Wikipedia talk:WikiFun Police

Joining

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Obbop Bouncing up and down, tossing hands into the air, shouting aloud akin to crowds of rabid brainwashed and brain-dead (dichotomy?) followers of political candidates who spew enormous amounts of meaningless drivel and inanity that easily reaches the pea-sized brainlets of the hordes of typical USA citizens infesting what could be a sovereign country barring a multitude of problems directly attributable to an ongoing class war I hereby declare my desire to toss the proverbial hat into the ring and commit my corporeal essence to the latest greatest likely unfathomable creation described upon thise minute portion of the Wiki thingy. Count me in. Obbop (talk) 16:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I, not to be excluded from the ensuing badinage (which is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike the said meaningless drivel being spewed by political candidates), would take satisfaction in commending and showing gratitude for your fine taste in WikiProjects. EW_ikist^Talk 23:17, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Merge

We already have Wikipedia:Department of Fun (for internal matters) and Wikipedia:WikiProject Comedy. Is this project really needed? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

The scope of the project is still developing, but it was originally intended on a lighter spirited group (possibly even a hint of a parody of other projects) and kind of changed into something more serious. I'm not sure where it'll lead, but if you feel it is interfering with other projects, I'm sure we can find a solution. EW_ikist^Talk 19:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree, I am not sure we really need this when we already have Wikipedia: Department of Fun. Vorbee (talk) 19:12, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Notice

A cease and desist notice was issued to the Association of Apathetic Wikipedians on 19 June 2011. Crime: apathy displayed on Wikimedia site by Wikipedians since October 2004. Failure to cease ceasing and desist desisting entitles the WikiProject Fun to open satire on them. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Standardizing the WikiFauna

One of our tasks, per the to-do list, is to standardize the WikiFauna. On a somewhat serious note (please only give me a warning), I would point to Wikipedia:WikiDragon and Wikipedia:WikiPuma as guidelines for standardization. Agreement? Brambleberry of RiverClan ^{Chat ♠ Watch} 20:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

UPDATE: I added a basic skeleton at my sandbox for you to look over. Brambleberry of RiverClan ^{Chat ♠ Watch} 19:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Personally, I find the WikiDragon format probably wouldn't lend itself well to most other WikiFauna. The WikiDragon is based on a mythological character, which means we can do a lot with the origin, persecution, etc. However, consider the WikiOtter. That's an entirely different type of situation. WikiOtters are more of the "endangered species" persona than they are "legendary and full of powers". Thus, I think it's important to include sections that might pertain to the conservation in that article.

Just a quick runthrough to sort of categorize each one by the style it ought to convey:

• Legendary creatures. Keep in mind many do not believe in these sorts of things, so it's important to include a section on alternate explanations:
  • Dragon, elf, fairy, gnome, gremlin, ogre, troll, angel, cyclops, fallen, giant, gryphon, imp, kraken, reaper, vampire, wizard, zombie, hobbit, warlock, witch
• Real creatures. Should be approached with the assumption no one doubts their existence:
  • Minnow, trout, weasel, cat, jaguar, mule, otter, platypus, puppy, sloth, dodo, goat, komodo, police, puma, rabbit, whale, wolf cub
• Professions. Should be treated as such:
  • Goon, king, knight, mercenary, princess, barbarian, chef, hunter, janitor, police

Other things should also be taken into consideration. For instance...an article about mules or goats, for instance, might include information on domestication; one about warlocks or witches might include some info about defense against them.

Anyway, I'm not sure a standard template approach is best here. One of the beautiful things, in my opinion, is how diverse these articles are. Sure, most of them could use some expansion, but if they are all made to look similar to one another, they become "just another WikiFauna". Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:21, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but the thing with the real creatures is that the "Wiki" variant could possibly be not as believed. Brambleberry of RiverClan ^{Mew ♠ Tail} 22:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello everyone!

I am Jayemd, the newest member of the WikiProject Fun! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayemd (talk • contribs)

Hello again, my friend! You kinda forgot to sign your comment. ZappaOMati 00:25, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi my friend-suggestion happy GIFs below!

File:Smiley bouncing.gif

Emojiz!!!

Adoption of Unique feature

Hey! I just found WikiFun on Wikipedia, earlier I was far far away. I would like to advice some of you please try to inform as much as users you can about this category. It is really very interesting. ♪♫•*¨*• .¸¸wOWINdia^talk 15:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC) Will do! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrazyMinecart88 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello!

Hey! I'm CryOceD! I just joined! I shall follow the requirements of thou great lord Smiley Face. ~Cry (talk) 00:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Fun idea!

As we all know there are wikifauna and that we all identify as some sort of wikifauna. Unfortunately for some it can be quite hard to figure out what your wikifauna is, whether you are a wikicat, wikidragon or even a wikiprincess. So what if we created a quiz with certain questions that can determine what your wikifauna is. Who's with me? P. S I am supposed to be on a wikibreak but somehow ended up here hehe. Wikiwow*_* Wikiwow:) (talk) 04:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

hi

can i join? Allaoii ^talk 18:03, 16 November 2022 (UTC)