Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ The Wikipedia Annex _ Let's have some fun

Posted by: mbz1

There is always something to have a good, kind laugh over. I mean some funny posts at Wikipedia.
Let's use this thread to link to these here. Let's leave our anger to a different threads. Please let this thread to be kind and funny. OK, I'll start:

1. A blocked editor cannot understand what he was blocked for yet another time, claiming he did only as he always does. An admin responses (see edit summary)http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ATreasuryTag&action=historysubmit&diff=454207842&oldid=454203340: evilgrin.gif

2.Arbitration enforcement concerning user Dinner for three starts like this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive98#Dinner_for_three tongue.gif

3.A post on AN/I:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=454000900 confused.gif

Posted by: EricBarbour

This would be funny. Slightly. If Wikipedia were just another website.

Sorry old boy, but it's not funny to me.
Because every day, thousands of schoolchildren use Wikipedia to do their homework and write papers.
While these idiots squabble and snipe at each other, people all over the world are fooled into thinking
that Wikipedia is a "resource" that can be "trusted".

I don't see any warnings on the front page about users called "Dinner for three" and "Lunch for two"
using Wikipedia as a casual wargame, do you?

Posted by: melloden

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 7th October 2011, 2:46am) *

This would be funny. Slightly. If Wikipedia were just another website.

Sorry old boy, but it's not funny to me.
Because every day, thousands of schoolchildren use Wikipedia to do their homework and write papers.
While these idiots squabble and snipe at each other, people all over the world are fooled into thinking
that Wikipedia is a "resource" that can be "trusted".

I don't see any warnings on the front page about users called "Dinner for three" and "Lunch for two"
using Wikipedia as a casual wargame, do you?

People aren't fooled by Wikipedia, though; they fool themselves. It's not Wikipedia's fault people try to do homework off it, or write papers from it, or make medical diagnoses with it. Only an idiot does something that reckless.

Wikipedia is quite fun to watch because of this mindless squabble; it's like a little theater with all these pesky characters that one can't hardly keep track of but still manages to laugh at.

Posted by: thekohser

Mbz, this thread has already been http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23009&pid=167916&st=0&#. I don't think anyone will ever top "You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."

Posted by: Peter Damian

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th October 2011, 3:12pm) *

Mbz, this thread has already been http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23009&pid=167916&st=0&#. I don't think anyone will ever top "You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."


Agreed.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th October 2011, 2:12pm) *

Mbz, this thread has already been http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23009&pid=167916&st=0&#. I don't think anyone will ever top "You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."


Thank you for linking to Kafkaesque's thread! It is an absolute classic, and it is hard to beat this one, but ... if I did not start this one now, I would have never learned about "You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."

Posted by: Milton Roe

balete

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sat 8th October 2011, 10:57am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th October 2011, 2:12pm) *

Mbz, this thread has already been http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=23009&pid=167916&st=0&#. I don't think anyone will ever top "You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."


Thank you for linking to Kafkaesque's thread! It is an absolute classic, and it is hard to beat this one, but ... if I did not start this one now, I would have never learned about "You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."

laugh.gif Remind me never to say "This is Kafkaesque." in some review of a Wikipedia procedure! These people are robot-literal. And yes, the wholey unintended irony here is indeed outstanding. happy.gif You couldn't make stuff up this good. Even Kafka wasn't this good.

Some book about Wikipedia should have this heading a chapter.

"This is Kafkaesque."

"You say you are Kafkaesque, if you are User:Kafkaesque you need to need to make this unblock request in this account name."

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th October 2011, 10:13pm) *


Even Kafka wasn't this good.


Actually it could be an interesting exercise, I mean to try to figure out how Kafka would have presented wikipedia. Here's my try:

Someone must have been telling lies about Josef K., he knew he had done nothing wrong but, one morning, he was blocked from editing Wikipedia. There was no block message left at his talk page, but when he tried to edit an article he saw this message:
QUOTE
You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia.
You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, move, or create them.
Editing from Josef K. has been disabled by GG for the following reason(s):
anon. only, account creation blocked.
Even if blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page and contact other editors and administrators by e-mail

At his talk page Josef K. asked for the reasons for his block, but was told to keep quiet for his own good. He did not.
He kept asking what he was blocked for. He was accused in wikilawyering.
He asked what “wikilawyering” means, and his block settings were changed to be with an expiry time of indefinite.
There still was no block notice, but his blocking administrator stated that “indefinite” does not mean “infinite”.
Josef K. asked what he should do for his indefinite block to end. For this question GG removed Josef K. talk page access.
Josef K emailed GG, and very politely asked her to explain what he was blocked for. In an hour he noticed that his e-mail was blocked.

Josef K. emailed to ArbCom to ask what he was blocked for, and to request to be unblocked. In a month he got a response. His unblock request was declined because... it did not address the reasons for the block.
Josef K. emailed to ArbCom one more time. He started his email with the words: "This is Kafkaesque". Members of ArbCom read no more. Now they knew what Josef K. was blocked for.
They all agreed to stamp Josef K. user and talk pages with a puppet template:

QUOTE
This account is a sock puppet of Kafkaesque and has been blocked indefinitely.

Posted by: radek

I've always thought that if one were to write a story of Wikipedia as a novel, The Good Soldier Svejk would work much better as a model than Kafka (though yes, that works too).


http://www.amazon.com/Good-Soldier-Svejk-Fortunes-Classics/dp/0140449914#reader_0140449914

and you take it from there...

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sat 8th October 2011, 9:26pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th October 2011, 10:13pm) *


Even Kafka wasn't this good.


Actually it could be an interesting exercise, I mean to try to figure out how Kafka would have presented wikipedia. Here's my try:

Someone must have been telling lies about Josef K., he knew he had done nothing wrong but, one morning, he was blocked from editing Wikipedia. There was no block message left at his talk page, but when he tried to edit an article he saw this message:
QUOTE
You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia.
You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, move, or create them.
Editing from Josef K. has been disabled by GG for the following reason(s):
anon. only, account creation blocked.
Even if blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page and contact other editors and administrators by e-mail

At his talk page Josef K. asked for the reasons for his block, but was told to keep quiet for his own good. He did not.
He kept asking what he was blocked for. He was accused in wikilawyering.
He asked what “wikilawyering” means, and his block settings were changed to be with an expiry time of indefinite.
There still was no block notice, but his blocking administrator stated that “indefinite” does not mean “infinite”.
Josef K. asked what he should do for his indefinite block to end. For this question GG removed Josef K. talk page access.
Josef K emailed GG, and very politely asked her to explain what he was blocked for. In an hour he noticed that his e-mail was blocked.

Josef K. emailed to ArbCom to ask what he was blocked for, and to request to be unblocked. In a month he got a response. His unblock request was declined because... it did not address the reasons for the block.
Josef K. emailed to ArbCom one more time. He started his email with the words: "This is Kafkaesque". Members of ArbCom read no more. Now they knew what Josef K. was blocked for.
They all agreed to stamp Josef K. user and talk pages with a puppet template:

QUOTE
This account is a sock puppet of Kafkaesque and has been blocked indefinitely.


Posted by: Zoloft

Bah. Kafka?

If you want to scroll through endless pages of text to find out pretty much nothing, you are a Tolstoy fan.

But if you insist on Kafka...

"As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic nerd."

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(radek @ Mon 10th October 2011, 1:40am) *

I've always thought that if one were to write a story of Wikipedia as a novel, The Good Soldier Svejk would work much better as a model than Kafka (though yes, that works too).


http://www.amazon.com/Good-Soldier-Svejk-Fortunes-Classics/dp/0140449914#reader_0140449914

and you take it from there...


Nope, you take it from here smile.gif I've already wrote one piece for Kafka. tongue.gif Now it is your turn to write for Jaroslav Hasek. Go for it. It's going to be fun.

QUOTE(Zoloft @ Mon 10th October 2011, 2:31am) *

Bah. Kafka?

If you want to scroll through endless pages of text to find out pretty much nothing, you are a Tolstoy fan.

But if you insist on Kafka...

"As Gregor Samsa awoke one morning from uneasy dreams he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic nerd."


So you prefer using The Metamorphosis? I believe The Trial is more suitable for taking on Wikipedia, but it will be interesting to see a Wikipedia's story resembling The Metamorphosis too. Why wouldn't you try?

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

Amateurs ...

If you haven't made up 6 new funny user names before breakfast, you just don't know where it's at.

See WR:PACMAN

Jon tongue.gif

Posted by: mbz1

A user made 140+ socks. Wikid77 (T-C-L-K-R-D) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&diff=prev&oldid=463609877

QUOTE
A close look at {{category|Wikipedia sockpuppets of Brexx}} showed 143 "alternate usernames" created over the years, many used only 2 days for less than 40 edits. It seemed more like someone who forgot their username and kept creating another username each week. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 03:50, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

At least this explains http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=35713, a poor guy did not create socks, he simply kept forgetting his user name. jawdrop.gif

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE
blocks are not punative. You can murder Jimbo Wales and so long as you are not going to cause any subsequent problems for Wikipedia you'll still be allowed to edit. <span style="background-color:silver;color:black;">[[User:Egg Centric|Egg]] [[User_talk:Egg Centric|Centric]]</span> 18:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=465496138

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 13th December 2011, 8:48pm) *

QUOTE
blocks are not punative. You can murder Jimbo Wales and so long as you are not going to cause any subsequent problems for Wikipedia you'll still be allowed to edit. <span style="background-color:silver;color:black;">[[User:Egg Centric|Egg]] [[User_talk:Egg Centric|Centric]]</span> 18:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=465496138


Hmm... that sounds like it could be a net benefit to Wikipedia. Good policy!

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 14th December 2011, 2:41am) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 13th December 2011, 8:48pm) *

QUOTE
blocks are not punative. You can murder Jimbo Wales and so long as you are not going to cause any subsequent problems for Wikipedia you'll still be allowed to edit. <span style="background-color:silver;color:black;">[[User:Egg Centric|Egg]] [[User_talk:Egg Centric|Centric]]</span> 18:32, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=465496138


Hmm... that sounds like it could be a net benefit to Wikipedia. Good policy!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Veiled_threats_against_Jimbo wtf.gif

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 13th December 2011, 10:32pm) *

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Veiled_threats_against_Jimbo wtf.gif


Here, let me teach you how to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=465683916#Veiled_threats_against_Jimbo that won't be worthless in a matter of hours.

Posted by: mbz1

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Slow-motion-bouncing-penis.gif&diff=prev&oldid=64079275
I believe the next time WMF should be asking for donating images of penises. After all there are "around 5 billion times many more" penises on the planet than "the unique Nelson's Column". biggrin.gif

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 22nd December 2011, 1:23pm) *

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Slow-motion-bouncing-penis.gif&diff=prev&oldid=64079275
I believe the next time WMF should be asking for donating images of penises. After all there are "around 5 billion times many more" penises on the planet than "the unique Nelson's Column". biggrin.gif


I think there are only about 3.5 billion living human penises on Earth. Is he including all humans, dead or alive? Let's dig up Lincoln for the next "Wikipedia Loves Penises" meet-up!

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 22nd December 2011, 9:19pm) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Thu 22nd December 2011, 1:23pm) *

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Slow-motion-bouncing-penis.gif&diff=prev&oldid=64079275
I believe the next time WMF should be asking for donating images of penises. After all there are "around 5 billion times many more" penises on the planet than "the unique Nelson's Column". biggrin.gif


I think there are only about 3.5 billion living human penises on Earth. Is he including all humans, dead or alive? Let's dig up Lincoln for the next "Wikipedia Loves Penises" meet-up!

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Slow-motion-bouncing-penis.gif&oldid=64332074(I believe it is funny, but my Russian sense of humor could be different than the sense of humor of the most people here) Anyway here it is:
QUOTE
Question: Fæ, you write: "we can find more images of the unique Nelson's Column compared to all images of the human penis for which we may estimate that around 5 billion times many more exist on the planet." Does it mean that you're suggesting that Commons should host as many images of penises, and naked butts including the ones decorated with chains for that matter, as it gets? After all there are "around 5 billion times many more exist on the planet" than a boring and a very unique Nelson's Column. BTW did you mention this idea in your presentation to the Parliament? This sure would have helped Wikipedia UK to get a status of a charitable organization :-)--Mbz1 (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

That really is quite irrelevant, please keep your mind on the task at hand. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

What "really is quite irrelevant" how many unique penises are there in the world or how many even more unique butts are there :-) BTW, muttbuck, while we are talking about penises I'd like to ask you please as an experienced admin:A policy states:Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not an amateur porn site. Does it mean there is no problem with porn images as long as they are professional? --Mbz1 (talk) 02:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I meant the Parliament bit. -mattbuck (Talk) 03:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see the number of unique penises and unique butts are relative, only "the Parliament bit" is not :-) Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:20, 25 December 2011 (UTC)



Posted by: Eppur si muove

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sun 25th December 2011, 3:29am) *

[
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Slow-motion-bouncing-penis.gif&oldid=64332074(I believe it is funny, but my Russian sense of humor could be different than the sense of humor of the most people here) Anyway here it is:
QUOTE
Question: Fæ, you write: "we can find more images of the unique Nelson's Column compared to all images of the human penis for which we may estimate that around 5 billion times many more exist on the planet." Does it mean that you're suggesting that Commons should host as many images of penises, and naked butts including the ones decorated with chains for that matter, as it gets? After all there are "around 5 billion times many more exist on the planet" than a boring and a very unique Nelson's Column. BTW did you mention this idea in your presentation to the Parliament? This sure would have helped Wikipedia UK to get a status of a charitable organization :-)--Mbz1 (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

That really is quite irrelevant, please keep your mind on the task at hand. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

What "really is quite irrelevant" how many unique penises are there in the world or how many even more unique butts are there :-) BTW, muttbuck, while we are talking about penises I'd like to ask you please as an experienced admin:A policy states:Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not an amateur porn site. Does it mean there is no problem with porn images as long as they are professional? --Mbz1 (talk) 02:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I meant the Parliament bit. -mattbuck (Talk) 03:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see the number of unique penises and unique butts are relative, only "the Parliament bit" is not :-) Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:20, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


It's amusing here. I thought you were starting a gradual reverse spoonerism there and were eventually going to call him muckbutt.

One of the people more expert with more expertise at transplanting things from YouTube might be able to find the Not the Nine O'clock News sketch where famous London landmarks including Nelson's Column and the clock tower of the Houses of Parliament are compared to phalluses.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Eppur si muove @ Sun 25th December 2011, 3:50am) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sun 25th December 2011, 3:29am) *

[
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Slow-motion-bouncing-penis.gif&oldid=64332074(I believe it is funny, but my Russian sense of humor could be different than the sense of humor of the most people here) Anyway here it is:
QUOTE
Question: Fæ, you write: "we can find more images of the unique Nelson's Column compared to all images of the human penis for which we may estimate that around 5 billion times many more exist on the planet." Does it mean that you're suggesting that Commons should host as many images of penises, and naked butts including the ones decorated with chains for that matter, as it gets? After all there are "around 5 billion times many more exist on the planet" than a boring and a very unique Nelson's Column. BTW did you mention this idea in your presentation to the Parliament? This sure would have helped Wikipedia UK to get a status of a charitable organization :-)--Mbz1 (talk) 19:38, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

That really is quite irrelevant, please keep your mind on the task at hand. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:05, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

What "really is quite irrelevant" how many unique penises are there in the world or how many even more unique butts are there :-) BTW, muttbuck, while we are talking about penises I'd like to ask you please as an experienced admin:A policy states:Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not an amateur porn site. Does it mean there is no problem with porn images as long as they are professional? --Mbz1 (talk) 02:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

I meant the Parliament bit. -mattbuck (Talk) 03:06, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I see the number of unique penises and unique butts are relative, only "the Parliament bit" is not :-) Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:20, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


It's amusing here. I thought you were starting a gradual reverse spoonerism there and were eventually going to call him muckbutt.

One of the people more expert with more expertise at transplanting things from YouTube might be able to find the Not the Nine O'clock News sketch where famous London landmarks including Nelson's Column and the clock tower of the Houses of Parliament are compared to phalluses.


I was thinking about calling him "mattbutt", but for anything smarter than that my knowledge of English and English/American cultures are not good enough. ermm.gif

Posted by: mbz1

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum&diff=prev&oldid=467068189

QUOTE
The thing I've always demanded, and I do mean ''demanded'', is consistency, and there's none here. Gentlemen's parts have been appropriated by the Wiki elite as representing some kind of sanctionable behaviour, but ladies' parts are out of bounds. Does that really make any kind of sense to you? [[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 19:18, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


And then http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum&diff=prev&oldid=467066598
QUOTE
Speaking non-hypothetically, I don't give a flying fuck. I see no reason why it's permissible to call regular editors "dicks" but not administrators "cunts".

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE
...Fifthly you return to penises. This particular one must be taken in hand at Commons...Rich Farmbrough, 19:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC).

Did you really just write that penises "must be taken in hand at Commons"?? O_o - Alison ❤ 20:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

A nice one, Alison. smile.gif
And here's my English question about Alison's response: should not have this been "wrote" or "written" versus "write"? Thanks.

Posted by: Zoloft

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Fri 10th February 2012, 5:04pm) *

QUOTE
...Fifthly you return to penises. This particular one must be taken in hand at Commons...Rich Farmbrough, 19:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC).

Did you really just write that penises "must be taken in hand at Commons"?? O_o - Alison ❤ 20:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

A nice one, Alison. smile.gif
And here's my English question about Alison's response: should not have this been "wrote" or "written" versus "write"? Thanks.

Alison's grammar is correct. 'Write' is the proper tense.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Zoloft @ Sat 11th February 2012, 4:50am) *

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Fri 10th February 2012, 5:04pm) *

QUOTE
...Fifthly you return to penises. This particular one must be taken in hand at Commons...Rich Farmbrough, 19:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC).

Did you really just write that penises "must be taken in hand at Commons"?? O_o - Alison ❤ 20:13, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

A nice one, Alison. smile.gif
And here's my English question about Alison's response: should not have this been "wrote" or "written" versus "write"? Thanks.

Alison's grammar is correct. 'Write' is the proper tense.

Thank you. It is interesting. If I were to say the same thing in Russian, I would have used a past tense. Oh well, I will never learn English ermm.gif

Posted by: Detective

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sat 11th February 2012, 5:42am) *

Thank you. It is interesting. If I were to say the same thing in Russian, I would have used a past tense. Oh well, I will never learn English ermm.gif

It is not difficult. This is the "past interrogative". If you say "Did you have...?" then the "did" is a modal verb which carries the past tense, so the second verb is in the infinitive. Similarly, the "present interrogative" is "Do you have...?" with the second verb in the infinitive. Some interrogatives use a different modal verb. In particular, the future form is "Will you have ...?"



Posted by: mbz1

Somebody just emailed me the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMZMcBride&action=historysubmit&diff=478530045&oldid=478464437

QUOTE
== I hate everyone ==

In case that wasn't obvious. --[[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]] ([[User talk:MZMcBride#top|talk]]) 01:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)