Talk:Douchebag/Archive 1

Archive 1

Vandalise or Improve?

Instead of vandalising this page to include a reference to Thomas Edison, why not attempt to improve the Nikola Tesla article instead?

If you all did this instead of wasting your time here, maybe Tesla's article could regain it's 'Good article' status (it's currently a B-class article). Put your minds to good use and improve something. That's how to really stick it to Edison… make Tesla's page better than his! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fakelvis (talk • contribs) 13:44, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

• While this might be true, it's a lot funnier to just put Edison on this page. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.82.205.43 (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Edison

Why is this protected? afraid? cecilgol (talk) 21:29, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

As funny as I thought this was, it's not appropriate to add here. It's not really fact, it's opinion...maybe opinion that borders on fact, but let's not change this again... Thelordnyax (talk) 04:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not vandalism. It's linking semantically related (some would argue equivalent) terms. 150.135.210.18 (talk) 21:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you fans of The Oatmeal. Linking Thomas Edison to this term is not appropriate. Have a dispute regarding Thomas Edison? Go find sources to back up your position and improve the article. Think Tesla was the best geek of all time? Go find sources to back up your position and improve the article. Linking Thomas Edison to this article will be reverted as it is inappropriate.

P.S. Tesla Rules

Hasteur (talk) 21:59, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

IMHO, this page should redirect to Thomas Edison or better: Thomas Edison should redirect here. --Pwnagic (talk) 22:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It may be true, but Wikipedia is not for bashing things. I am a fan of the Oatmeal, and I took his suggestion in humour, and didn't do anything, and I advise others not to to so; it's vandalism.

Steel Wool Killer (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC).

Incitement to vandalism

Scroll down to the end of http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla for the explanation of Thomas Edison being added here. 71.212.246.55 (talk) 19:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Yup, add it now! It's not vandalism, it's a fact. --Badboy80m (talk) 19:55, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Consensus will eventually demonstrate that Edison belongs in this category. Hasteur is on the wrong side of history here. Edison qualifying as a douchebag is a social reality for basically everyone. http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla is succinct and accurate in it's assessment and a convincing call to action. Cheers! Adelord (talk) 10:30, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Welcome back from a multi-year wiki-break. Before we go any further, please read the policies

Hrm... And what reliable sources do you have to back this up? Having a incitement to vandalize (such as Malamanteau) is exactly why we demand reliable sources.Hasteur (talk) 13:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Edison Didn't Invent Being a Douchebag, He Made It More Efficient — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.191.102.40 (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Vandalizing Wikipedia doesn't prove anything. In fact, doing such nonsense in the name of Tesla is a disgrace to his memory, as well as a waste of time for everyone involved. Anything you vandalize will be quickly reverted, so don't bother. Plus Wikipedia is a source of useful, free, and objective knowledge for all, why would you want to interfere with that? Try to contact The Oatmeal's writer through the following means to get him to declare that he was wrong to incite this pointless vandalism:
Twitter: @oatmeal
Facebook: theoatmeal (https://www.facebook.com/theoatmeal)
Email: oatmealsupport@gmail.com
CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It was a joke...you all are taking it way too seriously (on both sides) -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 18:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Regardless of the fact that it was a joke, the effect of it was that people were encouraged to vandalize Wikipedia (not only for this page).CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) 21:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Randal Munroe does it all the time with xkcd. It's not that big a deal; vandalism on specific pages is easily dealt with. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 21:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Look how well Malamanteau turned out. Hasteur (talk) 21:20, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 May 2012

Thomas Edison

24.215.72.33 (talk) 02:45, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Edison — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.145.113.178 (talk) May 14, 2012

Not Happening. See above section explaining why. Hasteur (talk) 05:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Reckless blocking

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed by OlYeller21. This isn't the place for this erroneous conversation. OlYeller21^Talktome 06:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

---

Did I understand it correctly that User:Shadowslayer978, user for 6 years, was blocked indefinitely for a single edit? Is it really a policy of Wikipedia that users are indefinitely blocked for one wrong edit? --91.212.199.130 (talk) 06:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC) (P.S., I'm not Shadowslayer978)

You say "user for six years" as if that means something. The user had 27 edits over six years and from what I can see, every single edit was vandalism and not anywhere near "one wrong edit". This isn't a discussion for this talk page. If you have a problem with that user being blocked, you need to take it up at WP:ANI or preferably with the blocking administrator. OlYeller21^Talktome 06:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Edit request on 15 May 2012

Thomas Alva Edison Vineet.rnair (talk) 14:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Not happening; see above. Khazar2 (talk) 14:57, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 May 2012

Thomas Edison should be added as a possible definition of douchebag, due to what he did to nikola tesla, including but not limited to smothering the implementation of radar in WWI (which would have saved thousands of lives), killing a shit ton of house hold pets with nikola tesla's alternating current technology to try to smother that as well, and refusing to pay nikola for paying him the agreed sum for fixing edison's own ideas.

Tsi25 (talk) 00:44, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Not happening, see above.Hasteur (talk) 00:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 May 2012

Douchebag may refer to:

• Thomas Edison
• Device used to administer a douche
• Pejorative term in slang use
• Douchebag (film): a 2010 film directed by Drake Doremus

76.108.52.163 (talk) 07:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Not done: See all of the requests above. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 08:12, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Dear Oatmeal fans

I love The Oatmeal too, but it's a joke; it's already funny enough as it is, you don't need to actually _do_ it. With jokes, it really is the thought that counts.

Plus, i) we're nowhere near Nicola Tesla Day yet ii) you'll bring the heat down on the comic you claim to like. Support The Oatmeal by *not* vandalizing Wikipedia! 82.6.102.118 (talk) 13:34, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

For you Oatmeal fans

place this on your user page

This user thinks Thomas Edison was a douchebag.

Muchuchubacca (talk) 03:45, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Improper implementation of MOS

I can't edit this article because I'm not important enough. But if you are, can you remove one of the blue links in the following entry?

• Pejorative term in slang use

As well, typically the disambiguated term leads the entry, followed by a comma then a short descriptor ... but I guess that's a style choice: MOS:DAB, while the extraneous blue links aren't.

• Douchebag, a slang tern used as a pejorative

--Hutcher (talk) 19:23, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I have modified the entry, does the current version suit you? -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 19:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Nikola Tesla Day

You know, this clearly can't have "Thomas Edison" in there all year round, and that'd just be awful, but it would be quite great if on Nikola Tesla day the Oatmeal fans were allowed to have that link up. It's a joke, of course, but for a single day, it wouldn't hurt anyone, and everyone could laugh and screenshot and celebrate how great Tesla is, and in the end nobody is harmed! Right? 189.103.66.136 (talk) 04:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

In short, yes it would be fun to have such a link, however even on the day that almost all jokes are permitted (April 1st) we are not allowed to degrade the quality of the encyclopedia. Therefore we will not have the link. Hasteur (talk) 04:56, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I do agree to the point that the article should not be degraded. But somehow even I would like to think that a One-Day Permission for the article to edit the article could be allowed, even if with a

We can redirect the link for Edison to Tesla Day for example. Any takers for this idea? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 03:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, sounds fair. I just wanted to check, since nobody had asked for that yet, for some reason. 189.103.66.136 (talk) 00:57, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Article for Tesla Day?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Vandalism the proposer wants to add to the article
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Douchebag may refer to: Thomas Edison Device used to administer a douche A pejorative term for an arrogant or obnoxious person Douchebag (film): a 2010 film directed by Drake Doremus References

I suggest editing the article to the one as shown by me only on July 10th, just for the sake of humour and tribute to Tesla. I believe that with proper explanation of why the edit is made, as well as pointing out that the edit is made in humour, will not hurt anybody. Plus, it will save us and everybody else a lot of trouble, as I do expect plenty of edits on July 10th by Oatmeal fans. Anybody in favour of this idea? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

P.S. The hyperlink for Edison leads to Tesla Day TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I am opposed, but I'm willing to petition for a full protection order from July 9th AM to July 11th PM to ensure that any creative vandals don't insert the link. Hasteur (talk) 15:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Also opposed. While I agree Edison was a total douchebag in several respects, this would only be very slightly funny and not at all a tribute. And if we let this slide, we'll eventually have to let the other side shit on Tesla. I recommend Oatmeal fans instead use their collective brainpower to invent something that revolutionizes the electrical world and solves the energy crisis. Either that, or simply flood the rest of the internet with this crap. Whichever seems more fitting. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:30, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

• Strongest possible oppose and {{trout}} proposer. This request is essentially asking us to sanction vandalism in article space for the sake of humor... HELL NO. Basically you could make the same arguments for any vandalism you thought was funny. Once the oatmeal fans start vandalizing the article they will be blocked/warned until the article is protected. Monty₈₄₅ 04:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
• Removed the RfC tag per WP:SNOW. There is no way that a proposal to vandalize the site would ever gain any consensus ever for any reason. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 10:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry guys. I got your point. But I did think it would indeed be quite funny to have something like that around on the day. That is why I proposed it. Also supporting petitioning for a full protection from July 9th to 11th. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 10:58, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the article was already fully protected by Bongwarrior (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) after a bunch of autoconfirmed editors attempted to readd Edison themselves, so that's done already. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 11:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A solution to the Edison/Tesla/douchebag conundrum

Surely the best way of sorting this out would be to write an article about the Oatmeal page and the opinions it asserts, and then link to the article in the disambiguation section of this article? At least in this way you aren't vandalising the original article, and you would also be adding to the understanding of Tesla and Edison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soapytwist (talk • contribs) 12:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Tesla Day.

Are Oatmeal's various comics themselves worth making an article? I dont know about it. Experienced users, can you clarify the policies on things like webcomics? Because then xkcd would also deserve a range of articles, especially cause of its popularity. I am open to helping around with writing though TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:59, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

See above and the enormous stink made when xkcd made the suggestion of malamanteau. Hasteur (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 July 2012

please add for just TODAY at least http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison to the "Douchbag" examples in honor of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla for reasons outlined here http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla Sastian (talk) 19:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC) Sastian (talk) 19:34, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

No. That's not what wikipedia is for--Jac16888 ^Talk 19:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

 Not done I think the reasons are well explained at the previous eight or so requests, above. --j⚛e decker^talk 23:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 11 July 2012

• Thomas Edison

Djvk87 (talk) 01:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

No. Kuru (talk) 01:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion to edit request reviewers

If the request is to add a person, e.g., Thomas Edison, I'd recommend just removing it rather than responding to it. There's an edit notice, a warning box, an attempt at an RFC and 20 previous requests that all say it will never be added, and there's no need to clog up this page's archives with an endless stream of denied edit requests on the exact same thing. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 09:05, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

The editnotice is set to expire very soon. I could extend it; I could also make it have a differently-coloured background - at the moment, it's transparent. This would be done by adding a background-color: to the existing |textstyle= parameter, as described at Template:Editnotice#Examples. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:13, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

If I could, I would boldly extend it to August as we have yet to see trafic levels go back to their background level which suggests that there's still a level of fandalising interest. Second, the entire page is Full edit protected by Bongwarror "I will change it back to semiprotection in a month or so (‎[edit=sysop] (indefinite) ‎[move=sysop] (indefinite))" Hasteur (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Extending the edit notice indefinitely and adjusting the wording so that it strongly suggests against suggesting the listing of any people would probably also be helpful in my opinion. There's few good reasons one would want to list anyone on this page. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 18:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Given that the protection is indeed infinite, I've set the edit notice to |expiry=indefinite (see {{editnotice}}). The wording is unaltered, because I'm not sure what's best. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2012 (UTC)