Wikipedia talk:List of jokes about Wikipedia

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles

Department of Fun Bottom‑importance

	This page is supported by the Department of Fun, which aims to provide Wikipedians with fun so that they stay on Wikipedia and keep on improving articles. If you have any ideas, do not hesitate to post them to the discussion page or access our home page to join the Department of Fun.Department of FunWikipedia:Department of FunTemplate:WikiProject Department of FunDepartment of Fun articles
Bottom	This page has been rated as Bottom-importance on the importance scale.

Pruning

How about some pruning or modifying the really unfunny jokes? Is that in bad form? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones? Are any of them mine (Just interested)?211.27.126.189 (talk) 20:43, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't nailed down the exact ones. And some of mine are complete lemons and should go. What do you think? Are there any that are a little too lame? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose that depends on the inclusion criteria. :) Is it a list of text blocks that consensus deems "jokes," a list of things at least one editor calls a joke, a list of jokes that a majority of people find at least a bit droll, exemplary feats of wit... :) Wouldn't be much of a wiki page if it could only be added to and never cut back, but at the same time I could see an argument for letting people post whatever. I think you should be bold if you think one should go. There are a few on there that I think it's hard to even call jokes... Certainly a page that could use a Reddit-like up/downvote system. One line that should be drawn is to disallow jokes about individual users, even if the user says they're ok with it. Exception for public figures like Jimbo, I suppose. There's one in there that's about the physical appearance of a user. I'm pretty sure he would be fine with it, but people who read it don't know he's in on the joke, and I think it's a bad precedent to set. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 02:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These are all the ones I've placed on this page (all from one or 2 liners). I'm mostly interested to see if these jokes should be modified:

How do Wikipedians hear each other speak? With the talk page! How do sick Wikipedians get better? By contacting Doc James or Drmies through their talk page! What do you call a person who is a star performing in a barn? A Barnstar! You know you're on a stub article if it makes you so stressed you stub your toe. (Ouch/groan!) Did you hear about the Wikipedia article on the solfeggio note fa? It will always be rated FA-Class! WP:GOLDiLOCKsANDTHETHREEBEARS (a variation on WP:GOLDLOCK). You know you've been at the WP:TEAHOUSE) for too long if your computer screen squirts tea at you whilst you're there. Did you hear about the 2 tennis players who struggled to beat each other in edit warring? The result was a WikiDeuce! Thank you for reading.211.27.126.189 (talk) 07:56, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I put up another one: The Wikipedian who whacks fellow Wikipedians with trouts the most always has a lake full of them! (as a new IP which is at the end of this post).211.27.115.246 (talk) 08:11, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I must say, the ones you put up are a tad....how do I say this kindly... :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rhododendrites: Is it the Jimbo beard one that is not so appropriate? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:31, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know. can't say I get that one. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

211.27.126.189 changed to a new location however 211.27.115.246 is run by the same person from the same location. Any jokes posted by either of the 2 IPs was me posting it. Are my jokes going to be pruned? 211.27.115.246 (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If they're pruned, they're not because you posted them, nor would anything be protected because some person in particular posted them. We can see in the history who added what if that were going to be a factor. No need to update the talk page each time you add one. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen them, though? I'm not here to have my jokes pruned. I'm most interested in how good my jokes are.211.27.115.246 (talk) 20:42, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, just remove the terrible ones. To the people who added them (me included): just treat it as constructive criticism. Mz7 (talk) 22:14, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think about mine, because they could be terrible, too?211.27.115.246 (talk) 22:48, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Like mine, some are good and some are bad. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:20, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the whole pruning thing is confusing. Maybe, without disturbing the discussion, I should just leave?211.27.115.246 (talk) 23:25, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't leave. Your input is very welcome here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After this, I'm thinking the IP may be trolling us with the copious additions of is-that-even-a-jokes and edit warring over their rating. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:01, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting or rating

I like Rhododendrites's upvote thought. How about we add some sort of note to the top of lists saying "sort in order of your favourite" or maybe some sort of other system where people could vote. Like maybe at the end of each joke, a set of brackets into which people can add a number? I don't know. Do we have anything scripts or anything that does this? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not aware of anything that would work, really. Off-wiki things.. Could add a (5) or whatever at the beginning of each for a makeshift up/downvote system, but part of the good of that system is that it's anonymous. :) It might just be that managing a list of jokes is just too far outside of what Wikipedia is for... The most Wikipedia method of going about it would probably be to list each one and call for !votes supporting/opposing. And if that happens, there is a big meta joke to be made... :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:24, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Experimental rating system

I started a sortable table. I will sort the tables from time to time. This could be an interesting experiment. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:59, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weird, but ok. :) My ratings are in. Starting to look at the lightbulb jokes, it seems like they aren't meant to stand-alone. Might as well package those that are supposed to go together as a single thing, I guess... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty opposed to the idea of rating jokes. The up vote would be great but media wiki doesn't allow and this sort of individual rating of jokes seems very unwikipedia to me. I strongly ask that we delete the ratings and if need be figure other ways to cull the jokes. For instance perhaps put a cap on the number of contributions per editor. Or boldly remove, see if it's reverted, and if it is talk. If only there were a page to describe that process. Best wishes, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:44, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Barkeep49. You are strongly against ratings and I am mildly for ratings. It won't take much more opposition for them to be gone, and with my blessings. So, another system for culling? We don't want to waste lots of time debating which are good and bad, but frankly, lots of those jokes ought to go. Thoughts on a replacement system? Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:20, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my advice, Anna Frodesiak: move this to your userspace, keep a projectspace redirect (ok in some cases), and use it being in your userspace to exercise editorial control. :) Otherwise what is to stop the various IPs from adding barely-a-joke-to-the-point-of-maybe-trollings and edit warring over ratings... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rhododendrites, hello. How about we just get rid of the ratings? I've gone from "mildly for" to "meh, sure, let's lose them". :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:49, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I noted in February I would strongly favor this. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:22, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To celebrate it being un-April Fools I have removed the ratings from the article. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jokes on article classes

Hi. I want to have jokes on article classes: FA-class:Did you hear about the Wikipedia article on the solfeggio note fa? It will always be rated FA-Class. (already put up.) GA-class:Ga-ga A-class:An article about a class, written by a class of Wikipedians. B-class:An article about bees. C-class:The article about the Ocean. Start-class:An article about starting a class. Stub class: You know you're on a stub article if it makes you so stressed you stub your toe. (Ouch/groan!) (already put up.) Note: The ouch/groan seems unnecessary and I don't agree on the ratings for my jokes. Thank you.211.27.115.246 (talk) 07:56, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]