Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia is an MMORPG

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

Moving the article[edit]

I like it, insightful enough for me to not VfD it even though it doesn't really belong. --Alex Krupp 23:38, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

You're right, it doesn't belong in the "Wikipedia:" namespace. I've moved it to meta. Lowellian 20:06, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
By the way, I did not just move the article here; I was the original author of this article. :) —Lowellian (talk) 05:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but by moving it to meta, you did not change any of the article itself. Thus it makes no mention of the other sister projects. (no meta account--Wikipedia user HereToHelp) 18:56, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
Well, yes, because the title is, after all "Wikipedia is an MMORPG", not "Wikimedia projects are MMORPGs." —Lowellian (talk) 07:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
As in the intervening couple of years, humor articles have sprung up in the Wikipedia namespace on Wikipedia and a large Wikipedia humor category has been created, I moved this page back to Wikipedia. —Lowellian (reply) 14:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It's still here. Move it to meta already. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Read the above discussion more carefully. There is no need for a move to Meta, as even a deletion discussion resulted in a snowball keep. —Lowellian (reply) 17:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


Shouldn't the title be "Wikipedia is a MMORPG" instead of "an MMORPG?" Massive doesn't actually begin with a vowel or a vowel sound. cookie 19:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

"Massive" may not begin with a vowel sound, but "MMORPG" does: "M" is "em". —Lowellian (talk) 05:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Be that as it may, I personally still have difficulty not reading it as a single word: "Wikipedia is a Mmoar-pig." ;D Lenoxus " * " 16:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

This is absolutely stupid[edit]

Wikipedia is no more a MMORPG than Congress is. Articles are magic items? Whoever wrote this has absolutely no idea what even constitutes a "game".

Wikipedia is an online library that essentially allows anyone to add a book to it about just about anything. That isn't a game. And neither is 'edit wars' a game. Thats just griefing, and its been around much longer than the internet has. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 05:08, June 23, 2006 (UTC)

What does this article/opinion has to do with Meta anyway? NielsF 01:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Minimum requirements for this page: sense of humor --brion 02:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Can't people ever see these types of articles are JOKES? Sheesh. 01:05, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we should make a big banner at the top of the page with flashing text reading "THIS IS HUMOROUS. LAUGH!" People don't really know if this is serious, because they don't see the Category:Humor at the bottom. Nishkid64 01:52, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
There is the humor template now.Orthologist

Stop making Wikipedia jokes, they aren't funny.... TheFireFox 17:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

They are too funny! And I guess someone decided to note that this page is humorous now...Chenhsi (talk) 01:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
It was humor? Edit for 30 days, then decide. ;) (talk) 19:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
it wouldn't be funny if it wasn't half true. Face-wink.svg --Ludwigs2 22:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It's good[edit]

This page is extremely well written and innovative, but misses a point or two. It doesn't mention that "players" belong in "classes" (sysops, bureaucrats, etc.) and "races" (POV hunters, WikiGnomes, Wikifairies etc.). --Orthologist 20:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I like this page too. I think it's quite an apt observation.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 14:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

What about...[edit]

The um... Cabal? Wait... There isn't one... <Shifty eyes> Yes... Let's go with that... Alx xlA 02:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


Hey i loved this article. I just wanted an explanation of how this fits in the Wikipediholism spectrum. J-stan 17:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Many editors are addicted to editing Wikipedia in the same way that many MMORPG players are addicted to playing their MMORPG accounts. —Lowellian (reply) 13:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is like an MMORPG, but Wikipedia is not an MMORPG[edit]

People who treat this place like a game are probably violating WP policy.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 13:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fighting vandalism may be like trying to slay a dragon with an infinite capacity to grow new heads and breathe fire, but it's important that editors (and especially admins) derstand that WP is not a game and do not treat it as such.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 14:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
This is a humor article. It's not intended to be taken all that seriously in the first place. —Lowellian (reply) 13:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
The problem is not the game itself, the problem reveals itself when all the kids start map-hacking. (talk) 01:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Too many brackets[edit]

I think the humor of this essay is being distracted with the large number of terms in brackets. If no one disagrees, I will go ahead and incorporate their contents into wikilinks to the respective words.--Alasdair 16:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

You mean parentheses, not brackets, right? Anyway, I disagree. Those brackets make it easy to read the article and what each Wikipedia term corresponds to in an MMORPG. —Lowellian (reply) 05:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Only free MMO?[edit]

Theoretically, aren't there several other free MMO's?

Viridia (talk) 14:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

yes! Bam123456789 Please Talk!! 20:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Guild Wars!!! Valerio Kreuk (talk) 21:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Most supposedly "free" MMORPGs still have things like ads or the option for paid accounts that unlock more options. In the case of Guild Wars, you have to buy the game in the first place even though it doesn't have subscription fees. That said, I agree that Wikipedia is not the only free MMORPG in the world. —Lowellian (reply) 13:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
True there are no ads and there are no fees, but you do have to train your character long and hard to level up to Game Master status. Kytti khat (talk) 23:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Any abandonware software could theoretically do the trick; you will spend hours of fun without spending anything except the internet bill, AND without the hassle and idiocy that permeates this place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Most useful page ever[edit]

I nominate this page as the single most useful page on Wikipedia as it contains every resource a Wikipedian could ever need! Jubilee♫clipman 02:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

How you know you're a n00b[edit]

You know you're a n00b if you think there's an automated level advancement after 5000 edits. (talk) 01:29, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree Wikipedia IS AN MMORPG[edit]

I'm on here way too much and i'm still new X3 --XxReikoxX - The Visual Asia Geek (talk) 00:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


nope not talking about [wowwiki] we're all play World of Wikicraft —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oakpack4 (talkcontribs) 20:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Social - tavern?[edit]

In the WP:Wikipedia is an MMORPG#Social section, it is suggesting that we have over 5.48 million taverns. Now, that's an interesting, if expensive, prospect, but I was wondering if perhaps "balconies" might be a better fit? With the villagepumps as more obvious contenders for the title of our 5 main "taverns"... -- Quiddity (talk) 07:04, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


I like this idea however I suggest including more Wikifauna.Jastcaan (talk) 10:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

That this article was not deleted, shows that the premise is actually correct[edit]

so much for running an encyclopedia. This is just a giant space for jerking off by little Nacny boys, who should do sports. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

This is not an article. It is a humor essay, in projectspace. It is only intended for the amusement/insight of other editors (or curious browsers). Hence no articles link to it. -- Quiddity (talk) 05:30, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
damn, and I was just trying to up my points so I could get some more rollbacker spells. You sure this is just humorous? --Ludwigs2 06:09, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
I blame everything on the overwhelming number of taverns. (See 2 threads up). With that much ale, everything is humourous (or morose). -- Quiddity (talk) 06:57, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
I pity the Nacny boys. That's /b/ worthy. --Lexein (talk) 06:48, 9 February 2011 (UTC)


I'm not sure how we can talk about stewards' ability to do just about anything the dark lord can do. Surely that should be mentioned.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:46, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


I propose the following for Revdelete and Oversight:

  • Revdelete=Brick dissolver: Only game masters may use a brick dissolver, which allows bricks in a dungeon wall to be dissolved. A dissolved brick is nothing but a clear space that still supports the bricks above it, and can be only viewed by game masters or miners. Whether the signature (edit summary) or even the name of the player who made the brick gets dissolved or not can be decided by the game master. The solvent is 69M per-unobtanic acid.
    • Brick crystallizer: A game master can also choose to re-crystallize a brick that has been dissolved, turning it back into a normally-functional brick.
  • Oversight=Brick vaporizer: Only SGMs and players allowed by SGMs are allowed to carry this. Anyone with it can permanently vaporize a dungeon's bricks. It is used when a player's secret plans and weaknesses are revealed to all the other players.

If these already exist, they would be cool additional analogies.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Added. Double sharp (talk) 09:05, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

IP block exemption[edit]

I'm going crazy here, but I'm proposing this:

  • Ice-proof suite: Can only be worn by game masters or players allowed by game masters. Allows anyone who wears it to pass through a freeze lock (IP block).Jasper Deng (talk) 05:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Isn't it already here as the sandwich-warming glove? Double sharp (talk) 09:03, 14 June 2012 (UTC)


I thought having the default image was a bit dull, so I changed it to File:WikiGreen.png. There's also File:En-wikipedia arms 3.svg and File:Outlaw-halo.PNG which might be worth a look. It Is Me Here t / c 22:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

New section[edit]

I have added a new section on general Wikipedia roles. Would appreciate of some-one could expand it.--Deathlaser talk 14:10, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


Shouldn't they be here? Double sharp (talk) 09:06, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Just sayin'[edit]

It's been two years or so since I've looked at this, and it's still hilarious. Sometimes I wonder if Phil Foglio's been editing it. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 12:52, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


This is one of the greatest articles I have ever read. Seriously, hats off to the authors, that was clever and very awesome. I'm impressed and greatly amused. :) • Jesse V.(talk) 06:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Non-humorous counterpart to this essay[edit]

Could we work in a link to WP:Wikipedia is in the real world#Wikipedia is not a role-playing game somewhere around the "See also" section? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey, what about the rules?[edit]

Hello everyone.

I saw no section about game rules! Did I miss something? 2602:304:59B8:3C89:5D8B:D475:D76:D59C (talk) 20:41, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Good idea, though I don't know how to implement that. RedPanda25 21:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


Arbcom is first referred to as the Arch Mages and is then later referred to as the Super Game Masters. This inconsistency should be fixed, but I'm not really sure how to best do it. --Jakob (talk) 21:21, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

It says, under Super Classes,

"Super Game Masters, also known as Arch Mages, are..." RedPanda25 21:38, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


I had to say, that's the funnest thing I've seen on here.


I must say, well done. It's great as a game. The only problem is, you CAN'T win. But it's still pretty good. RedPanda25 21:35, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

And yes, this is the funniest thing on Wikipedia. RedPanda25 21:36, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

A question about content[edit]

Don't you need to be a gunner in order to use swords? --Rlin8 (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2016 (UTC)