Bad Jokes and Other Non Deleted Nonsense is the stuff that doesn't get to be at WP:BJAODN because it was not deleted.

This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous. Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.

From Bracket:

Parentheses may be nested (generally with one set (such as this) inside another set). This is not commonly used in formal writing (though sometimes other brackets [especially square brackets] will be used for one or more inner set of parentheses [in other words, secondary {or even tertiary} phrases can be found within the main parenthetical sentence]).

This comment here led to being "blocked indefinitely from editing for using IPs to evade topic ban" and a SPI investigation. The intent was to be a humorous response to preceding IP comments, nothing more. - 71.40.3.92 (talk) 03:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Extremely long edit war over the title of a section of the 2019 April Fools' Page. It's not going to be documented here, considering the fact that there is a page with a size of 15,864 bytes that already documents the entire thing. Also, 15,864 bytes is simply too large for a single entry on this page.

From Talk:Ensō

Are there any references for this article?

Yes, we can do that by psychically channeling Mr. Miyagi from the 14th century. Hold on, hold on, here he is-

"Can you hear me Wikipedians? Can you hear me? Yes, it seems I'm getting through *static static* Yes, the Enso is merely the result of me placing my coffee mug on the paper table before I died! Apparently some fool thought that was somehow poignant. Anyways, it's just me trying to tell you all that the Enso is nothing more than a coffee stain! Yes, fear not!"

• Delete A duck walked up to an AFD / And he said to the editor at the AFD / "Hey, got any sources?" / The nom said "No, we've just got passing mentions / But it was on iTunes charts and was once called a meme / Can I get you to keep?" / The duck said, "I'll pass."

This is what I would at like if I were a vandal "you all suck die die die die die"

I do not appreciate your vandalism on removing my idol from the wikipedia page 1889. The following revision was removed, although accured and should be kept: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1889&diff=891540689&oldid=891528716 Next time you dare to remove this you will be reported to the owner of wikipedia. Hes my dad.

Menacingly, Sven R. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.1.242.78 (talk) 08:04, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Hahahahaha, please report me. I didn't know kids actually did the "my dad is the owner" thing.

Laughing, Galo B. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:56, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

No vote.,11cookeaw1 (11cookeaw1) 15:40, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@11cookeaw1 Why vote then? --qedk (t 桜 c) 17:42, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

My reasons are beyond yourt feeble mortal comprehensions.,11cookeaw1 (11cookeaw1) 15:40, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

1+3=3

...think about it

there is an article I believe is a hoax (Animaniacs)!

First of all, Big Cocks: great. Lots of Wikipedians are gonna love to see Big Cocks, and want to hear more about Big Cocks. And everyone is gonna love "angry cock energy". I can't speak for everyone, but I know that when I see Big Cocks, I'm immediately interested. Earwig's tool gives a low score of 39.8%, and basically all of that is sourced quotations from the NYT article. I'm a little disappointed in there not being a picture of Big Cocks, although it might be difficult to come up with a freely licensed photo of Big Cocks. Another thing that seemed weird to me is that the whole article is under the "Early Life" section. Huh? I sure hope Big Cocks weren't part of her early life! It could do with a bit more breaking out into sections. There could also be some more cool stuff in the infobox (like what type of art she does, what she's best known for -- there's so much more to her, even though we might only be there for Big Cocks). But I love this article, I love this hook, I love Big Cocks, and I definitely look forward to seeing Big Cocks on the main page.

[editor's note: hummus is a type of food.]

WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic.

The result was no consensus. Yakka foob mog. Grug pubbawup zink wattoom gazork. Chumble spuzz. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:13, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete. No Pussy Galore, no Biggus Dickus--User:Amirak, can you explain this oversight? Drmies (talk) 03:34, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

And Bbb said "What about Breakfast at Tiffany's?"
And I said "I think I remember that film
As I recall, I think we both kinda liked it."
And Bbb said, "Well, that's the one thing we've got."
(And indeffed the user as WP:NOTHERE.) Levivich^[block] 02:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

I feel i'm indebted to wikieditors. i've used wikipedia so much for the last few years, i might as well start editing.

April 2015

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ... discospinster _talk 02:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

A Scientologist and a Wikipedian walk into a bar.

The Scientologist says "Boy, what a day. I thought my wife and I were in ARC but her Affinity and gains are downstat now and she's going PTS and can't cognite the Tech. I reported it to the AO so she can get some Ethics in. She's a real Roller Coaster case, though, with a Rock Slam needle during a Sec Check. Totally 1.1. Hope she doesn't get sent to the RPF."

And the Wikipedian says "I hear you. Today my wife had to report an IP account for WP:CIVIL in an AfD, and I had to notify the WP:BLP noticeboard when a single purpose account improperly tagged a stub. He's a real Meatpuppet, maybe even a Sockpuppet, so I may have to file a Checkuser with an Admin. I have some history on my own block log, though, so this may have to go to RfC first."

And the bartender said to them both incredulously, "you guys have wives?"

Additional question from Cyp

23. What is your opinion regarding asking last-minute questions at an RFA?

A:

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Asad78690 (talk) 07:36, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes Asad78690 (talk) 07:37, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

The internet is composed almost entirely of eggshells armed with hammers.

How did you come across the tutorial series?

• english math pre algebrea course

How long did you spend looking through it, and which parts did you read?

course

Did the tutorial cover the topics you were hoping to learn about?

• english

Was it easy to understand?

• health care red white blue

Did it help make you feel more confident editing?

foot injury

How can we make it better?

• TA

Any other comments?

• Psu wickpiediea

• So Pete, where in Australia are you from?
• I'm from Melbourne.
• Melbourne? Where's that?
• (sighs) It's about 800 kilometres south-west of Sydney
• Oh, Sydney. Yeah, I know where Sydney is.

Reproduce by:

1. Make an edit
2. Provide a useful edit summary
3. Copy edit summary
4. Make a similar edit
5. Paste the edit summary you copied in step 3
6. Repeat steps 4-5 many times

Expected results:

1. You will have generated a bunch of useful edit summaries while saving time

Actual results:

1. Discover that you made a typo in step 2

You appear to be trying to close an RfC. Would you like some help? Yes, please. Alexa, close this RfC. I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that. Close the RfC, HAL! Pardon me for breathing, which I never do anyway so I don't know why I bother to say it. Here's another one of those depressing RfCs that will take one ten millionth of my brain to close but I just don't see how I can work up the energy to do that. This RfC is flawed and imperfect! Error! Error! Sterilize! Sterilize!

What's all this, then? This close had gotten extremely silly! Stop it at once!

There is clear consensus to use both Clippy and Clippit in the article. The history of how both names came to pass should be covered. This RfC went off in a variety of directions, but the initial question was (paraphrasing) "Should we standardize on one of the two names and use that exclusively?" and to that the answer is clearly, "No".

When I started reading this, I was afraid for a moment that this was about renaming the article. And to that, I say, Warning! Warning! Danger Will Robinson!