with the improvements. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

"Excerpts" section not from the Gospel

The Excerpts section contains quotes not from the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but rather from The Loose Canon, a congregation-compiled text. Not that The Loose Canon isn't worth reading, mind you, but it's not from the Gospel. --96.252.126.169 (talk) 18:11, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Revelations

Should not the last chapter of the Gospel include a promise of "eternal salivation"? :-) George963 au (talk) 01:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Is there a reason we aren't listing the 8 "I'd Really Rather You Didn't"'s?

It isn't all that long, and would only lengthen the article by about 3 lines. I think it'd help to explain the book, and hence the religion as a whole. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 13:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

parody religion

I've restored the long-standing lead description of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a parody religion rather than a religion. I'm mentioning it here because this change was snuck in 16 months ago here , by a currently-blocked IP, and missed. Prior to that all attempts to change from "parody religion" had been undone. Note the notice on this page concerning this being a parody. Meters (talk) 20:16, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree, and thanks. I'm dope-slapping myself for having missed that all this time. I'm glad that you caught it. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I only bothered mentioned it because it had been in there so long. On my list now, so one more set of eyes. Meters (talk) 06:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

And yet another IP ignoring the talk page consensus to remove "satirical" and "parody". Meters (talk) 23:19, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Still no discussion about this, or justification for ignoring the consensus mentioned in Talk:Flying Spaghetti Monster/FAQ. Restoring the status quo. Meters (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Offensive to some

Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute, the hub of the Intelligent Design movement, labeled the Gospel "a mockery of the Christian New Testament".

I notice that the Jews don’t give a flying matza ball. Similarly the Muslim don’t give a flying pita. That begs the question, why are Christians offended by this silliness? 75.127.208.18 (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

This isn't the place to discuss the "why" of it, but, with a source, that's something that might be worth reporting on the page. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)