Wikipedia talk:Sarcasm is really helpful

Essays Low‑impact

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.EssaysWikipedia:WikiProject EssaysTemplate:WikiProject EssaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

...[edit]

Nice! William M. Connolley 09:51, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcasm Essay[edit]

A sarcasm essay? Yeah, that's a really useful addition. Great work, guys. :p~ --TheOther Bob 06:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcasm Meter[edit]

Yeah, a sarcasm meter, that's real useful. >Radiant< 10:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@Radiant!: But, then there is a problem. How will it work on those users that don't understand sarcasm? Aceing_Winter_Snows_Harsh_Cold (talk) 06:09, 20 January 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Self-sarcasm[edit]

When I inserted that bit, I did it for these reasons:

To highlight the sarcastic tone of the page (which I had guessed but wasn't absolutely sure) i.e., since self-sarcasm is shown as "prohibited", then the whole essay actually mocks third-party-sarcasm.
To help readers understand that in certain occasions humor is indeed a helpful means of toning down a heated discussion as long as it doesn't offend others.

While I fully respect that mockery of others is utterly unhelpful, I find it really hard to believe that this article should serve as an advice for depriving us of the good side of humor. WP:ROUGE is a very good example of self-sarcasm that works and has been commented positively. As the Greeks would say, pan metron ariston and meden agan! Niko Silver 12:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Example (given the above specific comment):

As a member of the Society of Wikipedians Aiming to Mock People (S.W.A.M.P. for short), I find that excessive attempts to discourage healthy humor in WP should be strongly discouraged!

Niko Silver 14:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Projects?[edit]

Hey, any plans for a WP:IRONY or WP:FLIPPANT_DISMISSAL? : ) THEPROMENADER 14:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We have a WP:TROUT, does that count? —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 14:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And how : ) THEPROMENADER 14:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

))) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.192.238.186 (talk) 17:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

excellent! :) --Rebroad 23:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grr, Wikipedia is going to run out of )'s soon. Gracenotes^T § 00:09, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never understood counter-clockwise racism. This: (-: should do the same work. Niko Silver 00:22, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Extratextual"[edit]

Alright, I gotta say that I think "Nontextual" is the preferred term here. Although it's not as if it's hard to understand what's being said by the term at the moment (not sarcastic!) --Edwin Herdman 02:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does "verbal" exclusively refer to spoken dialogue ? I think "nonverbal" or "extraverbal" could work too, with the added bonus of being more widely known. Just edited the page, feel free to revert if it bothers. 89.3.236.183 (talk) 13:44, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- "Extratextual" may technically be right, but I prefer 89.3.236.183's edit of "nonverbal". EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:50, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Love...it[edit]

Just wanted to express my appreciation for this page. I've created another redirect to it that I felt was needed (Wikipedia:Sarcasm). I'd like to see this page become a guideline someday, and no I'm not being sarcastic. In fact I'm going to go and tag his as proposed right now. Thanks again.

Equazcion • argue/contribs • 17:05, 09/19/2007

- Reading this essay gives me the best belly-laugh I've had in a while! 203.129.139.183 (talk) 17:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- I wouldd like to second this. 65.87.185.147 (talk) 19:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair page[edit]

To be honest, i would expected that 'sarcasm is Eeeeevil'. In wiki.it, you have troubles and are often flogged (as i have learn, i am blocked infinite) if you dare use 'sarcasm'. Is often seen as 'personal attack' 'insult' and so on (just ask to Ligabo, another whipped for his comments). Instead, here is welcomed. At least one point for Wiki.en advantage let me say.--Stefanomencarelli 09:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... flogging and whipping? Wiki.it utilizes corporal punishment? Talk about admin abuse... MastCell ^Talk 19:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kinky! --Illustrious One (talk) 21:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. That's an odd wiki. Kausill (talk) 01:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've have to disagree.[edit]

SARCASM* tags would be a lot easier for everyone on the internet. You don't say "*SARCASM*" IRL, so it's not really known for sure that you're being sarcastic. On the 'net, however, with *SARCASM* tags, it's known 100%. Vael Victus 15:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What a great idea! ← κεηηε∂γ ^{(shout at me)} 10:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I <3 Sarcasm ← κεηηε∂γ ^{(shout at me)} 10:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of total stars[edit]

In this famous case of deletion there was a list of editors by number of total barnstars. Obviously, it got deleted for being total crap and un-encyvlopedial. Yesterday, this caught my eye and I was thinking: this is a perfect example of Wikipedia:Gaming the system, etc, other wikipedia articles. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 09:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re-write recommended[edit]

Someone should re-write this page to use sarcasm, instead of hefty doses of Irony. I would find it rather more amusing that way. - 121.223.171.209 (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like this at all[edit]

I find sarcasm very hard to understand on the internet. It should not be used on an online encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.154.230 (talk) 05:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<comment> HOW? Sarcasm helps everyone. It is one of the few languages everybody should speak! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.65.110.126 (talk) 01:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

XML tags[edit]

The lopsided tags! They hurt my brain! </humor> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feezo (talk • contribs) 17:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fixed and well-formed now. MastCell ^Talk 18:36, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Extension[edit]

Interesting enough, there is a MediaWiki extension, mw:Extension:Sarcasm, which implements a <sarcasm> tag to emphasize sarcasm in text. Cainamarques (talk) 18:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

<sarcasm>That extension's really useful</sarcasm> Dark Sun (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ellipsis[edit]

Some users also use ellipsis to mock other Wikipedians. I encounter this especially in Turkish Wikipedia a lot. For example a dialog like this occured between a user and me,

Me:"If there is anyone still disagreeing please let me know, I will answer it with sources."

Other user:"Actually we already let you know, but as I see it doesn't matter anyway..."

Here the sentence is already completed, nevertheless the user uses ellipsis to sense the other user rest of the sentence in a negative way. Here is another example,

Me:"I have revised the text a little bit. What do you think?"

Other user:"I wonder if you were able to read the link I gave?.."

Here the user still uses eclipsis although sentence is completed. There might also be other examples others can give. I think people do that do shadow forth a negative meaning. This is more like a grey zone but users still do this to tease others. I will add this into the essay. Is there any suggestions?--Visnelma (talk) 09:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive word changes[edit]

IP was an LTA. Closing as the LTA continues to try and get their way.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

IP please explain your reasoning for changing the words the people understand to ones that you'd probably need a dictionary to know what they mean. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:43, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is classic WP:BKFIP. Don't bother attempting to negotiate with them, it's not worth the time or energy to rediscover why they have been community banned. Gsquaredxc (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't realize it was BKFIP. The behavior doesn't really match what's described on the LTA page. Will report. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blaze Wolf What I noticed is that these are UK IPs and that there have been 2 accounts banned under CU blocks for being BKFIP that added the same thing to this page. Gsquaredxc (talk) 19:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Gsquaredxc: Ah alright. Regardless, I've reported the IP to AIV and requested it to be Glocked since the first account they used is glocked so it's technically lock evasion. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.