Wikipedia talk:Department of Fun: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 23:08, 1 April 2020

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Department of Fun page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 210 days

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Department of Fun page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 210 days

Department of Fun Project‑class Bottom‑importance

	This page is supported by the Department of Fun, which aims to provide Wikipedians with fun so that they stay on Wikipedia and keep on improving articles. If you have any ideas, do not hesitate to post them to the discussion page or access our home page to join the Department of Fun.Department of FunWikipedia:Department of FunTemplate:WikiProject Department of FunDepartment of Fun articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Bottom	This page has been rated as Bottom-importance on the importance scale.

This project page was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Deletion discussions:
SNOW Keep, 28 February 2010, see MfD5. Speedy Keep, 26 February 2010, see MfD4. Speedy Keep, 19 March 2007, see MfD3. Speedy Keep, 7 December 2006, see MfD2. Speedy Keep, 3 December 2006, see MfD1. Keep, 1 July 2005, see AfD.

Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 210 days may be automatically archived by when more than 10 sections are present.

m:Wikicommunity

Please see also the proposed project m:Wikicommunity. Sarsaparilla (talk) 14:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Word association games deleted

Most of the word association games have been deleted without being tagged. Please see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 October 25#Wikipedia:Sandbox/Word Association/Ultra Game and make any comments you wish there. Thryduulf (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Argh. Those games have been in existence for a long time and have been continually active. In the first place they should have been under DoF subpages, not /Sandbox... And another thing.. these pages fill a niche, they are a part of the Dept. of Fun, and the Dept. of Fun has a place on Wikipedia.. and I value the fact that Wikipedia has something for everybody.. and that people enjoy Wikipedia enough to have fun on it.. and create interesting link association activities that help them explore our wonderful site. These Word association games specifically are more for the readers anyway, not editors, so we shouldn't be complaining. They help readers find interesting articles to read, it's entertainment, part of the fun of Wikipedia.. Sure, let's be complete poopers and take that away from them. Editing Wikipedia is recreation.. It's meant to be fun.. Let's not get so presumptuous to think that has nothing to do with building an encyclopedia. Personally, I'm happy that we have such bright people as to want to play games on an encyclopedia rather than mindless shootemups! </end rant> -- œ ^™ 01:54, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am in favor of moving the word association games here. Just wondering, how will people know they have been moved, though? — Michael J 03:10, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, because the old name will still redirect? -- œ ^™ 13:43, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:Sandbox/Word Association#Suggest move to DoF -- œ ^™ 15:59, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Movies

Hi, I was asking, who selects the maker of the new Wikipedia Movie?--103.229.234.178 (talk) 19:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody please give me a link to the movies? Thanks! IHeartMath&#124Jason13579 (talk) 12:00, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between this and WikiFun Police

^ What is it? 108.26.217.72 (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JOKE, WP:LOL, WP:HUMOUR and WP:HUMOR

These redirects, most of which currently point to Category:Wikipedia humour, have been nominated for retargetting at RFD. You are invited to the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 4#Wikipedia:JOKE. Thryduulf (talk) 14:17, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April Fools Day RFC

There is currently an ongoing RFC about keeping April Fools day activities from getting out-of-hand, with a particular focus on the so-called Great April Fools Day Edit War. If anyone has any thoughts or comments, they would be greatly appreciated. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:40, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joining the DoF

Can someone enlighten me on how to join the DoF? I have lots of things I would like to help with. Thanks! Littlecat456 (talk) 10:42, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Littlecat456, We don't really have much of a member list. I.e. I participate and i'm not in any list besides the Great April Fools Day Edit War Participant one. moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 13:48, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Littlecat456: Click here and add your name. —pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 20:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should not WP:APRIL and WP:AFMP be explicit adopted by WP:FUN

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. Within 24 hours, this page will be added to the following list:

Wikipedia proposals

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

I don't see explicit association, since the objectives are the same and the lines that separate WP:APRIL movement seems to be fit within our department.

TLDR: Title says it all. Eduemoni ^↑talk↓ 22:12, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've turned this into a request for comment.

@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 :{{u|Littlecat456}}: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Department_of_Fun&action=edit&section=29 Click here] and add your name. —[[User:pythoncoder|<span style="color:#004080">python</span><span style="color:olive">coder</span>]]&nbsp;([[User talk:pythoncoder|talk]]&nbsp;&#124;&nbsp;[[Special:Contribs/pythoncoder|contribs]]) 20:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
-== Should not WP:APRIL and WP:AFMP be explicit adopted by WP:FUN ==
+== Should not [[WP:APRIL]] and [[WP:AFMP]] be explicit adopted by [[WP:FUN]] ==
+{{rfc|prop}}
-I don't see explicit association, since the objectives are the same and the lines that separate WP:APRIL movement seems to be fit within our department.
+I don't see explicit association, since the objectives are the same and the lines that separate [[WP:APRIL]] movement seems to be fit within our department.
 TLDR: Title says it all. <b style="background:#FEE;padding:5px;font-size:10px">[[User:Eduemoni|<b style="color:#913">Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b>]][[User Talk:Eduemoni|<sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓</sup>]]</b> 22:12, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
+* I've turned this into a request for comment.