12 Years of Illogicopedia

Forged in the Golden Age of Humour Wikis, Illogicopedia remains at the forefront of Internet nonsense some twelve years later.

Back in 2005, Wikipedia jettisoned its humorous content to the Uncyclopedia, a shameless parody of the original free encyclopedia.

This in turn spawned Illogicopedia, which was first established at Wikia Scratchpad in late 2006. And just as Uncyc was born out of content restriction, Illogicopedia heralded a new dawn in inclusionism with its generous acceptance policy.

So it remains to this day - deletion is reserved for the very worst offenders. Even spam is salvaged, re-grilled and served with chopped bananas in the after dinner 'Nose Collection'. 

While the aforementioned Golden Age passed some years ago, Illogicopedia powers ahead into a new era. An era free of drama and destructive vandalism. An era that will usher in hologram television, personal hover boards and the Ultimate Sandwich™.

Until they inevitably arrive, our newly-established Discord server will satiate our desire for conversation, providing the glue to keep Illogicopedia rolling through vandal attacks and server outages.

Aid Epoc Igolli! Acid Pile Igloo! Ideological Pi!

Jimbo's Wails #1,084: Stop the Werrorists

Jimbo Wales appeared on British political panel show Question Time this week to appeal for calm over recent 'scandalous' edits to his Wikipedia article. Last Wednesday, somebody changed his name to Myanmar Wasburma, an edit that remained on Wikipedia for all of 120 seconds before it was reverted by a user known as SaveTheWales.

These vandals, or more accurately 'web terrorists' (werrorists) are responsible for crimes worse than SOPA and must be dealt with immediately. Here, take this stick with a nail in it and go... head forth to Texas and seek out the one named Roberto. He is no doubt responsible. -- Jimbo Wales (pictured above right with his 'Wikipedia Founder of the Year 2001' award)

Also raised on Thursday's show was the following puzzler: If one makes deconstructive edits to the Wikipedia page on Spoonerisms, will one be sent to Wimbo Jails? Answer: no, because I made that up just now. Or last night, whatever.

Anyway, you still have another few days to watch the show on iPlayer but only if you live in the UK. Evidently the BBC hates foreigners, or something. I recommend one of those UK IP masker doodads, or I would if I knew what they were.

Has Uncle Pete hit rock bottom?

After Uncyclopedia's Forest Fire Week 2011, Nerd42 and Kevillips tied for the petaQ'a'pedia logo contest and the discovery of Cheeses, you'd think there couldn't be any more controversies. But then again...

It seems that Uncyclopedia, ?pedia's well-known competitor, has had an error that made all of the pages look like plain old HTML. Not at all like Wikipedia's new look, which is obviously what they wanted it to look like.

Well, we at ?pedia say go get 'em! Anything that takes the heat off of us and Roberto, Roberta, oscar.uncyclomedia.org or whoeverthehellheis is awesome. (Plus I'm still mad at them for huffing all my articles in the Forest Fire Week 2011.)

That reminds me: did you know that Encyclopædia Dramatica is lower than ever?

27,000 smackers down the pan. Cheers, Wikipedia

Dear Wikimedia Foundation,

It's all your fault. Why did you have to crash mere hours before my final paper on Advanced Illiteracy? My whole university education is riding on your provision of articles 24/7 for me to copy-paste into this 200-word preparatory dissertation, and you can't even function correctly?

Refer to the below image as incontrovertible proof of your misdeeds.


Because of your incontinence incompetence, I shall most likely fail and resort to utilising Illogicopedia as a source. It will get me a higher grade, but it's hardly worth it when you're reduced to nicking poorly constructed jokes from a bunch of college drop-outs with a grasp of humour that would make even [name removed] wince. And I hate that idiot. Always rambling on about how it's his predecessor's fault and he's the greatest thing since the portable particle accelerator.

As compensation, I suggest you employ me to research and insert 'facts' to prominent articles. I demand five times minimum wage or my head lecturer will hear about it. And you know who that is? Well, neither do I, but he has some pretty high-ranking contacts in the world of server sabotage, or something.

Consider this a threat,

Peter T. Pearson Esq.

The Roberto Family: Bringing down the Internet one wiki at a time

Following Illogicopedia's latest server crash, we have some rather scary news to bring you. Roberto and his family of deranged clones (pictured above are Roberto, Roberta, Bert and Robbie) have not only succeeded in crashing Uncyclopedia, which has been experiencing periods of downtime, but also pioneering humour wiki Encyclopedia Dramatica.

Roberto's hatred for wikis is well-known: aside from destroying the Illogicopedia servers on a regular basis, he brought Wikipedia to its knees in 2010, and sources indicate he will not stop until the Internet is rid of all such websites. Now, armed with a selection of humorously-named clones he created from his own saliva, his evil plans are mere days from becoming a reality.

Popular meme-bashing website Encyclopedia Dramatica was relaunched under the watered down guise of Oh Internet, a new venture somewhat resembling Know Your Meme, on 14 April. ED has gone mainstream, much to the chagrin of its users and web trolls alike.

Illogiblog can exclusively reveal that Roberto was instrumental in this change, demanding 20,000 Pot Noodles and 1,000 boxes of Krispy Kreme donuts otherwise he would wipe the site from the face of the earth. In a panic, the site's owners caved in and went ahead with the unintended revamp. They did pay $40,000 to purchase said foodstuffs, but someone broke into ED HQ and pinched the lot under mysterious circumstances. By the way, if anyone wants a Pot Noodle I'm selling them for 50 cents each. Check out my Paypal page for more information.

Illogicopedia is down but not out. We shall fight Roberto and his mini-army of nefarious clones and ensure Illogico (and Uncyclo) shall not meet the same fate. The future of the Internet is in our hands.

AID EPOC IGOLLI, fellow Illogians.

WP:DAFT, a little bit of craziness in a world of sanity

Some time ago, the super serious types at Wikipedia issued a ban on 'humorous' content. Anything mildly interesting was promptly removed or branded 'silly' and brushed into a corner with the other babbling fools whose sensibilities don't exactly fit with the site's 'facts-only' ethics. Pah, the madness of such actions cannot be quantified by words alone! Hence, I have prepared a 30-minute dance routine entitled 'Wikipedia, why u no like teh jokes?'

...But seriously.

Cries of 'you used to be cool, man' are not entirely justified, however. You cannot accuse the Free Encyclopedia™ of undergoing a complete humorectomy, for there is the odd page which remains as evidence of a former, less serious Wikipedia.

It is something of a minor miracle, but Deleted Articles with Freaky Titles, a collection of pages with silly names (duh) has yet to bite the dust. I'm not sure whether we should all rejoice in this fact or let out an enthusiastic 'meh' en masse, but it certainly provides Illogicopedia's Articles for Creation with an almost unlimited source of fuel with which to keep the fire of insanity burning. Again, I dunno if this a good thing or not, but it sure is interesting. To some.

Graduates of the DAFT-Illogico AFC alliance, whilst not exactly numerous, at least provide some mirth to the people that created them. MASSIVE TRAFFIC CONE SHAPED ALIENS FROM OUTER SPACE is one excellent example, whilst A better Wikipedia simply redirects to the page about Illogicopedia. Mildly amusing, no? Paper- the fat free chocolate and Poorly built rocket bus also stick out, but we've yet to see alumni of this far from notable university hit the front page. However, one feels it is only a matter of time.

Wikipedia Almighty

Why American teachers don't seem to trust it...

Illogicopedia article on Wikipedia successfuly restored

Wikipedia have finally reinstated their Illogicopedia article after deleting the article about us last year due to the wiki "Not being notable enough". I have been attempting to persuade numerous sysops on the wiki to reinstate the page for a while - and last week I got lucky. This could be a defining day in Illogian history - or not.

Now we are among the ranks of ED (oh god no), Wookiepedia (meh) and AID's in having our own article. Give you's selves a pat on the back, if that's your sort of thing.

Link is here.

Beating the Wikipedes at their own game

Good morning everyone. I trust you are all enjoying your Spring Break/Easter hols so far -- that's if you aren't at work or something. If so, the festivities (?) will probably begin for you tomorrow with the traditional drunken Good Friday Blowout, which Illogicopedia will be taking part in! Kind of. Actually, not at all.

Anyhow, on Monday I mentioned Wikipedia will be introducing their new Vector skin later this week. Well, since that time, Carlb -- that's our friendly server owner (nothing to do with Roberto, you understand) -- has contacted me with some news that might be of interest to readers/editors of Illogicopedia. That's you, incidentally.

Carl has very kindly taken the time to install a special plugin on the Vector software that, well, is just plain awesome. So awesome, in fact, we'll be rolling it out before you can say 'bumper spaghetti harvest'. YAH! We're gonna beat the Wikipedes at their own game for a change, and how! Features included in the new Vector 2.0 skin:

• Userpage Popup Facebook-style status boxes updated in real time
• 'Who's Online' facility for Recent Changes stalkers
• Twitter compatibility so all your tweets appear on Recent Changes should you wish them to (although I dunno why you wouldn't...)
  
• Skype extensions so you can not only type stuff on peoples' userpages, but actually engage in verbal conversation as well
  
• User blogs (beta) closely tied in with the forum to provide an all-round better collaborative feel to the wiki
  

... Plus a whole load more! Full details are outlined in this special video blog starring an old friend who's rapidly becoming something of a celebrity on Illogicopedia. Be sure to watch all the way to the end so you know what's going on before the new skin comes into effect.

A post that has nothing to do with Roberto

Since Illogicopedia is down for the moment (nothing to do with the aforementioned server usurper, I swear), Illogiblog has decided it's time for a good old fashioned hoedown!

Not really, I have a sore leg. Don't believe me? I have this handwritten excuse note complete with a terrible forgery of my mother's signature to prove it.

So anyway, continuing the theme of not mentioning Roberto (dang, this is harder than I expected), those anti-humorists at Wikipedia are rolling out their Vector skin, also known as Wikipedia Beta, next week. If you can remember back to October of last year (I know I can't), you may recall this very same blogger praising the move. In fact, I've had it set as my Wikipedia default ever since it's been an option.

Illogicopedians can emulate the Wikipedia Experience (not quite as good as the Jimi Hendrix experience, but hey) right here at Illogico by selecting the 'Vector' skin under user preferences. Personally I still use Monaco because at the present time it's better for page management, but you're free to meddle with your own settings as you wish.

Or not. It's entirely up to you. I am not the master of your destiny. Choose your own path in life. For Great Justice.

You might also note in that post that I took a cheap (and some might say uncalled for) shot at Wikia, which you'll probably have noticed is one of my favourite pastimes alongside pinching fluorescent traffic cones and rolling down hills in a barrel. For good measure, here's another slant at our commercial cousins: 66% percent of the world's population agree Wikia sucks. If it's on the Internet, it must be true.

Wikipedia downed as Roberto strikes again

Oh dear, it seems Illogic's recent server problems have rubbed off on its big brother. That's Wikipedia, incidentally, or 'Windpipe' if you're my spellchecker.

The Free Encyclopedia has been down worldwide for a while now, apparently causing much error-message related mirth. At least, it isn't working for me at this particular moment in time (that's now, for the sake of posterity), but what do I care? I'm just pleased my own Internet connection is actually functioning again following a 24-hour period of crashination. Raw corn!

According to a quick search of Google News, this particular server crash is simply down to 'a coding error', but we know different. Roberto, the alien hunting non-existent entity everyone loves to hate (or not, if you don't believe in ghosts), is of course the real cause. Don't tell anyone, however, or Jimmy Wales and his vandalous crones will close down ?pedia quicker than you can say pseudoantidisestablishmentarianism.

Actually, they may have already done so, seeing as I can't get Illogico to load right now. Gulp! Effective immediately, I declare server rat hunting season open! Feel free to open fire at blokes with baseball caps and large guns as well - the likelihood is they were gonna shoot you anyway.

In the absence of a suitable alternative, please do not hesitate to utilise Illogicopedia as a substitute for Wikipedia until further notice. At least when it comes back online, anyway.

The media takes this crap too seriously

To Germany this morning, where it's being reported that some footballer with an unfathomable surname fell victim to internet vandals earlier this year. On the 11th February, it was announced on his club's official website that Schalke striker Kevin Kuranyi had been made redundant due to certain disagreements between him and the club.

However, it was in fact a load of old codsbollocks, and some hacker had managed to break into the official website and put the article there out of mischief. The story was taken down soon after, but not before the media had got hold of the so-called 'revelation', resulting in red faces all round (they stayed in the sauna too long).

You may ask what on earth this has to do with Illogicopedia, and that's a very good question. The answer to that is nothing much. What is interesting is the fact that ESPN decided to embellish their article on the above incident with a selection of football-related Wikipedia vandalisms, described in boring and meticulous detail.

What's more, the article attempts to explain some of the inner workings of the free encyclopedia. When will they learn? Wikipedia has no formal rules and procedures so cannot be regulated in the way a prisoner or performing bear can. The fools!

Illogiblog hereby announces that whoever can persuade Wikipedia that the moon is actually cheddar cheese will be made King of all Wikipedia.

Additionally, forget the image in the top corner of this post. It has almost nothing to do with this article, but then that's probably what you'd come to expect from this blog by now.

Wikipedia Beta

For what it's worth -- and even though not a single person asked me for it -- my opinion is that Wikipedia's new Beta skin is... not that bad, really. There are no drastic New Monaco-esque changes - only the colour scheme and sidebar have really been altered.

Probably best of all, though, is that the search box is now in the upper right hand corner of the screen. This does require some getting used to, but on the whole I think it lets the sidebar breathe a bit better. As you might know, I'm a bit of a fan of the old grey-and-black colour scheme, so I suppose this was always gonna sucker me in.

In all, it looks a bit cleaner and, save the funny gradient colours behind the page tabs ('edit this page' etc.) -- I'm not sure what the general Internet obsession with those is all about -- is probably a slight improvement on the classic Monobook.

Wikia, take a good hard look. This is what good practice is all about - not rushing out half completed skins and using the public as unannounced beta testers, rather taking time to get opinions, and most importantly, leaving it up to the users to decide.

Think I more than made my point there. Anyhow, I'd love to hear your opinions on the new beta skin. Just log into your Wikipedia account and select the 'try beta' option next to your user control panel at the head of the screen.

Bigipedia, the new Wikipedia radio parody

Radio 4 are launching a new show entitled 'Bigipedia', which parodies the one and only Illogicopedia... er, I mean Wikipedia. It's not exactly an original concept, as anybody reading this blog will know, but probably still worth a listen. I haven't done so yet, but thanks to iPlayer I'll be able to when I get the time.

The first episode aired last night. If you're in the UK and can be bothered, give it a listen and tell us what you think. Be quick though, it's only available for seven days!

Some info on Bigipedia:

• British Comedy Guide
• From reading this review, Bigipedia sounds just like Illogic. Wonder why they haven't been in contact with us yet?

See the review at Retro Yakking here, because it turned into something of a mini-epic and doesn't really fit with the Illogiblog sensibility.

Inclusionism v. deletionism: an essay by the Telegraph

What Wikipedia would look like if on paper, broken down by qwghlm at Flickr.

Shane Richmond of the Telegraph has decided to address an age-old wiki issue: the battle between inclusionism and deletionism.

The article claims to be about a recently passed music journalist, and how deletionists don't want his page to be kept at Wikipedia. By normal standards this instance is not in the least newsworthy, yet for some reason every so often the mainstream media decide to report this stuff. Stuff that happens every day on Wikipedia.

Whatever, it's as good a reason as any to blast the deletionists. Blast them I say! :)

Deletionists are trapped with an outdated metaphor. They want to make a “quality encyclopaedia”. The notion of quality, like usefulness, is relative. Relevance is a much better measure.

The concept of an encyclopaedia comes from the print age. Limited space meant limited entries, so the notion of ‘notability’ helps when choosing what goes in. Limitations on how often a new edition could be printed meant that accuracy was all important. You don’t want your encyclopaedia to be filled with mistakes.

True, but paper-based encyclopedias took a select group of people years to write. Wikipedia has millions of editors so it's not always possible to police absolutely everything, not least verifiability.

In summary, you journalists should forget Wikipedia and concentrate on Illogicopedia.

Jimmy Wales: making money from Wikipedia morally wrong

Seems we've received an indirect response from Jumbo Whales himself on the subject of paid-for-edit wikis. Kind of.

There are other ways to squeeze cash from the famously non-profit free encyclopedia, it would seem. The Register makes no apologies for the anti-Wikipedia stance in its article describing how one long-time Wikipedia administrator planned to use the site for monetary gain.

Big whoop. Once again, the slightest thing controversial happens and the mainstream media gobble it up like a fat kid does chocolate-coated crisps.

Anyhow, it seems MyWikiBiz has been attempting to integrate cash incentives into the wiki format for some time now. It largely sucks, as Mr. Wales has also pointed out, but at least it's completely honest in its intentions, unlike certain wiki farms, who I shall not name here.

You know who you are.

David Cameron "down wid' da hood": Wikipedia

It seems that these days, not a day goes by in the world of the mass media without some sort of Wikipedia-related "scandal".

The latest of these pseudo-newsworthy incidents seems to be about some politician bloke taking some mild jabs at some other politician or other on their Wikipedia page, it's all very childish.

Aaaand that's what we like! What I like even more is the fact the media are actually bothered with this nonsense. I mean, why Wikipedia and not Illogicopedia? Furthermore, why does everyone in the mainstream press absolutely love Wikipedia? You're missing out on the illogicality, fools!

Back on subject, did you know that if something is printed on Wikipedia, it means it is automatically true? For a few minutes in December 2008, David Cameron was some kind of gangsta rapper, it would seem.

Illogicopedia heroes of the month: Wikipedia Art

Wikipedia vandalism as an artform? It's been done, believe it or not. The Wikipedia Art website was originally founded as a collaborative performance art project, but has since grown into something much, much bigger.

In a nutshell, it now consists of a glorified piece of 'vandalism', which saw the site itself attempting to gain its own Wikipedia entry 'playing by Wikipedia's rules'. I won't explain too much more about it here, but you can read more on the project and the wonderful hilarity of it all in the links at the end of this post.

For the most part, it has slipped under the radar with the mainstream media, but Jimbo Wales has come out this week to publicly slate the project and announced his intention to bring legal action against the site for using the Wikipedia name.

This automatically makes the project wholly worthwhile in our eyes. After all, we all loved to goad the headmaster at school didn't we?

Further reading

• The Wikipedia Art wiki.
  
• Wikipedia founder slams Wikipedia art - WebProNews
• Wikipedia threatens to sue - Techdirt
• Wikipedia Art project Wikipedia Page (may well be deleted, so view it while you still can!)
  

Unsourced frivolity

Yeah, so some bloke fooled a load of media dudes into thinking a bogus quote he just made up was real. How did he do this? Via our good friend Wikipedia.

So why hasn't Illogicopedia done something similar yet? Why isn't the media clamouring to interview the Illogico bigwigs and plastering Francis E Dec quotes all over the papers? Because Wikipedia is what everyone cares about.

What we need is a huuuuge prank or event so good that the Wikipedia community would be completely hoodwinked. Of course we all know that if something is on Wikipedia long enough, then it is accepted as fact. Truth. Please remember this as you write your brilliantly sourced, non-AFD Wikipedia articles in the name of illogicality.

Wikipedia and censorship

Warning: A serious post follows! Also, reader discretion is advised when searching for web info on this topic.

If you live in the UK, there's a chance your IP is currently blocked from editing on Wikipedia because the Internet Watch Foundation have blacklisted the site. Why? Well, the issue stems from an image used in an article about Virgin Killer, an album by 70s Rock Band The Scorpions, which supposedly depicts child pornography on the album cover.

As with all child sexual abuse reports received by our Hotline analysts, the image was assessed according to the UK Sentencing Guidelines Council (page 109). The content was considered to be a potentially illegal indecent image of a child under the age of 18, but hosted outside the UK. -- IWF Statement

As a result, the page in question cannot be viewed on UK browsers. Wikimedia have protested that other sites such as (Warning: may not be SFW >>) Amazon continued to host the picture (though the cover now seems to have been replaced with an alternative, non-offensive version) and it can easily be accessed via Google Images without the application of Safesearch. Wikimedia go on to claim that they "have no reason to believe the article, or the image contained in the article, has been held to be illegal in any jurisdiction anywhere in the world".

The POV bit!

Wikimedia stands by its 'Wikipedia is not censored' stance, and I for one agree with them. What will the nanny state think of next? We won't be able to view the article about Middlesex? Well, that was a bit of an over the top reaction, but if Wikipedia give in to the censors now, who knows what they'll have to concede in the future.

Of what use is that repellent picture? -- "A caring mother", from Wikipedia Talk:Virgin Killer

To any concerned parents: I suggest that you take on board the fact that Wikipedia is not censored before letting your child use the site. Yeah, the pic was a bit repulsive but it was an actual album cover and is therefore encyclopedic, if you see what I mean. The fact that it caused controversy when it was first released makes it all the more notable and important that the image be used in the article. Wikipedia could take the picture down but it would border on breaking their own code of ethics, so argue all you like but there'd have to be some major policy changes for Wikipedia to give in to this one.

My guess is that this will blow over pretty quickly and we will have forgotten all about it by the New Year. Fact is, IWF received a complaint and they have to be seen to be acting upon it: meantime, Wikipedia get a bit of free publicity. So, despite the fact our friends at The Free Encyclopedia lose some editors for a while, they at least get a bit of promotion, gratis. :)

Web links, all SFW

• BBC News Online — Wikipedia child image censored, IWF backs down on Wiki censorship
• Guardian.co.uk — Wikipedia falls foul of British censors, Amazon US under threat as internet watchdog reconsiders Scorpions censorship, How the IWF blacklist stops you seeing the Scorpions' album cover, Internet ban on 'child porn' album sleeve, Internet Watch Foundation reconsiders Wikipedia censorship & British censor reverses Wikipedia ban
• Wikimedia Press Release
  
• Webtrends.about.com article
• Metro article