Topic: Department of Fun
An article about or described by any of the following can be safely assumed to fit into the set of unnecessary articles:
- You, your family, or the organization you work for.
- Your band, which has only sold 47 copies of its one album. Even if you think it will sell 48. Or maybe 49! Or, if you get really lucky, you can pay off the record store owner so that he may buy one and your sales will have gone up to fifty!!! Keep dreamin', brotha.
- Your imaginary friend or your imaginary friends that don't even exist.
- The religion, language or even country that you made up with your friends in school one day.
- The street you live on, unless it is on a Monopoly board. But since it is highly unlikely that you live on a Monopoly game board, we suggest that you not even try.
- Any one of the 16 distinct regions in the Pokémon video game series or lieking mudkipz, or hering dat someon lieks mudkipz. Remember, not everyone is a Pokémon fanatic.
- A stunt or trick only you have ever attempted, probably unsuccessfully.
- Any movie you made yourself which has never been seen by more people at one time than can fit in your basement. Even if you have a really big basement.
- Individual songs that have never been released as a single nor seen radio play, unless they're twenty minutes long or have led to a phone number becoming unusable or even have questioned the essence of music itself.
- "(Anything) in popular culture." Anything at all.
- Likewise "Hysterical Realism in the Works of (insert neither hysterical nor realistic author here)".
- Your dormitory, university residence, or any suite therein.
- Stuff nobody but that guy who changes his Spock ears more often than his underpants cares about, or the equivalent thereto. For example, a song about a custom map of a video game, unless you are famous and the song managed to release as a single.
- Anything about which you cannot be buggered to write one complete sent
- Subjects that cannot be studied, or the knowledge of which amounts only to the fact that it pertains to another topic. A favourite line from a movie or catchy lyric, a potent phrase used in argument, juicy facts of interest to fans, a punch-line or zinger; these are all very interesting, but usually all that can be informatively written about topic "X" is: "X is a _______ found in _______."
- Just about everything listed on Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool.
- For that matter, Wikipedia:Millionth topic pool.
- Anything about your cat or dog and how cute it is (or your hamster, degu, or chinchilla).
- Exploding Whales, or indeed Exploding Wales, or even Exploding Wales. Or blowing up any other animals, for example, exploding mice, or even exploding Velociraptor, for that matter. Most things that implode are pretty much off the list too, with a few exceptions.
- Anything written under the influence of recreational substances or while tired and emotional.
- An article about another article, written after the use of aforementioned substances.
- A fork of an existing article for the sole purpose of adding some humor.
- The weather in London. Not even a redirect. (Wowee).
- Your guild in World of Warcraft or similar time wasters. Just because you have
no lifea personally fascinating hobby doesn't mean you get to tell the world about it. And don't write about this guy in your guild who wiped your raid, either.
- Something you just saw on YouTube and, possibly, laughed at.
- Something you just put on YouTube.
- An article that haz badly grammar and/or speelling. Including, bad punctuation!!
- Any meme, no matter how popular or important.
- Anything you don't know the title of.
- Your wiki or blog. It's probably not internationally famous. If it is, well go ahead, but let's face it; your blog of cute cats is not internationally famous (three readers is not fame).
- Your new invention or research paper that will change the world. It will undoubtedly fail.
- Anything about your cat named Bubba or your dog named Max. No one cares. Trust us.
- Your nomination for the Noble (or even Nobel) Peace Prize.
- Anything about how you were abducted by aliens.
- An article on the dream you had last night. No matter how long you describe it, it will never be interesting: Even if dreaming that you were the inventor of the chalk board who had to overcome obstacles from the evil book binding lobbyists deeply moved you to tears upon waking up.
- An article on the person that knocked on your door while you was writing the article about your dream last night, causing you to forget about the dream (but I’ll be honest, I feel for you).
- An article about Wikpiedia, Wikipaedia, Wiokipedia, Wikipeedia, Wikipeadia, or any other Wikis that appear to be Wikipedia but aren't.
- An article about the media response to the Wikipedia article about the barely notable thing that shouldn't even have an article (recursivity has its limits, even here).
- The difference between Hoagy Carmichael and Stokely Carmichael.
- An entry promoting your hilarious web series about Wikipedia.
- Recreating this dumb list.
- Anything about hashtags. #IHateHashtags
- Anything about how fat you are or how much weight you're losing (trust us; no one cares).
- Headlight flashing – I know, it's preposterous, even for Wikipedia. But when you're done laughing and/or crying, follow the link. It really exists.
- Assumptions about the conclusions of scientific publications that you have seen the titles of, but not read.
- Your self-published book.
- McGannahan Skjellyfetti.
- An article about your friend's latest selfie. Or, for that matter, selfie stick. They are banned in most places anyway.
- Lists of times at which commercial breaks occurred during a sporting event.
- Your personal opinions about your boyfriend or girlfriend.
- An article on discussing the differences between you and your close friends. It does not matter to most people in the world.
- An article about how Tyson Foods is run by a bunch of chicken fuckers because the main article is protected from vandalism by the legions of Internet trolls.
- Yet another list of Google doodles.
- A new sex position that you and your boys theory-crafted one night.
- Times Scooby-Doo has defied the laws of reality.
- A list of celebrity couples names for couples that you wish would get together but as of now haven't.
- Your stupid esoteric programming language you made up to 'test the boundaries of computer programming language design'.
- Any article related to odorous gas clouds, but particularly smelly farts.
- Your youtube channel, unless you have millions of fangirls.
- Your opinion and/or fascination about outer space, even if there are lots of unusual exoplanets out there. Yes, we know. They're weird. No need to tell us that.
- Your opinion on time traveling to have dinner with the members of Bone Symphony or Bone Thugs-n-Harmony or Boney M. or The Right Honourable Bonar Law
- The time you laughed about someone eating a red 5-pound gummy skull while wearing a jetpack while driving a limousine at 5 a.m. on a Tuesday in August 2018.
- An article that uses templates to perform math for no apparent reason besides your entertainment
- Your anus and how it had very good funny time with girl.
- The time you laughed at someone living in Fortnite (Chapter 1), even though I get that they were eaten by a Black hole. Oh well, they came back!
- Posting a video of yourself saying the n-word.
- Posting an image of yourself falling off the Burj Khalifa.
- Singing any Cardi B song.
- Posting 69 (nice) useless messages made by bored editors of Wikipedia.
- Your low-effort school play of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas!"
- A list of times you pinged @everyone on your Discord server.
- "List of really, really stupid article ideas that you should not create" | 2014-07-24 | 20 Upvotes 6 Comments
The Terminal Event Management Policy (TEMP) is a Wikipedia policy detailing the procedures to be followed to safeguard the content of the encyclopedia in the event of a non-localized event that would render the continuation of Wikipedia in its current form untenable.
The policy is designed to facilitate the preservation of the encyclopedia by a transition to non-electronic media in an orderly, time-sensitive manner or, if events dictate otherwise, the preservation of the encyclopedia by other means. Editors are asked to familiarize themselves with the procedures and in the unlikely event that the implementation of these procedures proves necessary, act in accordance with the procedural guidelines, inasmuch as circumstances allow.
- "Wikipedia policies on what editors should do in the case of impending apocalypse" | 2019-06-28 | 25 Upvotes 15 Comments
- "Wikipedia: Terminal Event Management Policy" | 2019-05-26 | 18 Upvotes 3 Comments
Of the over six million articles in the English Wikipedia there are some articles that Wikipedians have identified as being somewhat unusual. These articles are verifiable, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia, but are a bit odd, whimsical, or something one would not expect to find in Encyclopædia Britannica. We should take special care to meet the highest standards of an encyclopedia with these articles lest they make Wikipedia appear idiosyncratic. If you wish to add an article to this list, the article in question should preferably meet one or more of these criteria:
- The article is something a reasonable person would not expect to find in a standard encyclopedia.
- The subject is a highly unusual combination of concepts, such as cosmic latte, death from laughter, etc.
- The subject is a clear anomaly—something that defies common sense, common expectations or common knowledge, such as Bir Tawil, Märket, Phineas Gage, Snow in Florida, etc.
- The subject is well-documented for unexpected notoriety or an unplanned cult following at extreme levels, such as Ampelmännchen or All your base are belong to us.
- The subject is a notorious hoax, such as the Sokal affair or Mary Toft.
- The subject might be found amusing, though serious.
- The subject is distinct amongst other similar ones.
- The article is a list or collection of articles or subjects meeting the criteria above.
This definition is not precise or absolute; some articles could still be considered unusual even if they do not fit these guidelines.
To keep the list of interest to readers, each entry on this list should be an article on its own (not merely a section in a less unusual article) and of decent quality, and in large meeting Wikipedia's manual of style. For unusual contributions that are of greater levity, see Wikipedia:Silly Things. A star () indicates a featured article. A plus () indicates a good article.
Occasionally, even experienced Wikipedians lose their heads and devote every waking moment to edit warring over the most trivial thing, wasting time debating topics of no practical value, or wrestling over questions whose answers hold no practical consequence. This page documents our lamest examples. It isn't comprehensive or authoritative, but it serves as a showcase of situations where people lose sight of the big picture and obsessively expend huge amounts of energy fighting over something that, in the end, isn't really so important.
Edit warring is believed by some to be important, possibly due to the historical regularity and frequency of the occurrence of these wars. A careful and scholarly study of available archeological evidence has even suggested that edit wars may have recurred on a regular basis going back all the way to the beginning of recorded history, even before the advent of proper writing circa 2001 C.E. (see Wikipedia). In some earlier instances of edit warring, dating back from before the good old days, participants would simply utilize their swords and fight a battle, or later, their guns and fight a duel.
In modern times, physical combat has been outlawed and replaced by the careful inciting of personal attacks, strategic 3RR templating and canvassing, timely notices on WP:AN/I, and (in some cases) marking the changes as a minor edit. Truly, the revolutionary Wikipedia outlook has changed the way things get done. It has changed them from actually getting done to never getting done. On the other hand, nobody gets dispatched (so far!).
- "Lamest Edit Wars" | 2020-04-27 | 441 Upvotes 318 Comments
One theory that explains the addictive nature of Wikipedia and its tendency to produce Wikipediholics is that Wikipedia is a massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG). The following article explains how Wikipedia shares many characteristics with MMORPGs.
Wikipedia is a sequel to the game Nupedia, an encyclopedia-themed MMORPG in a hack and slash and "article roaming" style. It was released for the World Wide Web by the Wikimedia Foundation, and was developed by the community.
- "Wikipedia is an MMORPG" | 2020-09-12 | 214 Upvotes 115 Comments