Talk:Fail Blog

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 September 2009. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Blogging, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BloggingWikipedia:WikiProject BloggingTemplate:WikiProject BloggingBlogging articles

Internet culture

This 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

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Youtube Success

The article says little about Failblogs massive youtube success, it is the fifth most viewed and thirteenth most subscribed channel. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karithomasmiller (talk • contribs) 08:08, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They have gone from posting regularly on youtube to not at all - nothing in the last 6/7 months....

It could be argued that it's finished on youtube - it really needs putting into the article too.

Rushton2010 (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rescue

Well I did put the rescue tag back in the page but I noticed the deletion review discussion was already deleted. In my opinion, the notability bits that have been discussed for Fail Blog must be placed there now. kazu (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree

This article has been fixed, with notability stated. I agree with the above. Saebjorn! 03:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Future AFDs

Anyone tempted to nominate this again should wait at least 4 months due to the amount of sources found. It can still be merged assuming it gets no additional coverage per WP:NOTNEWS.--Otterathome (talk) 08:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you need some references

If anyone wants me to find references for anything related to Fail Blog, chances are I would be able to find it. Just contact me on my talk page, linked in the "Roy" part my signature. Leo-Roy! ^review/gb 22:20, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photoshop?

Many, many of the entries on FAIL appear to be photoshopped. Anybody know real sources for this? NeverWorker (Drop me a line) 18:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly think almost none of the images there are “photoshopped”. I came across a comment there which states that even if it's edited, it's still a fail, which I also believe. kazu (talk) 19:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

use of the word "fail" in popular culture

The article states that FAIL Blog has had a big impact on popular culture with the increased use of the word "fail".

Is there evidence for this, as opposed to the possibility that the site chose its name in response to the popular use of the word "fail". Certainly i can say from my personal experience that "fail" was in popular use among my peers some years before 2008 when the site was launched. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdul tom (talk • contribs) 11:10, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to Know Your Meme, which notably is itself part of the Cheezburger Network and therefore affiliated with FAIL Blog, states that "fail" as an interjection has been documented on Urban Dictionary as early as 2003, and that Google image and video searches for the term began to drastically increase from 2004. So FAIL Blog themselves don't seem to make that claim. 84.227.240.148 (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Fail Blog (TV series)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Fail Blog (TV series) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 23#Fail Blog (TV series) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]