Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man
- "One can only think they’re profoundly stupid – and these people are obviously not – or that they’re so enraged they’re incapable of thinking."
- "Yelling won't get you what you want. You have to be smart to get what you want."
Sometimes even the coolest of editors become involved in disputes over content. These may become heated, and sometimes degenerate into incivility and revert wars. These traditionally result in the disputed article being protected on the wrong version by a passing administrator. In extreme cases where the issues are of paramount importance, editors may be tempted to climb the Reichstag building dressed as Spider-Man in order to promote their cause. This is strongly discouraged and will result in a definite block from editing Wikipedia.
This is intended to stop content disputes from escalating to the extent of scaling public buildings dressed as popular comic book characters. Note that climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man is an absolute limit – not an entitlement! Users scaling any public building dressed as any popular comic book character may be blocked for disrupting Wikipedia to make a really stupid point. Even threatening to do so is generally viewed as unacceptable. Wikilawyering about how high up the Reichstag you climbed (or about what qualifies as a "popular" comic book character) is right out.
Editors who believe that another user is on the verge of climbing the Reichstag building dressed as Spider-Man may place a request at the Administrators Noticeboard (Reichstag Climbing). Many administrators from the Rouge Admin Group will honour requests if asked (spammed on Talk pages at least 7 times), and will enforce blocks if warranted. Or unwarranted, we don't care too much actually. Maybe we'll just block people at random. That'll teach 'em!
It all boils down to this
Look, if you have been linked here from a Talk page or a Wikipedia debate such as articles for deletion, it's probably an indication that someone thinks you are taking things a bit too seriously. Perhaps you should have a nice cup of tea and a sit down. It is pretty certain that all conflicts can be amicably resolved before the publication deadline. And if they can't be resolved before the deadline, let the deadline pass.
No jumping off the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man
It's not a good idea to believe anyone who tells you that because you're dressed as Spider-Man, your superpowers will prevent you from injury when you jump off the top of the Reichstag. Similarly, it's never a good idea for anyone to delete the main page simply because they believe a new software feature now prevents them from doing it. If you survive the fall, you will only end up in the village stocks. This is unfortunate, as the tomatoes thrown at you are very, very stinky.
This applies even if you are the genuine Spider-Man
Other superheroes and buildings also covered
This shall also apply to climbing an M25 gantry dressed as Batman or climbing George Washington dressed as Superman. Army crawling along the A1 road dressed in the outfit of The Stig is acceptable, no matter the time of day, nor the place of entry nor exit.
- Jaysus, remind me now, Staysha, wot waz dem protesting single dads called wot used to dress up as Batman and didn't dey flour-bomb dat Tony Blair fella in Britain's Reichstag? The Supreme Cabal has yet to rule on that particular content dispute.
- Alain Robert
- Publicity stunt
- Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot
- Wikipedia:No angry mastodons
- Wikipedia:No painting Mont Blanc red and calling it art, a similar rule
- Wikipedia:Don't be a fanatic
- Wikipedia:Don't edit war over the colour of templates
- Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars
- The above caption has been ruled by the Supreme Cabal to be both NPOV and in the best possible taste, as per WP:First Commandment - Thou shalt always be absurdly sycophantic towards Jimbo, and thou shalt pretend to be happy about it.
- To any infidels objecting that Wikipedia's First Commandment is actually two commandments, the happy answer is that this instance of '2 equals 1' just proves Jimbo's divinity, as per The Irish Times's Brendan Glacken's Proof of the existence of God. This goes "I can prove that God exists, but it would take too long. However you'll have to believe I can if I can prove something even harder, namely that '2 equals 1' ". He then uses algebra to prove that '2 equals 1'.
- Shhh...don't tell anybody, but you can 'prove' anything with algebra - the trick is to cleverly hide where you're illegally dividing by zero - but you could never be forgiven if you let Wiki-infidels find this out, and your punishment for letting Wiki-believers find it out simply doesn't bear thinking about.
- However, the rule of law requires that punishments be spelled out, so we regret to have to inform you that the Supreme Cabal would clearly have absolutely no other choice but to sentence you to be hung, drawn, and quartered, chopped into little pieces, fried in boiling oil (with not too much salt, please), and hanged by your naughty bits until Doomsday, and, lest this sentence cause outrage amongst the populace on account of its self-evidently excessive leniency, that you in addition thereafter be banned from editing Wikipedia for a full 365 seconds.