User talk:UBX/Userboxes/Humor

I think that {{User tonofedits}} may belong on Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia, along with other edit-related templates from Wikipedia:Userboxes/Other. -- Tetraminoe

It doesn't actually appear to work either.--Dan ^(Talk) 20:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I worked up this lot. Anybody who can (& wants to) make them "standard" userboxes, do feel free; I can't... Trekphiler 12:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vul-0

This user does not speak Vulcan.

This user is from Mars.

This user thinks Mars Hotel rocks!

This user is Napoleon.

If you like...

This user likes getting caught in the rain.

I made some of them into a standard template. You can view them at my userbox factory. --D-Day 14:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Try these on, if you like. Or give 'em away. Or delete 'em. I had fun... Trekphiler 04:14, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user wants to turn Zeus and Apollo on people who think Higgins was Robin Masters

When I tried to clean up this page so it would be concise enough to allow easy access to all the entries, and moved redundant templates to other pages where they were much more appropriate (e.g. noone would look for poker or Garfield humor under "humor", they'd look for it under "card games" and "comic strips"; "interesting userboxes" is no more a useful topic than "interesting userboxes", as humor is entirely relative, is pretty much universally liked by everyone and thus not a useful specific categorization system, and for the below reason), a lengthy endeavor which I've met no resistance on in any of the other Userbox pages thus far, User:Andux immediately and hastily reverted my entire edit with the aggressive and violent-sounding comment "rv--userboxes can fall under more than one category, dammit!" What Andux does not seem to realize is:

1. I could not agree with him more. I've spent hours, and will continue to spend hours, sorting userboxes by more than one page. An "I am interested in religion" userbox belongs on both "Interests" and "Religion", and an "I believe in Santa Claus" userbox belongs in both "Seasonal#December" and "Religion#Other spiritual and mystical beliefs" (along with "I believe in ghosts" etc.). However, this page is the exception to the principle of cross-referencing, and a very important exception. Almost all templates in the Userbox project are humorous; arbitrarily including some on this page and excluding most is not enforcing "userboxes can fall under more tahn one category", it's enforcing "LA LA LA I LIKE PUTTING PRETTY BOXES ON PAGES LA LA LA": nonsensical, willy-nilly, totally chaotic and disorganized and user-unfriendly mishmashing of completely unrelated topics. For a page as deeply vague as "Funny", we should only include templates that are not listed on other pages, or at least almost always do so, and only make rare and specialized exceptions for certain specific templates which should be discussed beforehand. We should do this for the same reason that "interests" doesn't re-list everything on its subpages (media, books, sports, games, favorite colors, etc.): because it would be redundant, useless, excessive, poorly-organized, and profoundly unhelpful. "Humorous Userboxes" is about as meaningful to users as "Green Wikiboxes" or "Wikiboxes that use words starting with the letter 'T'"; infinitely more useful is including humorous userboxes where they are topical, and including the ones here which are impossible to place (of which there are clearly a large number anyway, as you can see from how many templates I left perfectly intact in my edit of the page).
2. I made a number of additions to the page at the same time I made my subtractions, like the "War" section.
3. Something like two thirds of all Wikipedia userboxes are already humor-oriented! But almost all of those templates are not included on these pages, simply because what's listed here is so totally arbitrary. And it's good that they aren't listed here, because they're already listed on other pages where they're much more likely to be found by people who are actually interested in the relevant topic, and which is also good because the "funny" page would be almost as long as the full userbox list if it tried to include every type of userbox on every topic that can conceivably be considered "funny" (or, as is more often the case with this page, "not completely 100% serious", since you'll have a hard time finding many people who thinks that a large number of the templates here are genuinely "funny". "Yes, you're a paladin. We get it. Hilarious. What a quirky and delightful human being you are. Mm.") shoved randomly into a useless generic page. Templates like Template:user code do not belong here, because they're specifically and exclusively related to the Lost TV series, which is on the "Media" page with all other TV shows. "I contribute to Uncyclopedia" doesn't belong here, because the template itself isn't humorous or funny, it's just about a website which some people mistakenly think is funny, hence my moving the Uncyclopedia template to "Computing" with all the other websites (many of which are equally or even more funny and humor-based, yet were not included here for absolutely no reason whatsoever). If you want to list my rationale for every other template I removed, I'll gladly do it. They're all quite excellent. (The rationales, not necessarily the templates.) -Silence 06:07, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Le sigh...

1. If we truly could not agree more, I would not have reverted your edit. =Þ Seriously, though, I see your point; I just think you're taking it too far.
2. I accidentally reverted the addition of two boxes (diff), for which I apologize; all my intentional reversions, however, were of deleted material.
3. The humorous meaning of these boxes (whether idiomatic or literal) is not always confined to the categories you would place them in.

(Incidentally, given the length of your post, your username strikes me as rather ironic.) —Andux 07:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"I see your point; I just think you're taking it too far." - Then we still agree. You're the most agreeable person I've ever had an argument with.

"I accidentally reverted the addition of two boxes" - Well, of course it's accidental. I was merely pointing out that if we do revert what I did (which would be highly inadvisable), we should at least keep bits and pieces.

"The humorous meaning of these boxes (whether idiomatic or literal) is not always confined to the categories you would place them in." - A good point, though that applies to hundreds of templates not listed here also, and I don't really see it as significant enough to require double-listing; "not playing with a full deck" is only a truly meaningful template in the context of card-playing, and will probably be used much more often by people with that interest than by other people, and people who aren't interested in that probably won't have a tough time finding it anyway if they simply scroll down the "games" page. I do see your point, though, and will gladly discuss any instances of templates which you feel should be reinserted. As an example, I'll explain why I removed the "pyromaniac" template below.

(Incidentally, given the length of your post, your username strikes me as rather ironic.) - Hm. Actually, now that I think about it—you're right. I can't believe no one's ever noticed that and pointed that out to me before. (...) :3 Anyway, glad we could work this out! -Silence 11:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the context of playing cards, saying "this user plays with a full deck" is rather like saying "this user writes English using the entire alphabet." Taken literally, it's hardly a significant statement; it's only truly significant when viewed as a humorous metaphor. That is why I feel it's better off here.

Having {{User eat flowers}} under books makes my head explode. —Andux 15:52, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fire freaks are funny.

Template:User pyro was recently re-added after I removed it. So, why did I remove it? Simple: Because it's already listed as an actual mental disorder on Health#Mental, and because, although there's no rule against something using it for humorous intent on their user page (and in fact I wouldn't be surprised if everyone currently using it at least partly intends it as a joke, though there are also surely non-pyromaniacs out there who are deluded into thinking that they're pyromaniacs), should Wikipedia really be making the POVed statement that a rare mental condition that actually exists and can be very dangerous and harmful is inherently "funny"? Just because a template can (and even often will) be used as a joke doesn't mean we should outright state "this template's just a joke" when the joke is based on the condition itself and people who like to mock it rather than on anything humorous about the template. Personally, I'd be vastly more comfortable with putting things like Template:User Multiplepersondis under "Funny", because that, at least, is a condition that's received heavy criticism from the scientific community and of which the existence is, at best, quite dubious. Like "Pyromania", that condition is also often used as a half-joking hyperbolic self-description. Likewise, when many people make a typo, they're prone to joking, "Wow, I'm so dyslexic", but is that a reason to put a straightforward dyslexia template under "humor"?

Personally, I don't see a big problem with including the template here, it's not like I'm outraged or deeply offended or anything (I'm really more concerned with the redundancy and inefficiency of repeating the template on a page where noone would ever look for it than with not pissing people off). And I'm the last person to recommend putting political correctness before ease of use (which I loathe) and going to ridiculous lengths to avoid offending people (which I despise)... but in this case, it seems to be easier to just not list "pyro" on this page, not to mention that that course makes a fair amount of sense anyway. Anyone can use any userbox as a joke, and some (like the Scientology template or the Santa Claus belief templates) are probably much more prone to joking use than others, but that doesn't mean that we should come out and say "THIS TEMPLATE IS A JOKE BECAUSE ITS SUBJECT MATTER (in this case pyromania) IS FUNNY". Not only is it not a helpful organization for those templates, but it's also tacky. Few things are funny anymore after you go out of your way to say that they are; where's the long-lost art of understated, tongue-in-cheek satire, Wikipedia? -Silence 11:37, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I originally created it, I meant for it to be used humorously, but if people are using it seriously, maybe a blatantly silly fork (possibly involving leprechauns) should be created. —Andux 15:52, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know why this was speedied? I thought it was harmless myself, and it wasn't supposed to be an attack template. Just something known as humor. --D-Day 18:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I speedied it. It may be intended as humor, but if you look at what it says, you'll see that it's also an attack. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 18:38, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a request to undelete this at Wikipedia:Deletion review.--Fenice 20:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user wants to see Jimbo and Willy on Wheels duke it out in the ring, with Chuck Norris as the referee.

Should this go under "funny userboxes" or "Wikipedia userboxes"?--ikiroid | (talk) 02:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, as it is humorus and not to be taken seriously. The Republican 23:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is indeed a very funny userbox! I wonder how Jimbo feels about this! It is always nice to have a good sense of humour around here as well. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 19:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thats not funny. It's a real disease.

Well, maybe it is a little funny.

DuctoMan 18:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that it is actually a hoax. Dtm142 19:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, how do you turn userrboxes from a whole lot of code into a simple thing like all the other ones? Is that a template, or some... something that i don't know about? I have found absolutley no documentation on it.

DuctoMan 18:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look harder. — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 12:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thats a hyperlink! I just noticed that...

DuctoMan 18:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i'm still confused. I have already seen that page. Does that "subst" thing have anything to do with it.

Or, you could just tell me.

That would be much easier.

DuctoMan 18:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"For ease of use, userboxes are made using maker-templates that have a number of parameters. Once the maker-template is saved, it is automatically transformed to HTML." -EdGl 19:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ME NO UNDERSTAND

DuctoMan 18:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, right now, say my userbox looks like this.

{subst:Userbox|white|green|UBX|Userbox}

The code is transformed to something like this.

(div style="float:(({float|left}}}; border:1px solid white; margin:1px;">

</div)

Ok, it doesn't relly look very much like that, but then how do I get it so i can acess that whole lot of HTML with something like this-

{User DuctoBox}}

Do you save it as a template or something?

ME NO UNDERSTAND!!!!!

DuctoMan 18:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just explain it in normal english terms, i don't like hints.

DuctoMan 18:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's this "ME NO UNDERSTAND" stuff? Honestly, stop talking like a caveman, it's not helping. The page I linked explains how to make a userbox in plain English. I can't possibly simplify it further. It tells you what to type and what happens when you type it. You also have to understand HTML and its uses before you understand how to use/make userboxes. If you don't understand that, Google for 'HTML tutorials', read 'HTML for Dummies', etc. Educate yourself and you'll learn something. — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 00:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I am an expert at HTML! But never mind, i figured it out for myself. Without that page. SO HA!

Well, maybe not an expert, but I am pretty good at HTML. I "understand" it perfectly. Now, java script is a different story.

DuctoMan 18:39, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What i was trying to figure out was how to make the HTML into a simple thing like '{user blah}'. apparently you have to save it as a template. Thats What i was wondering about.

-END TRANSMISSION-

DuctoMan 18:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute! Were you questioning my intellegence? I am very smart, I just like to be funny too. Thats what the caveman talk was. I don't mean to boast, just don't question my intellegence. Unless you were being funny too....

DuctoMan 18:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wasn't questioning your intelligence, it was just a question. — nathanrdotcom ^{(Got something to say? Say it.)} 07:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the help, I guess... Sort of... jklfsdjkdkfbjklvfjkbldkjsajfk... DuctoMan 18:57, 10 May 2006 (UTC)...[reply]

I hope you've figured out userboxes, they're fairly straightforward. However I note that on this edit, you added a userbox that doesn't exist. — nathanrdotcom ^{(Got something to say? Say it.)} 01:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, where did that userbox go? I know I tested it, and it worked. I guess I'll try it again. DuctoMan 18:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There, now it worked.

DuctoMan 18:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is everything being proposed to be deleted?

DuctoMan 18:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you delete these things... people are going to cry. Do YOU want to make people cry? vote no on deletion. This has been a message from your hero MegaloManiac 17:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't want to delete stuff, I was wondering why so many userboxes were being proposed to be deleted! I looked at most of them, and the reasons for deleting them are kinda stupid.

DuctoMan 19:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page was the subject of an MfD discussion closed on 30 May 2006. The result was keep. Xoloz 15:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Link in the H5N1 box should direct to this article: H5N1, not this one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Somnabot (talk • contribs) 02:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Agreed. I believe this has been fixed. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 19:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After doing a general cleanup, I placed at the bottom of the page several that I am not certain of their status. {{User:Aeon1006/Userboxes/User used parts network}}, and {{User Fatmouse}}. The first should probably be userfied, and I don't think I know the reference for the second. (And I presume that the Religion & Politics sections should be userfied as per WP:GUS.)
Insights would be appreciated : ) - Jc37 10:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religious humor seems to be an easy enough call - userfy. As far as the others go, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Userboxes/Pets should provide some insight on how far GUS applies. Rfrisbie^talk 12:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will be moving the last of these to my userspace tomarrow Per WP:GUS. The Catalog can be found on my user space. Æon ^{Insane Ward} 01:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is the right place to post suggestions for this but I have a few. This user is trying to reestablish the Roman Empire. This user thinks Donald Trump is the source of all evil in the world. This user is watching you right now. This user is a superhero named El Toro. This user contemplates about the usage of BBQ sauce too much. (Zojo 00:26, 22 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]