Wikipedia talk:List of cabals

mediation cabal is not on the list

However, the mediation cabal is not on the list. Wow, that quiet eh? Kim Bruning 10:06, 15 May 2006 (UTC) This page alone made me commit to never donating to wikipedia again during yearly poverty drives. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:AA09:B700:D9C:314B:A210:3609 (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello, welcome Kim Bruning! Wikipedia is a wiki; that means individuals (even you!) can edit pages to correct mistakes and add information. If you see a page that needs information added, please click "edit this page" and add it! Welcome to Wikipedia, where it's a wiki wiki world!

/evil smile/ Essjay (Talk • Connect) 02:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Why am I not surprised to learn that you two have edited this page. n.n <3 ~Kylu (u|t) 06:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

white-collar American cabal - this one does actually exist - what's it doing in a page under a humour (sorry, that should be "humor") banner? MarkThomas 11:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

The "IRC Cabal" needs to be added sometime. Gurch should do it, since he's leader of the cabal and all. ~Kylu (u|t) 05:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Ssshh... TINC! TINC! – Gurch 05:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

"Of course, cabals that actually exist are by default excluded from this page. You did not just read that." --Raijinili 18:07, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

FNORD! FNORD! FNORD! Essjay (Talk) 04:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The emerging penguin cabal should be listed here.--24.20.69.240 09:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, its already there. Should have seen it before posting. 24.20.69.240 20:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Enough with this list of conspiracy theories! The plain truth is that there is now only a Cabal of One, and you will know them by the rings that they wear, as it is written:

       One for the Dark TINC on his dark throne
       In the Land of Wiki where the Cabals lie.
       One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
       One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
       In the Land of Wiki where the Cabals lie.

67.176.29.209 05:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

/le gasp/ You're not supposed to know about the cabal! How'd you find out? /looks around suspiciously/

Real commentary Cute, real cute. :) I like it. On Uncyclopedia they have a whole list of pages about the non-existance of the cabal. I'll include it in a second.--Song 03:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Removal

This page is used to make fun of people who question certain things and to belittle them. Making fun of people should not be concidered humorous and thats why this page should be deleted. Besides that it can be uased as a 'weapon' to silence people who are serious about this. 87.210.105.64 13:54, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

It's just humour. It's not teasing anyone. There are plnty of Humourouse pages on wikipedia see the Wikipedia:Department of Fun. I'll rmv the Npov but you can put it back on if you have a problem with this--Pheonix15 (talk) 17:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, there's no reason for the stupid Wikipedia:Department of Fun category to exist; it just encourages people to muck around and further hurts what little credibility the website has when people see it.

New picture for page - how to integrate?

This is exactly how a cabal would deal with user complaints.

I'd like to see this on the cabal page but I'm unsure of how to integrate it cleanly. Anyone have any ideas? Triddle 15:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:LOC shortcut

Since this article is for humor, I think the WP:LOC shortcut should instead be directed to the League of Copyeditors. Their focus is improving articles and I think they could get better use out of it. Thoughts? KnightLago 16:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Delete a "cabal"

I've removed the Boy Scout cabal, as I feel it was made solely as a vindictive listing bu User:Allstarecho against me because I nominated two of his templates for deletion, one of which was and the other was not. Humor certainly has its place, but I find nothing funny about this content as it is directly solely at my actions. Please discuss here before reverting. Justinm1978 (talk) 03:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Bitter much? I find you removing the content solely vindictive because of your harassment of me over the 2 templates you mentioned. Stalking has NO place. And how dare you tell people to discuss it here before reverting... did you discuss it here before removing the content in the first place? NO, you did not. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 14:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Explain and clarify how I am stalking by removing an edit that is directly related to my actions? How is it vindictive to remove something that was placed and referenced by my edits and actions? How is singling out the actions of a single user and calling it a cabal constructive? It's not funny, and if anybody needs to do some growing up here, it would be the editor who would rather push for this cruft than edit articles. Justinm1978 (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

And yet you are here arguing over a humor page instead of following your own advice. Read the freaking huge purple box and get over yourself. The world doesn't revolve around you and your paranoia is childish. - ✰ALLSTAR✰ ^echo 18:37, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Cute, and not at all insulting. On second thought, I will take this to ANI. A big purple box doesn't give free reign to be uncivil. Justinm1978 (talk) 12:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really involved in whatever dispute these two users are having, but I oppose the change being made to the gay cabal section. It seems to be more a real complaint about the "cabal," and not really humor at all. Real complaints, surely, should be addressed in some other place than a humor page, while things that aren't particularly funny should reasonably be removed. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

List of...

Regardless of whether people like these or not, if there is no supporting page on Wikipedia introducing/describing the group and so forth, then it shouldn't be listed here.

If anything it will cut down on page length. - jc37 04:01, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

The original idea for the list was to highlight the absurdity of all the accusations that Wikipedia is controlled by the so-and-so cabal. For example, we are supposedly run by both pro- and anti-Communist cabals. Given that purpose, I would agree that all listings should reference the place where the cabal was alleged to exist. --bainer (talk) 23:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, some sense of purpose to the page rather than the current directionless hodge-podge would be a plus : ) - jc37 06:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

(And I'll note that it's really becoming tiresome to see a small "cabal" of spoilers coming to one humour page after another and showing their lack of good sense by attempting to turn it into a battleground.) - jc37 06:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Put back the Canadian Cabal. We're not gone yet. Trekphiler ^{hit me} 15:29, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

We totally need a Canadian cabal! Can I put it back? YoSoyUnHamster (talk) 03:43, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Sedition

You all are playing with some very dangerous stuff. This is no joke.

"Underground cabal that uses parody and poker games to invite unsuspecting users into their lair for conversion and Lithuanian chit-chat. If encountered, smile and nod your head, but decline any offers of cool, refreshing Kool-Aid.[16] Christian cabalists are all brain-washed and have an intuitive understanding of how to brainwash others. To them, factual material is just bait. Beware their "spirituality is the opposite of brainwashing" technique—you're being brainwashed."

That sounds like 1935 Germany to me, and Adolf Hilter speaking about Jews. Godwin's Law falls in the same category. 68.103.31.116 (talk) 20:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

68.103.31.116 (talk) 20:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Jews/Zionists/Pro Israelis

I notice they aren't mentioned.--Mongreilf (talk) 22:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow, keep it up, and you are going to get banned. travb (talk) 01:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

the (anti) IDCab is also a glaring omission. this page is CLEARLY a diversionary exercise--Mongreilf (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Troubling page, ignoring the realities of wikipedia

Every society has minority beliefs and views that it ostracizes, no matter how valid or invalid those beliefs are. The Cabal label on Wikipedia is now like the word "conspiracy theory" in larger society.

Offline e-mailing between "trusted people" is common, and occasionally its ugly head sees the light of day, for example in the most famous case, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Durova/Evidence . travb (talk) 01:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Cabal

I noticed a cabal called the Anti-Long Shortcut Cabal on Wikipedia. It isn't on the list. Should it be added? Dogposter 21:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Whatever, I'll add it. Dogposter 22:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of stamp

What happens if I delete the Supreme Cabal stamp of the top of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.179.165.213 (talk) 21:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I guess you'll find out, won't you? (Incidentally, nice Internet access. It'd be a shame if anything were to happen to it ...) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 22:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Is this a joke?

Also, one cabal seems to target the exact city where I live. Scary and demeaning and the same time. Abce2|TalkSign 01:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

THE Administrator Cabal

Added the following:

First floated by Jim Wales in October 2001,

Ikip (talk) 17:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Climate Cabal

I readded this without the personal attack that was added. Please do not delete/hide this cabal. --The PimpHand $ 19:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

• This section has been completely deleted twice now, if anyone feels like this section is an attack then maybe you are part of this cabal.? I think that editing the section is far better than removing the whole thing due to ideology.--The PimpHand $ 02:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

• I have added this section back for the third time, with out any refs. So does this section still have personal attacks (or are you part of this cabal)? Please edit and add your comments on this section as to what is a NPOV on this cabal. --The PimpHand $ 21:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

And it will continue to be deleted. I looked at the history and I noticed the main reverter (and probably the other one too) is a facebook friend of the infamous William Connolley. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.196.4 (talk) 19:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

is this necessary???

Guys this is really bad and not funny except to the supernerd(s) who wrote it. Can't we delete this crap, its likely taking up valuable server space that could be used for something else. This should really be on some technodweeb's humour blog not wikipedia.50.80.150.100 (talk) 21:26, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Step away from the vehicle! This is not the page you are looking for!Buster Seven Talk 07:27, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Taking up valuable server space? First, please read WP:NOTPAPER. Then read WP:OBEY. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 10:15, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Deleting pages doesn't actually remove them from the database. It only makes them invisible to non-admins. If you don't like it, then ignore it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:03, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Beans

Hey, i have heard of a beans cabal. I think they idolize the Supreme Idiot. Note: i've been tracking him for months —but never caught him. They also try to trick people into blowing up Wikipedia thru devious beanery (and other such things).

CABAL AHEAD!  :) lnglivzecabl - Benzband (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

This page is most certainly not humorous

While I don't actually care a single iota whether this page remains or not, to call it 'humorous' is a gross example of false advertising. Please, quote me the funny part: I read nearly halfway and found nothing but drivel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.208.186 (talk) 12:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC) Well I read it & found it very funny. You can't always please everyone.Assistant N (talk) 19:35, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

How about this: (in accordance with the joking "One True Cabal" theory)

Nine Cabals for the Elven-admins under the sky,
Thirty-seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Seventy-five for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor (haven't found a way to substitute this) where the Shadows lie.
One Cabal to rule them all, One Cabal to find them,
One Cabal to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

Thomas J. S. Greenfield (talk) 00:32, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Revert Cabal

Although they seem to work separately, there is clearly convinced there is a Revert Cabal as one comes across more and more Editors who do not do any actual editing or writing, they occupy themselves with reverting the work of other Editors (or at least 90% of the edits are reverts). First thought to be just one zealous person it has expanded to many more. They seem to believe they are combating Vandalism but Undoing other Editors' work (over and over and over again) is also a great way to express passive aggression. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

There Is No Cabal

There Is No Cabal (TINC). We discussed this at the last cabal meeting, and everyone agreed that there is no cabal. An announcement was made in Cabalist: The Official Newsletter of The Cabal making it clear that there is no cabal. The words "There Is No Cabal" are in ten-foot letters on the side of the international cabal headquarters, and we the announcement that there is no cabal is shown at the start of every program on the Cabal Network. If that doesn't convince people that there is no cabal, I don't know what will. --Guy Macon (talk) 11:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

The Equine Cabal...with qualifications

May I please propose the addition of the "Equine Cabal" which comprises expert editors who are qualified to identify horses' asses? Thank you for your consideration. ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Added Ukrainian Cabal

Created "Ukrainian Cabal". Inspiration came from reading Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#"Kiev" vs. "Kyiv" disputes discussion. I explained my reasoning for this in great detail here.--RogueRickC137 (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2020 (UTC)