Wikipedia talk:The first rule of Wikipedia

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organize and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.Wikipedia essaysWikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysTemplate:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

This essay, hopefully soon to be a decree, was inspired by this thread on the ever-amusing ~~message board~~ ~~parody site~~ supremely important talk page, Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship, on June 1 of 2007. User:Pigman and I brainstormed it via IM. (But don't ask me to IM with you. I hate IM and only do it in special situations. Bah.) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 20:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. So does that mean I can't talk about Wikipedia, ever? Is this just humour? I've talked about Wikipedia, my edits on Wikipedia, and discussions on Wikipedia, what, like hundreds, if not thousands of times? How come I've never seen this before, let alone as the first rule? What if someone stopped talking about Wikipedia, and had nothing else to talk about? I've heard people who talk frequently about websites they're involved in (eg. facebook, youtube, game sites, etc), but why can't we talk about Wikipedia? Should a mention of Wikipedia in real life be reported to ANI? Wouldn't the "list of policies" at the side convince some people that this is a real policy? Would that cause people to use it as an excuse for preventing people from talking about Wikipedia, and claim it is a violation of policy? Is this inspired by, "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas"? Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 01:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take this article seriously. It's apparently supposed to be humor, but is actually spam/nonsense. Jtrainor (talk) 23:04, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may not find this presentation of policy funny, but I hardly see anything about it that could be considered WP:Spam. Cheers - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 05:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAOOL, this is hillarious. Yet. I laughed, for like, a total of 15 minutes since last night. My spoon! is too big! My... spoon, is too big! I am a BANANA! Anyways, we should make it clear that it is humour. My nordostersjokustartilleriflygspanningssimulatoranlaggningsmaterielunderhallsuppfoljningssystemdiskussionssinlaggsforberedelsearbeten... is too long! Seriously though, qqq! Qqqqqqqqqqqq! QqqQqqqQqqqqqqq! LOL. Keep up the good work. Oh, and what happened to the WP:STFU shortcut? Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 18:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was not invited to join or anything so... Mapleya (MAY-peel-YUH) (talk) 17:05, 21 July 2018 (UTC) And sorry to possibly spam, but I am a newbie. {{This user is new to Wikipedia}} Mapleya (MAY-peel-YUH) (talk) 17:07, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm violating the policy!

Wikipedia is cool. Wikipedia is actually an independent wiki.--Glaxp (talk) 10:58, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Rule #11

Don't make rules about Wikipedia. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:24, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]