Talk:Geek Code

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Computing (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Internet (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

not in breach of copyright[edit]

I'm the author of the equivalent entry on h2g2. This entry is taken from the unedited version, to which I retain a non-exclusive copyright. Therefore this is not in breach of copyright. IANAL. TINLA. -Martin

Bear Code predates Geek Code[edit]

The bear code existed in 1989:

http://www.resourcesforbears.com/nbcs/

...and is extraordinarily similar to the Geek Code.

Searching early Usenet archives (i.e. Google Groups) will reveal uses of the Bear Code going back to 1990 and earlier.

66.127.105.218 01:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)Anthony Berno (aberno@rakko.org)

According to the Jargon File, the Geek Code originated in 1993, and the inventor of the Geek Code was indeed inspired by codes such as the Bear Code. B7T (talk) 04:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

This, and the Bear Code's inspiration from the Yerkes star code, have been added. I also added a bit explaining the difference in orthogonality in the codes. Josephholsten (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Lol?[edit]

"While the original way to read or write Geek Code is by hand, some people feel they have more important things in their life, like changing that r--- to a happier state, so Joe Reiss wrote an Ungeeker for them to use." Shouldn't it be stated in a less... ironic fashion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.227.67.181 (talkcontribs)

I liked it the way it was. 154.121.251.247 (talk) 19:09, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Outdated?[edit]

>> Nowadays, personal websites are the most common breeding ground, particularly any "about me" sections.

IMHO, that's so Web 1.0, personal websites are a pain to deal with and most likely no one will ever visit one. Blogs are used much more nowadays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.181.12.52 (talk) 12:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
That's so Web 2.0! Now we only use corporate identikit crap like Facebook. Equinox 01:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Horrible article[edit]

This article leaves the user with more questions than answers. Does this code have a syntax or it's just simply made to exclude people. It uses lots of jargon. Please make this article more clear. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 20:07, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Indeed! After reading this article, my #1 question is, "This thing is notable because...?" There appear to be some okay-ish references, so I assume it is notable, but the article certain doesn't explain so. The topic comes across as being some random thing some random guy made up and put on a random website and now it has vague relevance to something random somewhere. lol. I think the article comes across as attempting to make the topic seem more important than it is. Whether or not that is the intent, I think the excessive use of passive voice throughout the article is partly the reason it comes across that way. --50.99.8.69 (talk) 00:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

USECODE as predecesor?[edit]

I found a USENET article from 1984 suggesting USECODE as a compact way to describe one's "identification". Should it be mentioned in the article? grawity 10:39, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Interesting link. Thanks for the flash back. It does seem to be an early proposal for something similar to Geek Code. But making that connection and saying so in the article would be WP:OR original research. Marteau (talk) 10:46, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Sources modified on Geek Code[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just attempted to maintain the sources on Geek Code. I managed to add archive links to 1 source, out of the total 1 I modified, whiling tagging 0 as dead.

Please take a moment to review my changes to verify that the change is accurate and correct. If it isn't, please modify it accordingly and if necessary tag that source with {{cbignore}} to keep Cyberbot from modifying it any further. Alternatively, you can also add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page's sources altogether. Let other users know that you have reviewed my edit by leaving a comment on this post.

Below, I have included a list of modifications I've made:


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Parody of PGP signature blocks[edit]

The fact that Geek Code is a parody of PGP signature blocks is somehow absent from the history section. Somebody please remedy this? 2605:A601:46D:B01:CABC:C8FF:FEA5:82F4 (talk) 05:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Geek Code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:53, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Geek Code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Geek Code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:01, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Geek Code. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:01, 12 October 2017 (UTC)