Wikivoyage talk:Joke articles

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archived discussions

Wikivoyage talk:Joke articles/Archive 2007-2018

2019 proposals...[edit]

Okay let's open the discussion.

My preference would be , given that we did a sci-fi themed destination last year that we go for something historical this year. (even though I've put in some sci-fi related proposals...

Article Supporters
Nano-tourism - Why should travel stay within the limits of optical "Mag-n-if-ca-tion!" ? ;) User:ShakespeareFan00
The Great Exhibition (1851) or Festival of Britain (1951)
The Bicentenial (1976 USA).
Wikivoyage (along the lines of Wikivoyage:Joke_articles/Wikipedia) ϒψιλον (talk) 13:41, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I also had an idea to have a meta guide to Wikivoyage, so that might be interesting if we are capable of ribbing each other and the site as a whole without causing offence.
Nano-tourism would be fun, but could easily be done next year or the year after that. It's certainly an "all weather" destination as far as joke articles are concerned.
How would a history article work?
Brexitannia might just be too horrible, actually.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:29, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pick a destination that's historically significant and write a travel article for it at a given date, (like was done for East Berlin.), That's why I put The Great Exhibition and Festival of Britain in the options. Can you think of other historically significant places that would have existing source material to draw on? ( Like Imperial Rome, Southwark in the Tudor period, The Call of the Wild Frontier..) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I also plan to around April 1st add some updates to existing joke articles ;) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well I would dispute some Nano-tourist destinations as being all-weather. Lawn safari's need it to be dry. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:21, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What if we wrote the history article as if it either had just happened or was still to come? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 15:12, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well for something like the w:Great Exhibition, a guide would be commenting on competing rail companies offers, some choice comments about transport to Hyde Park, which boarding houses to 'avoid' etc.. and that you should guard your pocket watch in crowds. Writing style would thematically be more akin to the various travel guides published in the 19th century ( Bradshaw, Badeker and others)?
By comparison for the w:Festival of Britain (which was multi-sited) you'd be mentioning ferry routes, liner timings, British Railways, the nearest tube at Waterloo (which was upgraded for the event), food rationing still being in force, and so forth... Most likely you could thematically write this guide using an American correspondent style of the late 40's. And London in 1951 still had some more old-fashioned cultural attractions, that would be mentioned alongside the Festival itself..
If you wanted to do a three-period article covering both the above as well, you could also include "the Millenium Dome" which is thematically linked..ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another board 'historical' article would be to do the US circa 1976, (given the factual information that went into Time Travel, I can imagine it's feasible).

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think I said it before at some point, but the best Joke articles have been the ones that as many voyagers as possible know and can write something/anything about without having to google stuff. ϒψιλον (talk) 17:10, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, my gut feeling is that history-focused articles, especially really specific and obscure events like these, would not encourage a lot of people to join in for fun. It might be more like a homework assignment than an April Fools joke.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:19, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, then, thanks for the views.. I might develop some stubs on my time though... And welcome a further discussion about the development of 'historically' focused articles, for other reasons. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:53, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Another proposal I had considered listing was one of the many cinematic universes, but Middle Earth and Narnia had already been done.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:55, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantis? --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:28, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Never mind, it's already been done. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I had a couple thoughts: Traveling with w:Jack Benny and Devil's Island. However, I like the nano-tourism idea. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 01:52, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Time to decide[edit]

Less than two weeks left to April 1, so it's time to decide what we should do. Even if many if not most Wikivoyagers aren't that interested in this any longer (as some of the discussions above and the decline in interest over the years indicates) I'd really like to see a joke article on the Main Page one last time, at least.

So is it nano-tourism, Wikivoyage, maybe even Wikivoyage:Joke_articles/TravelRant or something else (last year I suggested Gibberish phrasebook)? -- ϒψιλον (talk) 05:31, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nano-tourism looks good to me. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:07, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Great, maybe ShakespeareFan00 should move it out of their userspace to Wikivoyage:Joke articles/Nano-tourism , then. -- ϒψιλον (talk) 17:24, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ShakespeareFan00 Is on WikiBreak but he's said he's happy with the change so Template:Doing RhinosF1 (talk) 18:43, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Done RhinosF1 (talk) 18:45, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@RhinosF1: Actually, I don't think he's on Wikibreak. It is on his user page that he says he's on Wikibreak, but his userpage hasn't been updated for almost a year, so I think he probably had a Wikibreak some time ago but simply forgot to take down the notice. Thanks for doing the work, though! --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in communication with ShakespeareFan00 and following issues on other projects he is taking a WMF wide WikiBreak until 1st April and will then return to a few sites. He is aware of the discussion and Advised me that he was happy. He's taken a longer WikiBreak until 2021 on English Wikipedia and commons. RhinosF1 (talk) 06:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please also check his contributions. RhinosF1 (talk) 06:40, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry, I'm obviously behind on all the news. I will check his contributions. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 13:46, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SelfieCity, no problem! RhinosF1 (talk) 16:17, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've contributed to the future joke article, but my jokes aren't very funny, so please feel free to adjust them and improve them. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:39, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Time to start thinking about 2020's article?[edit]

It's a little more than two months until April Fool's day! What do you say, is the community interested in doing a joke article this year? There are dozens of article suggestions in discussions above. --Ypsilon (talk) 20:44, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest a specific place/time combination (like was done with East Berlin)... What was happening in 1920 globally? (I Do not really want to suggest the British Empire Exhibition because I suggested the Festival of Britain previously..) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alternatively , are you familliar with Bunyan's allegorical work? w:The_Pilgrim's_Progress#Places_in_The_Pilgrim's_Progress.
(Aside) That also suggests, someone trying to do a broadly historical travel topic style article on visiting holy sites in Europe :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:26, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever we end up doing, it should be something with broad appeal among editors and readers. Something too obscure will result in just one or two contributors writing for a small audience.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:11, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, I think the idea of using a historical event from 1920 is a good one in principle, though the year itself was a bit on the violent side: wars, revolutions, all the fallout from the end of World War I. Possibly the only positive 'news story' of international significance I could see on the 1920 Wikipedia article was the first meeting of the League of Nations. How that would be worked into a humorous travel article is not clear to me yet, but maybe it could work?--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:32, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In the age of post-truth, may I suggest my suggestion from #April_Fool's_day_article_2014 — State of Denial? --Ypsilon (talk) 09:50, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Places to go after you die[edit]

Swept in from the pub

Why stop traveling just because you've stopped breathing? (koavf)TCM 23:33, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't relevant to this page Freyr Brown (talk) 04:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Some of our contributors like to post links to articles, in some cases trivia but in other cases important travel information that requires updating of our articles. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 14:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like a proposal for next year's April Fool's Day page. Maybe an itinerary this time? WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't find it funny to be honest especially in light of current pandemic. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:13, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
May be a case of "too soon", I agree but I think travel in the afterlife would make a great article. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:19, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's "too soon". I think it's "NEVER". As of today, there's been 6.8 million infections and almost 400,000 died. We don't joke about the Spanish flu, MERS, H1N1, nor SARS. So why should COVID-19 gets different treatment? That's why I agree with Freyr Brown. It's not relevant to this page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:43, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, the above is some black humor that I wouldn't publish here. I think doing a "tour" of Heaven or Nirvana could be done in a lite-hearted enough manner. Still possible controversial but not as provocative as the above link. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, even without any ongoing pandemic an article like the one you linked to wouldn't be appropriate even as an April Fool's article. A "Tour of Heaven" maybe. Ypsilon (talk) 08:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: Freyr Brown’s username is now CupcakePerson13. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 11:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking about a tour of all the famous places: Heaven, Hell, Nirvana, Purgatory, Elysium, etc. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April fools 2021[edit]

Swept in from the pub

This year, I want to go to Before Times. They were kind of nice the last time I was there, and it was so much easier for the traveler. Take a leisurely drive on back highways, knowing that you could stop at any gas station or convenience store to get what you forgot to pack. Speed through the airport without getting your temperature checked. Set foot on a cruise ship with only norovirus to fear. Join the surging crowds on the subway. Hug family members when you arrive. Does anyone want to go with me? WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. As a travel wiki, and especially as a wiki that during the pandemic has explicitly offered itself up as an escapist vehicle for "armchair travellers" who would otherwise be travelling in real life, we need to be very careful about how we treat the pandemic and pandemic-related themes. It goes without saying that we should include information in Wikivoyage that's legitimately useful to travellers, such as the COVID-19 pandemic article itself and the COVID-related infoboxes at the top of country articles and others higher up in the breadcrumb hierarchy. But reminders of the "Before Times" - a term I viscerally loathe, FWIW - are a very serious emotional trigger for many of our readers and editors, and it would be insensitive and inappropriate to make light of the subject in a joke article, least of all one that gets top billing on our Main Page. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 02:08, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reminding people of what was normal in the past also gives us hope for the future, and talking about what we miss promotes good mental health. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That may be true for you. But for others - including me, and including a large majority of those I've interacted with on both a personal and professional level - normality is already something that seems to exist in some inaccessible fantastic realm not unlike how we portray our April Fool's joke articles, and living through this pandemic is incredibly distressing. In these trying times, it's more necessary than ever for people to try to see things from others' point of view. And coming up with a different topic that we can all enjoy is not a difficult proposition, especially this early in the game when the article hasn't even begun to be written yet. So again, let's please have a little more consideration, especially for those who are on Wikivoyage for escapist purposes and would prefer not to have reminders of the pandemic thrown in their face at every turn, as happens in real life. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Andre, did you just say that it's necessary for me to see things from your point of view, right after you forcefully dismissed mine as a point of new that only "may" be true "for me"? I hope you didn't mean that.
If you think that there should be a different topic, I'd be happy to hear your suggestions. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:54, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, no, I didn't say it was necessary for to see things through my point of view. If you reread my remarks, hopefully you will see they are in the spirit of ttcf first and foremost. It happens to also be my personal viewpoint, but that has no bearing on the validity of my argument. Second of all, I'm confused as to the position you're staking out here. I've already explained the downside of running Before Times as our April Fool's article, but what I've yet to hear is the alleged downside of "coming up with a different topic that we can all enjoy", as I suggested above? Why is it absolutely necessary that we publish this particular article, regardless of what our readers' reaction may be? I'm honestly trying to assume good faith and see this as something other than you feeling disappointed that your idea didn't get the reception you were hoping for. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 00:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Remaining in good taste has always been a problem when considering what topic to go with for April Fools Day and how to cover it. I agree with Andre that the topic you're proposing would be deeply depressing and not funny at all, except maybe in a very darkly sardonic way. I'd much rather have no joke article than the one you want to run. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For anyone interested, there are already a couple of suggestions at Wikivoyage talk:Joke articles#April Fool's 2021.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Andre, I repeat: I'd be happy to hear your suggestions. NB that I don't want to hear a suggestion from you that other people should do the work of coming up with other ideas. I'm asking that you make a constructive suggestion yourself. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the original proposal was unacceptable remains true regardless of whether or not I have offered an alternative. As a Wikivoyager, I am interested in the overall reader experience, hence my participation in this discussion, but I have never been particularly interested in participating in the April Fool's article tradition, even during non-COVID times. I don't begrudge those who do enjoy it, but I personally don't, and the act of exercising my right not to participate in it does not mean I waive my right to participate in other areas of site governance, such as determining what does and doesn't belong on the Main Page. If you'd like some alternative ideas, ChubbyWimbus has already suggested two, ThunderingTyphoons! has pointed you to a place where there are others, and I'm sure anyone else who enjoys the April Fool's tradition would love to share their preference. But, to make myself absolutely clear, I will not be sharing any of my own. And quite frankly, your insistence on hearing one specifically from me comes off as rather dismissive of the ideas others have already offered, which seem quite well-considered. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I liked the original idea and I'm surprised that it could be considered triggering. There are reminders of the pandemic everywhere, including on this site. Powers (talk) 00:52, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(indent) Of the article suggestions linked by ThunderingTyphoons!, I like the Captain Obvious suggestion. I also like the suggestion of the Simpson's Springfield IF there are enough people with knowledge about the places in Springfield and events that occurred there or other tidbits to make it fun and interesting. I have of course seen many episodes of the Simpsons myself, but it's been a long time, so I probably don't have the memory to make such an article funny/fun/nostalgic. If others do, it would be a fun feature. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 13:00, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be enthusiastic to help out with a Springfield article. (A relative owns a travel guide!) Vaticidalprophet (talk) 02:26, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Simpsons idea has been proposed many times over the years. The obvious problem is that almost all conceivably relevant images would be copyright-protected. If we manage to find a way around that, it would make for a great article, but it's a pretty formidable barrier. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 04:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Commons has a small handful of images that it seems to either consider acceptable or has at least turned a blind eye to that we could use, such as c:File:Gran Sello de la Alcadia de Springfield.svg, c:File:North Takoma mapa.png (not in English, but only sort of an issue), and c:File:MoesBarConcepcion2016.jpg. I think there's definitely something we can do. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 05:28, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think deliberately violating the copyright of a TV show that might be likely to sue is a good idea, just because some images haven't yet been deleted from Commons. This isn't a case of fair use in regard to a permanent work of architecture somewhere. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, we can start a Simpsons Tour article along the lines of Seinfeld Tour. Gizza (roam) 00:37, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft article[edit]

Contributions are welcome at Draft:Springfield (USA). Ground Zero (talk) 16:11, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April Fool's 2021[edit]

Earth article for April Fools Day 2021[edit]

Only three months to go and we need to come up with some suggestions. My suggestion is 'Earth'. If Earth is actually chosen, then you heard it here first. This idea was created by User: and if Earth is chosen, I want to be credited for coming up with it. 16:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Earth was done in 2007.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Springfield article[edit]

I suggest "Springfield" as the article (as in Springfield from The Simpsons), because I think it would be interesting to see an article about what is there and the people who live there. 17:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I like that idea, and would be up for contributing to it. The best April Fools articles are those that everyone in the community can contribute to without specialist knowledge, so generally "fandom" topics don't really work because they're niche almost by definition, but The Simpsons has been around for so long and is so well-known internationally, that it might just work. I'd be interested to know if anyone disagrees.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:22, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, for example, The Simpsons is an American show, but I live in the United Kingdom and still know about it. 09:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
w:Springfield (The Simpsons) would be a good starting point for someone interested in working on this. Ground Zero (talk) 19:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As I said in the travellers' pub, I'd be happy to help out with this idea, and it's indeed one people (e.g. the show's creators) have had before, so there's quite a lot of pseudo-tourism information to work with. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 02:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Springfield is an interesting idea. 2A00:23C7:DD06:1F01:5875:1F17:1221:7A56 10:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Repeating my 2019 suggestion from above: "Wikivoyage (along the lines of Wikivoyage:Joke_articles/Wikipedia)" --Ypsilon (talk) 20:19, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Wikivoyage idea is a great one, so great in fact that it's worth saving for a special occasion e.g. the 10th anniversary of being called "Wikivoyage" (either next year or 2023, depending on when you're counting from), or the 20th anniversary since Wikitravel was founded, which must be coming up --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
2023 will be the 20th anniversary, judging by Wikivoyage:User_rights_nominations/Archives#User:(WT-en) Evan.ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikitravel's 20th anniversary will be on February 19, 2023 and Wikivoyages's 20th anniversary - well I'm not really sure. The first edit was this one on 2 March, 2009 but Wikivoyage was probably invented a few weeks before. My guess would be 2023 for Wikitravel and 2029 for Wikivoyage, but that might be wrong. 08:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go with this one. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Internet[edit]

Not the most original idea, as it bears similarities with both the above Wikivoyage idea and last year's article Your House, but the internet remains a place we can all visit and is also a rather easy well to tap for humour.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:23, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could just call it Cyberspace. The dog2 (talk) 20:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Travel for dummies / Captain Obvious[edit]

An ordinary travel guide article, either a specific destination or something like Travel basics, but the Captain Obvious version, with every minute and patronising detail retained.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I'd love for every article to have "wear your seat belt" or "the maximum speed limit is 100km/h so don't speed". TravelAroundOz (talkcontribs)
Sure, and readers also need to know they will get wet if they go swimming. :) Ypsilon (talk) 09:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not if you grease up :)
"Readers should take time to note that many swimming pools will not allow you in if you're caked in animal fat." XD --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:31, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Or, if you are over 90kgs, you will not be allowed on a boat. TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:35, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Or, if you get caught in a rip. Don't panic. No one will come and get you. TravelAroundOz (talk) 07:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LOL 2A00:23C7:DD06:1F01:5875:1F17:1221:7A56 10:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is a sad reality though. If you get caught in a rip, there's about a lifeguard only about on 1% of our beaches. So it's obvious. TravelAroundOz (talk) 10:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gibberish phrasebook[edit]

What it says on the tin, really. We're quite a multilingual bunch, so should be able to come up with a nonsense language that pokes fun at phrasebooks, travel in strange lands, and language itself. Including classic phrases like "The pen of my aunt is in the garden" and "My hovercraft is full of eels."--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 08:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC

Support. --Ypsilon (talk) 09:39, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, sounds like a plan. The dog2 (talk) 21:21, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting 2A00:23C7:DD06:1F01:5875:1F17:1221:7A56 10:16, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 1st[edit]

What about the "Middisland"?

Essentially it's a 'world' building exercise for a 5th 'fictional' constituent of the United Kingdom located where the Dogger Bank is.

Influences are essentially a combination of British, Danish and Dutch.. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


Middisland is the fifth constituent of the United Kingdom, having been so since the 13th century, previously having been under nominal Saxon and Viking rule.

The major port cites of Westport, and Northmouth link Middisland with the United Kingdom; Denmark and Low Countries. There is a regular ferry service with frequent sailings to Hull and Harwich. Although plans existed for a channel tunnel style link in the 1970's. perceived "geological difficulties"

Despite the low lying nature of portions of the Middisland, the region is exceptionally fertile, and agricultural exports form a good proportion of the countries economy. Eel fishing along the coast is highly prized, and modern 'hover-dogs' have replaced earlier fishing skiffs used for this, as they can rapidly travese the changing flats of the Middis


"Northmouth" Cathedral. Hove-Dogge Heratige and Visitors centere Norsen - The viking experience.

Gilly Gilly Ossenfeffer Katzenellenbogen by the Sea[edit]

I recently heard a song with this name, and I thought this could make a good April Fool's suggestion. The town is completely fictional, however I don't think many people would have heard of it. 08:09, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Time to make a decision[edit]

@Ypsilon, The dog2, ShakespeareFan00, SHB2000, ThunderingTyphoons!: With less than three weeks to go, it is time to make a decision. I have pinged the five most active contributors of this page so that they can collaborate and make a decision on this years April Fools page. We have eight suggestions by four different users; three by me, three by ThunderingTyphoons!, one by Ypsilon and one by ShakespeareFan00. What do you guys think will make the best April Fools page? 08:39, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be out of town for April Fools but I do have plans to make Tourist Drive 33, full of Captain Obvious things just before I go. SHB2000 (talk) 08:44, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000: I see. Thanks for letting us know. 08:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ground Zero, Vaticidalprophet, AlasdairW, Crouch, Swale: Any thoughts? 08:49, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, why not consider create an account? SHB2000 (talk 09:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Out of my ideas - The internet one is quite boring and didn't attract any support (at least, I don't interpret user:The dog2's comment as support). Several people seem to like the Gibberish idea, and I think it would be fun to work on. I struggle to see how Captain Obvious would work as its own article, but we could insert really boneheadedly obvious advice into regular articles just for the 24 hours of 1 April GMT (though that might upset other members of the community who don't wish to partake in the silliness).

Out of the other ideas, The Simpsons one is the best in my view, and I think lots of people could work on it. We don't actually need to have photos if that would cause copyright problems. Personally, I don't really see Middisland or Gilly Gilly wotsit as viable collaborative projects, but others may disagree.

So yeah, for me it's between Springfield (USA) and the Gibberish phrasebook.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 12:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My personally preferred proposal continues to be the Simpsons proposal. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 12:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC) @SHB2000: I don't want an account, thank you. 13:20, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How about something to do with the Fucking/Fugging rename? Crouch, Swale (talk) 15:00, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, these are the votes so far. 13:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This vote table is a good idea, but I don't think the opinions expressed above can really be counted as finalised votes (for instance, I haven't decided yet). I would invite each user to enter their vote themselves.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Crouch, Swale: There is already a page about that, see Fugging. I’ll add it to the table anyway though. 15:49, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for 2021 April's fool[edit]

Users Votes Springfield
Ypsilon Gibberish phrasebook
The dog2 Gibberish phrasebook
ShakespeareFan00 Not voted yet
SHB2000 Springfield
ThunderingTyphoons! Springfield
Ground Zero Not voting
Vaticidalprophet Springfield
AlasdairW Springfield
Crouch, Swale Not voted yet
Articles Votes
Earth 0
Springfield 5
Wikivoyage 0
The Internet 0
Captain Obvious 0
Gibberish phrasebook 2
Middisland 0
Gilly Gilly 0
Fucking/Fugging 0
  • This is a project I'm not going to participate in, so I don't think my vote should count. I think Springfield is a better subject, for what it is worth. Ground Zero (talk) 19:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Springfield. Gibberish phrasebook is a good idea, but I would rather avoid it since we deleted the Esperanto phrasebook, which is a much more valid made-up language. AlasdairW (talk) 23:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you everyone. 16:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started[edit]

After all this chatter, no one has started this, so I will take a stable at it. I am creating this as a draft as it will need a lot of work. Draft:Springfield (USA). Ground Zero (talk) 13:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

3 more days left SHB2000 (talk) 09:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]