Wikipedia talk:April Fools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Merge Wikipedia:Rules for Fools and Wikipedia:April 1 guidelines into this[edit]

This is not a joke. I think it would be good to merge these pages as it may help to eliminate any confusion about the rules. In particular, the two pages in the topic have almost opposite rules. Of course one of them is meant as a joke in itself, but I think april fools rules are one area where we should definitely be as clear as we can be, and not make any jokes. CodeCat (talk) 19:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Proposed distillation -
  • Rule 1, Hands off article space and procedural issues that cite article space.
  • Rule 2, Otherwise, lighten up. Someone else might think it's funny.
  • Rule 3, Joke authors, apologize as needed
  • Rule 4, Repeat from top.
NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
This nomination is only for merging the articles, not about their contents. CodeCat (talk) 19:23, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I fully support merging everything other than the contents of these articles! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Jokes may be acceptable. meta jokes that make it difficult to understand if jokes are acceptable or not - are not acceptable. support redirect/merge/delete of the joke page for coherence sake. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

This edit (19:39, 1 April 2014) which added {{humor}} to the "fake" rules solved the problem as far as I'm concerned. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't merge them. It is a essay or humor page, and most of the others keep there own page. And as above, anything looking wrong was pretty much **fixed** by that tag.  —Mysterytrey 00:58, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
What about Wikipedia:Rules for Fools though? That could easily go here. CodeCat (talk) 01:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Put the distilled version in WP:April Fools, but leave the actual WP:Rules for fools and any other guidelines for on-wiki humor on their own namespaces because, while they're dealing with jokes, they're not jokes in their own right. I'm not sure, but it might be a good idea to put them into the BJAODN template. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 04:25, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

The destilled version being one my few earnest remarks in all this, I am opposed to adding it to the joke page under the "humorous" label. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 05:40, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
What I mean is that we should put it in a separate section at the top where it's clear that it's not the humorous section (Maybe put it in a box that says something along the lines of "This quick reference list is for informational purposes, please take it seriously (even when the subject matter it deals with is not)"?). That way, it's a tl;dr of Rules for Fools that can be looked at quickly while on the page that it directly affects. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 14:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
I could say I agree with confidence if I saw a mock up, but if I understood you correctly, that is probably a good idea. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:11, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
How's this look? Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 15:24, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Basic guidelines
This is a summary of WP:Rules for Fools, which is not a joke page but is the official April 1 humor guideline and is to be taken seriously,
despite the less-than-serious nature of what it deals with.
Rule 1: Hands off article space and procedural issues that cite article space.
Rule 2: Otherwise, lighten up. Someone else might think it's funny.
Rule 3: Joke authors, apologize as needed.
Rule 4: Repeat from top.
Thanks for doing that; however I think it would be even more confusing to put serious text on the joke page, instead of just flagging the joke page as humor and leaving a straight-up link to the official non-joke guideline. But I could get behind adding this as TL-DR to the serious page. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:April 1 guidelines is confusing because, despite the {{humor}} tag, and perhaps aided by the title, it appears to be the actual rules—especially if the reader doesn't know that Wikipedia:Rules for Fools (WP:FOOLS) exists. I think the clearest way to avoid this without it being mistaken for a joke would be to include an explicit mention of and link to WP:FOOLS in the introduction to the former, along the following lines:

April Fools' Day is a day of celebration on Wikipedia where we test the limits of short tempered Admins by playing jokes and pranks. Some guidelines on making jokes have been established based on last year's Although a set of rules has been established by consensus, the below guidelines have been proposed (in jest) following past complaints by a few of such short tempered Admins and their henchmen who were not amused. Sticking to these guidelines will guarantee that this year's April Fools' Day will be even better than last year's!

Perhaps with the addition of a hatnote:

Not to be confused with the actual rules at Wikipedia:Rules for Fools which are to be taken seriously.

sroc 💬 13:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

(A year later) I've added a hatnote to Wikipedia:April 1 guidelines and used {{humorantipolicy}}. Hopefully that will clear up confusion. I will also remove the merge tags because it's been proposed for over a year now without a solid consensus. (Replace them if you want to revive discussion.) Mz7 (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)