User:MZMcBride/Memes

The English Wikipedia (and the broader Wikimedia community) have developed a number of memes. Below is a sample of the common memes, accompanied by an explanation of their underlying meaning. Feel free to expand or improve this page.

X is not a vote

This meme is often used as a means to ignore a vote in which the closing admin closes the discussion in a way that doesn't match the majority's opinion. It also makes people feel good about how different and not a bureaucracy Wikipedia is. However, if people are boldly supporting or opposing an idea in a bulleted or numbered format, it's a vote.

Adminship is no big deal

The English Wikipedia is one of the most visited sites on the Internet. Adminship is a giant bundle of user permissions that allow a user to be able to cause massive disruption to the site. Adminship is difficult to rescind and is most certainly a "big deal."

Blocks are preventative, not punitive

This meme often appears on noticeboards when trying to defend someone who has been blocked who wasn't acting inappropriately at the very moment they were blocked. Blocks are regularly punitive, and bans even more so. They may also be preventative, but ultimately, a lot of blocks serve as a means to punish editors for misconduct. Manipulating the meaning of the word "preventative" does not change this fact.

Consensus

"Consensus" is governance by the loudest people. See #Wikipedia is not a democracy.

Polls are evil

See #X is not a vote.

Poles are evil

Well, this is simply true.

Arbitration Committee is not a court

Users file cases, the Committee hears evidence, drafts a decision, issues a final decision, uses legalese in its writing, is composed of a specific body of individuals who are elected to hear cases, and often cites precedent in cases. The Arbitration Committee is undoubtedly analogous to a wiki supreme court.

DRV is not AFD 2

A common shorthand way to tell someone that they are not focusing on the right issue at a Deletion review. All too often misunderstood, and otherwise completely ignored, especially by people attempting to defend a poor deletion debate closure simply by repeating the arguments made for deletion.

Policy is descriptive, not prescriptive

(But also "consensus cannot trump policy.")

This adage is based on the idea that people shouldn't read policy pages and act on them because they're policy, but they should track down the magic Consensus fairy and either do what she says or change the meaning of "consensus" so that you are right. See #Consensus.

How about a nice cup of tea?

Fuck you and your damn tea.

Fuck you, buddy! I brought over the tea meme from Wikinews. —harej (talk) 05:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not your buddy, guy! archanamiya · talk 21:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not your guy, tubby! - Amgine (talk) 22:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

You people are mean. -— Isarra ༆ 20:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

!vote

SEE WHAT I DID THERE? I PUT AN EXCLAMATION POINT IN FRONT OF THE WORD TO NEGATE ITS MEANING. BECAUSE I'M NOT ACTUALLY VOTING! ARENT I CLEVER?

Stop violating WP:POINT!

Alternatively, "stop being POINTy" and other variations. Just because someone makes an action you don't like, doesn't mean they are disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. I don't see fires and people running in the streets and planes falling out of the sky.

Wikipedia is not a democracy

Citing "Wikipedia is not a democracy" is a convenient way to attempt to override a decision-making process that is not going your way. It is very versatile. If you favor the status quo, but the majority favors a change, you can use "Wikipedia is not a democracy" to argue that it takes more than just a majority to make the change, it takes consensus. (In this example, "consensus" is defined as "a greater majority than presently exists".)

On the other hand, if you favor a change but the majority favors the status quo, you can use "Wikipedia is not a democracy" to argue that the change should still be made, despite the majority opinion. You see, on Wikipedia, we use consensus to make decisions. (In this example, only those who are right about the issue at hand are considered part of the "consensus". Those who are wrong are irrelevant.)

If you are Jimbo Wales, you can use "Wikipedia is not a democracy" to assert your own power. Wikipedia is not a democracy, and Jimbo retains special authority to do as he sees fit, regardless of the level of the opposition he faces. (A high level of opposition would be a "mob", and Wikipedia is not under mob rule.)

Cool-down blocks are prohibited

Suuuuuuuure.

Rogue / rouge

Is it a typo? Is it a color? Goddamn, so many puns to be had.

Code-word for "attention whore". Drama queen slaps this template on his or her user page, making a big show about the evil boogeymen on Wikipedia. This leads to swarms of wannabe sycophants begging for an end to this retirement.

Short of real-life death, it's incredibly rare that someone actually leaves this place. Might be short for "really tired" as in, of this place. But not enough to actually leave.

Wikipedia is not censored

Of course it is, and rightly so in many cases. You won't find Hello.jpg at the Goatse.cx article and you won't find featured images of dead bodies on the Main Page. Content should never be deleted simply because it might offend readers, but that is never a free license to be as vulgar and tasteless as possible.