Jump to content

Talk:Chuck Norris facts: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 4: Line 4:
{{WikiFun Police}}
{{WikiFun Police}}
{{Archive box|[[/Archive 1|1]]}}
{{Archive box|[[/Archive 1|1]]}}

== Kyle Katarn Facts ==
What happened to the part of this page on Kyle Katarn Facts? These have almost the same status among Star Wars fans as Chuck Norris facts are to internet Users.

[[Special:Contributions/24.233.132.198|24.233.132.198]] ([[User talk:24.233.132.198|talk]]) 16:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


== Wrong Origin Date ==
== Wrong Origin Date ==

Revision as of 16:21, 25 July 2012

WikiProject iconInternet culture Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Internet culture To-do:
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Template:WikiFun Police

Kyle Katarn Facts

What happened to the part of this page on Kyle Katarn Facts? These have almost the same status among Star Wars fans as Chuck Norris facts are to internet Users.

24.233.132.198 (talk) 16:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Origin Date

www.activebass.com/resources/review.asp?i=4521 shows comments from 2002 with Chuck facts. Clearly 2005 was not the start of the Chuck-facts. Anonymous Coward 118.219.230.10 (talk) 16:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I just stumbled upon this wiki article and was more than surprised about 2005 as origin date. Chuck Norris "facts" were already pretty common on Usenet back in the 90s, probably earlier but that's when I started using the internet. 80.141.157.89 (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Well sourced" examples

The examples cited were all referenced to Google searches, ebay comments, personal joke websites, and other entirely unreliable sources. I removed them all. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:11, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Chuck Norris Facts

The Chuck Norris Facts Facebook Group that further fueled the internet phenomenon.

Over 1/4 Million Group Members...

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2204804234&ref=ts

http://www.facebakers.com/facebook-groups/2204804234-the-chuck-norris-facts/ THEBLAKEGROUP (talk) 22:18, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Also

Objects visible from space? Zazaban (talk) 22:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apostrophe mistake

{{editsemiprotected}}

Can someone please remove the offending "s" from the title of Chuck_Norris_facts#Norris.27s_response? I.e. so it says "Norris' response". Thanks 86.7.19.159 (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I"m not sure that this is necessary: Per the section of the MOS that applies, the apostrophe may or may not be used as preferred; I think it is necessary here to distinguish between "Norris" and "Norrises" (with added s) when read. But I agree that some uniformity would be good either way. {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 10:47, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It depends whether it is spelt like that throughout the article or not, at least that's what I thought. If it's spelt differently to that throughout the rest of the article I thought it should be changed. Chevymontecarlo 10:54, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done: IMO it looks better, and as Chevy stated, it matches the rest of the references to Norris now. Worst case scenario it's unnecessary but valid, anyway. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 12:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook password

In the articke it says that the password to any facebook acount used to be "chuck norris".According to the reference this isnt intirely true.Facebook employee quote: "I’m not going to give you the exact password, but with upper and lower case, symbols, numbers, all of the above, it spelled out ‘Chuck Norris,’ more or less. It was pretty fantastic." I think the artick needs to be more specific and say that it "more or less" spelt chuck norris. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.235.144 (talk) 08:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another Userbox

Here's another userbox stating a Chuck Norris fact: {{User:UBX/Chuck Norris 2}}. Enjoy! EWikistTalk 19:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fact: Chuck Norris was born in a log cabin he built with his own two hands.

Chick Noris on God.

Oh wow, really. I do not think Chuck Norris said that. I want proof and I want legitimacy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThisguyYEAH (talk • contribs) 01:34, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference is in the article and can be verified, which is what is required by our policy. Dougweller (talk) 07:02, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think this entire segment is not entirely relevant and doesn't help to explain Chuck Norris Facts. It is interesting to note his opinion on these satirical factoids, but this segment is basically a tangent that adds no substance to the article. Honestly, I think listing a few 'popular' Chuck Norris factoids would be more relevant than this crap: "One of the satirical facts made of Norris states that "There is no theory of evolution. Just a list of creatures Chuck Norris has allowed to live". In the abovementioned article, he wrote:

It's funny. It's cute. But here's what I really think about the theory of evolution: it's not real. It is not the way we got here. In fact, the life you see on this planet is really just a list of creatures God has allowed to live. We are not creations of random chance. We are not accidents. There is a God, a Creator, who made you and me. We were made in His image, which separates us from all other creatures. By the way, without Him, I don't have any power. But with Him, the Bible tells me, I really can do all things — and so can you.[2]" 184.99.228.62 (talk) 04:20, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nostalgia Critic

In his website Dog wallker rivew sidekicks(1992)movie and it was full of Chuck Norris facts

http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/nostalgia-critic/8421-sidekicks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.42.105.40 (talk) 14:08, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This post was confusing(to me), only the Nostalgia Critic made Chuck facts, NOT the 1992 movie. 118.219.230.10 (talk) 16:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Examples

I think examples are needed for the Chuck Norris facts. Expecting the user to visit an external link to see what even one Chuck Norris fact is like seems to be asking too much. I'm there's concern that one or two examples could turn into a list contributed to by every singe person on the planet, but I don't believe wanting to discourage poor edits is a reason to keep them from the page. Editors can always go through and remove all but the best. Dr. Cheis (talk) 06:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. A couple of good examples would enhance this article, even though it might add a maintenance burden to keep the examples from growing into a long list of trivia. Astronaut (talk) 16:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How would we manage to limit the number of examples? Google provides ready access to examples, and we're not in the business of documenting everything. Any notions of criteria? --Nuujinn (talk) 22:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here's an arbitrary criteria that would work: two. We put two examples on the page. When it goes beyond that, somebody takes down others, saying they're redundant. Worst case scenario I can imagine is that the example facts keep changing every day or so because a user thinks they have a "better" example. As long as the replacement fact doesn't function less effectively as an example, there would be no need to change it. Keeping the old one up wouldn't seem to further any goal of Wikipedia's, so there wouldn't be any need to define the only two examples that would ever appear; just assume good faith when the user replaces it with a "better" one. High maintenance? Perhaps, but I don't think that's really a bad thing. Dr. Cheis (talk) 04:05, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with such a solution. Without examples, the phenomenon is hard to understand. German news station N-TV just listed examples, including the classic "the water gets Chuck Norris". I'm sure we can also find reliable English language sources for examples. It's not a slippery slope when we can stop the slide by a simple "no more than two" rule. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Do not add Chuck Norris Facts to this talk page or its article." By what authority is this order made? I think the article would be improved by adding examples. It is a significant cultural phenomena that seems to meet the criteria for WP:notable. (Chuck Norris could add Chuck Norris facts to the article!) DrTh0r (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Dcostroff, 10 April 2011

Family Guy included the "There is no chin behind Chuck Noriss's beard only another fist" fact in season 5 episode 15 titled "Boys Do Cry" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boys_Do_Cry Dcostroff (talk) 19:53, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Spain That's likely true, but if you check the article, you'll see that we do not list the actual "facts" (save 1, which Norris specifically responded to), nor where they were mentioned. Such a task would not be encyclopedic (falling under WP:NOT). There are, I'm sure, dozens of sites across the internet where you could add such a "fact". Qwyrxian (talk) 05:19, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

I just found this nice picture showing a student protest banner at the University of Bamberg in 2009. Its text is written in German, but perhaps this illustrates the international meaningfulness of Chuck Norris facts especially well. The translation on Commons is quite accurate, so it could be used as a picture despription. If appropriate, one could think of adding this exemplary image to the pictureless article. -- Gohnarch░ 16:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Need citation for WorldNetDaily response

Here's the URL: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=38499

Krissco (talk) 17:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chuck Norris understands the difference between who and whom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.163.156.250 (talk) 00:05, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My Revert

Sorry about that Revert, I was on my Iphone and must of accidently hit Rollback. --SKATER Is Back 20:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

World of Warcraft ad

Some reference (perhaps in a "pop culture" or "legacy" blurb) should be made to the recent (Nov 2011) WoW ad that prominently features Norris and includes the very Chuck Norris facts line "There are 10 million people in the World of Warcraft, because Chuck Norris allows them to live" (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/technology/gaming/chuck-norris-features-in-new-world-of-warcraft-ad/story-fn6rvxri-1226202246930). This ad demonstrates the ongoing success of the the Chuck Norris facts trend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.115.251.143 (talk) 02:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Saxton Hale Facts

There's a fan-made website that collaborates "Chuck Norris facts" and "Saxton Hale" from Team Fortress 2 http://saxtonhalefacts.net/ 58.153.188.6 (talk) 12:55, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If Rory Williams gets mentioned then I believe that Linus Torvalds' facts should also be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.176.206.233 (talk) 20:03, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Germany there exists a similar internet meme with football player Hans Sarpei. For Example "Hans Sarpei can catch his own penalty kick" or "Hans Sarpei - the L stands for Danger". 77.181.173.19 (talk) 22:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From an anthropological perspective, we could write a whole article on phenomena throughout human culture that are analogous to the Chuck Norris facts meme, and related to it by common anthropological underpinnings. From tall tale traditions (such as Paul Bunyan), to maternal insult jokes, to folklore from classical Greek and Roman eras (for example, polytheist characterizations of various gods' personalities), up to folklore worldwide today—but the current censors of this article have already deleted all mention of such connections, even just a one-line mention, because, well—I suspect because they don't know anything about anthropology, and they assume that even a one-line mention "doesn't belong" here, as if it's off-topic or original research (neither of which is true, of course, but there you are...). Till this misguidance is worn down, it'll be hard to put a paragraph in the article to develop this aspect of the encyclopedic coverage. Eventually encyclopedic comprehensiveness will win out. Some number of months or years from now. — ¾-10 02:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chuck_Norris_facts&oldid=504132411"