Wikipedia:WikiSpeak

See also: Wikipedia:Glossary

The name WikiSpeak was chosen based on George Orwell's fictional language Newspeak, described in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four as being "the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year". As the essay developed, though, it became obvious that it owed at least as much to the pioneering work of Ambrose Bierce's The Devil's Dictionary.

It is meant to be taken no more or less seriously than either of those two works. Please feel to contribute so long as you don't breach any of Wikipedia's increasingly arcane and bizarre policies or guidelines.

Misc–A–B–C–D–E–F–G–H–I–J–K–L–M–N–O–P–Q–R–S–T–U–V–W–X–Y–Z

Misc

~~~~

A quick and easy way to insert at the end of every post the 20kb of Wikimarkup that make your flashing, multicolored sig look so badass.

! excl. mark

Used as a prefix to signify that whatever it is you actually did, you really did the exact opposite. For example !voting means you're not voting even though you are about to vote. Used preemptively to ward off having to later use allcap blue NPA and allcap blue civil when someone doesn't start their response with respect. Particularly useful for those charged with establishing consensus, as they are at liberty to ignore all !votes.

A socially acceptable way of typing a Wiki-taboo word. Prefixing such a word by "!" makes the meaning understandable to the reader while still maintaining the appearance of social propriety. Comparable practices in the Victorian era included the use of "limb" in place of "leg" in polite conversation. Modern usage would encourage "!leg" instead of "limb".

3RR n.

A policy intended to prevent edit warring by drawing a clear line in the sand. Specifically, if an account editor reverts the same edit any edit any non-vandalism edit any edit that is neither vandalism nor in violation of WP:BLP by a given editor any editor an editor who is not presently blocked banned blocked or banned to a given article any article a single page more than twice three times three non-consecutive times within a day a 24-hour period, and someone pushing the opposite POV another editor is able to navigate an insanely complex and confusing template reports the incident to the appropriate noticeboard, that editor will may be blocked, except under certain circumstances. See also wikilawyer.

A

Administrator "assuming good faith" with an editor with whom he has disagreed

Admin coaching in progress

administrator n.

The be all, and end all of Wikipedia. Alpha and omega, the ultimate wikipedian. Administrators are the role models all wikipedians should strive to emulate. They display superior intellect, outstanding article building abilities, captivating physical attractiveness and, above all, a stupendous and awe-inspiring modesty.

(If anyone removes this, I'll block them.)

Paul Blart role-playing as Dirty Harry.

admin abuse n.

Abuse directed toward an admin.

(rarely) Abuse by an admin, especially the one who blocked you.

admin coaching n.

One of the few ways to avoid the potentially fatal accusation of canvassing while still letting as many people as possible know that you will be initiating an RfA at the end of the month. Also designed to teach candidates the correct answers to the questions likely to be asked at their RfAs, even though nobody bothers to read the answers anyway.

Quick and easy shortcut to finding quality RfA candidates to oppose.

Administrators' noticeboard n.

Not quite the Slough of Despond, but you can see it from there.

Administrators' noticeboard for incidents n. (ANI)

A place where administrators and other editors consider reports of various incidents on Wikipedia, engaging in lofty, open-minded discussion, presenting reasoned, rational arguments, and listening to one another with tolerance and good will, before reaching a consensual decision to block anyone who steps out of line.

The largest fire hydrant in the kennel.

Adopt-a-User n.

A WikiProject where experienced wikipedians aim to help new editors get to grips with editing, by explaining to them why all their contributions have been removed and how many policies they've just violated.

AfD n.

• A place to send an article you don't like.
• A place to send an article created by an editor you don't like.
• A place to send a potentially productive editor to spend his or her time with frivolous deletion arguments rather than with actual contributions.
• A training ground for RfA, according to your admin coach.
• A place where you will inevitably, through no fault of our own, irritate enough people to destroy your chances of ever passing RfA.
• The Wikipedia community's primary way of thanking you for your contribution.

"AfD is not a vote"

• AfD is a vote that administrators are allowed to count any way they like.

allcap blue civil n.

(appears on screen as such: CIVIL). Used in a similar way, often at the same time as, allcap blue NPA.

American English n.

• A piece of text in which alternate words are spelt alternately. See also British English.
• a gud eskoose fore ritin a simpsonz artikle withowt payin no attenshun too spellin typin grammer punkchooaishun or nothin stoopid like that, no wut i'm sayin?

anorak n.

• Editor, typically male, who feels compelled to inflict as much boring detailed information and trivia as possible on the rest of the online population by writing articles on sheds, skips, the A215 road and all things railway-related. Named after their garment of choice which comes in a range of colours: from dull, boring browns and blues; to high-visibility fluorescent wear indicating the extent of their "anorak-ness", the ultimate being iridescent.

Arbcom debating whether a civility block or a community ban is more appropriate in the case of a user who has repeatedly used the word "poop"

Arbcom n.

• A committee of the best and brightest editors Wikipedia has to offer, who have dedicated three years of their lives to discussing what punishments are appropriate for a motley band of typing students, critics and friends of gays. Combines the role of CenCom with the efficiency of WorldCom.

arbitrary section break n.

A break in a very long thread. It provides the appreciative audience member a chance to go to the bathroom and get extra popcorn during a really good drama festival. Carefully calculated placement of these, followed by your own comment at the top of the new section, allows you to have center stage for the next round of cabbage-hurling and dead-catting.

arbitration n.

The final step in Wikipedia's dispute resolution process. Editors first compile random diffs they hope no one will click on relevant evidence, then offer shrieking denunciations of the other parties carefully crafted proposals for settling the dispute. Arbcom then either blocks two randomly selected editors from each side of the dispute, or issues "admonishments" all around and everybody has a good laugh.

article n.

• A motley collection of boring, vague lies, sometimes punctuated by extremely useful and interesting images from Commons—and beautifully distributed em-dashes.
• Or, for brief periods of time, a succinct and insightful commentary on the subject's sexual orientation.
• An obscure pastime of boring editors with no talent for noticeboard drama, incivility, policy-whinging, sockpuppeteering or writing userspace widgets. The things made by editors you haven't heard of.

article assessment n.

• An additional facility offered for the use of editors who find the current facilities of edit warring, content disputes, and personal attacks insufficient in their scope for fruitful action. Periodically, the logic and the structure of article assessment is overhauled with more elaborate yet vague and unspecified schemes to allow editors even more scope to spice up their jaded argumentation skills.
• A great way to up an edit count (see RfA) and get barnstars.

File:Arthur-Neville-Chamberlain.jpg

The Right Honourable Arthur Neville Chamberlain, an early practitioner of "Assuming Good Faith"

assume good faith

• An admonition to experienced editors to take stupidity, illiteracy, malice, and transparent lies seriously. The subtle but delightful jab is in wikilinking it – which implies that an editor of three years standing has never heard of it.
• A handy phrase with which to taunt an editor whom you are trolling.

Usage:

"You've remilitarized the Rhineland and annexed Austria and the Sudetenland. I don't believe that you really want a peaceful resolution to the Danzig issue."

"Oh, come on – WP:AGF!"

attack site n.

Any website that's ever said anything rude about you. Sometimes called a BADSITE.

automated tools n.

• When used by an administrator, a valuable time-saving device to automate tedious, repetitive tasks.
• When used by a non-administrator, an abusive mechanism to artificially boost edit count.

B

bad adj.

A degenerate form of I'm sorry, as in my bad. Intended to give the impression that the user is cool, hip and fully up-to-date with the latest WikiSlang. In reality it indicates that the user is probably still in school and struggling with basic English grammar. Or American.

Anything you don't agree with.

bad block n.

See oxymoron.

See tautology.

banner n.

Multiple instances of these are found at the top of an article talk page, placed by different WikiProjects to indicate their ownership of said article. Banners will often include article ratings, from Stub- to A-Class, assigned by the projects; ideally, these should all be different.

barnstar n.

A way of telling an editor that you hate them and are jealous of their contributions without being blocked.

Something highly active users give to their friends.

A solicitation for praise, particularly in advance of the bestower's RfA.

"be bold"

An exhortation made by established editors to encourage newcomers to go ahead and make a bunch of stupid mistakes, so that they can then be indefinitely blocked with impunity.

beans n.

A popularly-held view amongst many with access to the block button, ensuring that every new editor's journey is an eventful, adrenaline-fuelled passage along Wikipedia's webbed hallway. The fundamental principle is that if we told you the sort of things which will get you blocked, you might want to try them out. Instead we simply warn you of the consequences, leaving you to discover where the traps are. Isn't that much more exciting?

bias n.

A meaningless, blockable personal attack often labeled at morally superior editors when they're trying to delete something which is sourced and notable, but really icky-yucky that no decent person should want to read.

block n.

The means by which an uninvolved admin prevents an editor from answering back. See also indefblock.

BLP (sometimes allcap blue BLP)

A Biography of a Living Person. By "Living" Wikipedia means Living or Dead. The Undead-- vampires, zombies and such folk-- are also included. "Persons" includes Animals, Inanimate Objects, Theoretical Constructs and South Park characters. "Biography" also includes Treatises, Comic Books (including manga), How-to-Manuals, and Chats with Your Friend Over a Beer.

The best reason to revert an edit by an editor you don't like on an article about someone in popular culture you've never heard of.

BLP (Biography of Living Persons) articles are held to the strictest standards of verifiability and sourcing. And North Korea is a workers' paradise.

As a rule of thumb, any proper Wikipedia BLP will read, "[Subject of article] is a notable, but completely non-controversial person who has never done anything disreputable in his or her life." (Note: for BLPs of blood-thirsty dictators, mass-murderers, cannibals, gangland figures, and the like, one can append the statement, "And no RELIABLE source says otherwise."

What remains after a bot has efficiently deleted a sourced Fair Use image for being unsourced because the sourcing statement was in a non-machine-readable format, such as English

bot n.

Automated editing tool used by someone whose edit count is already over 10,000. N.B. Wikipedia's rules on vandalism, "templating the regulars", civility, and nearly everything else do not apply if you get your bot to do it.

Automatons which exist to perform useful tasks like this.

brilliant prose n.

Text so dense, dull, and filled with words that haven't been used for three hundred years that no one can comprehend it, let alone object to it. See also American English.

Britannica n.

The Canada to Wikipedia's USA.

British English n.

A reason to fail a Featured or Good Article candidate.

Something to revert on sight with the edit summary "correcting spelling"—a particularly useful tactic on slow days, when there hasn't been much action on the talk page or at WP:ANI.

broken adj.

See RfA

bureaucrat n.

An administrator so bland that they haven't managed to upset anyone.

C

cabal n.

A collective noun for everyone you don't like. It doesn't exist, by the way, as has been clearly demonstrated by a number of uninvolved editors.

Any group in agreement about something whose opinion differs from yours; antonym of consensus.

canvassing n. & v.

—v. Informing one editor of the whereabouts of a discussion that they might find interesting. Strongly frowned upon unless that editor shares the same opinion as the initiator of the discussion. Compare with "Deletion sorting", informing a large group of editors of the whereabouts of a discussion that they might find interesting. This may be considered to be helpful in opening the issue up for community input, as long as that community is of the same opinion as the initiator of the discussion.

caps lock n.

A means for conveying the Truth in the absence of any more-convincing argument.

category n.

A way to slip unreferenced assertions into an article without anyone asking too many awkward questions.

charity n.

An organisation run by a small clique of friends, who despite being "unpaid" earn huge amounts from speaking engagements based solely on their position.

checkuser n. & v.

—n. A tool that enables a user with appropriate permission to read the minds of Wikipedia's users. This ability has never been openly admitted; instead, the official story is that the tool merely gives access to a user's IP addresses and user agent string. Its mind-reading abilities are officially held to be false. By using this official line, lazy checkusers (see second noun definition below) can deny any request they don't feel like fulfilling.

—n. One of the privileged few who hold access to the above tool. Do not get one of these people angry at you. The least they will do is ignore your request, leaving you unable to whack-a-mole report/block whatever vandal you are chasing, while knowing that said vandal is laughing in your face. The worst they will do is say that they ran a check on you, that you are a sockpuppet of Willy on Wheels, and block you indefinitely, e-mail blocked, talk page disabled.

—v. To use the aforementioned MediaWiki mind-reading software.

citation n.

A reference to an obscure publication which contains some of the words in your article.

[citation needed] n.

A suffix often seen following a personal opinion, to ensure that its removal can be legitimately reverted. See {{fact}}.

civility n.

The state of grace two editors achieve when they are in agreement with one another.

A common inspiration for accusation, abuse, and insult. A tempting occasion for hypocrisy without consequence. A quality, the alleged absence of which has occasioned some of the most rancorous fights in the history of Wikipedia. The phlogiston of noticeboard discourse and combustion.

The skill of abusing, insulting and humiliating another editor without the use of intemperate language.

N.B. RfAs, RfCs and a few other processes for comment on an individual editor are considered Civility-free zones on Wikipedia. Feel free to hurl your most outrageous insults while participating in one of these, as, while the most anal-retentive form of PC-speak is expected elsewhere, you can vent your spleen with impunity here.

{{cleanup}} n.

A tag added to an article when you don't like the creator's writing style or POV, but can't immediately think of a criterion under which it can be speedily deleted.

A graffiti-like banner (or "tag") with which to muck-up a respectable article. Clean-up often entails only the removal of the cleanup tag.

clue n.

Well, if you have to ask you obviously haven't got one.

Essence of wet trout, medicinal doses of which are occasionally administered automatically by ClueBot.

ClueBot n.

Wikipedia's scarecrow.

collaborate v.

To agree to work productively with another editor, following ten talk-page threads, nine reports to ANI, eight RfCs, seven wheel wars over page protection, six community bans, five ArbCom cases, four indef blocks, three requests for mediation, two angry blog posts, and a partridge in a pear tree.

collaboration n.

One editor taking credit for someone else's work.

Two WikiProjects claiming ownership of the same article.

common sense n.

"I have no justification for my opinion, but wish to imply my utter contempt for anyone who would consider supporting an alternative point of view."

Opinion arrived at without reflection, often more correctly categorized as bollox. It only takes common sense to realise that uncommon sense is a far rarer, more admirable, quality.

Bleedin' obvious.

File:Dani-020914-2896-24.jpg

Part of Commons' ceaseless mission to educate the masses and document important world events through informative illustrations

Commons n.

A website where editors who have annoyed too many people on Wikipedia for anyone to listen to them, but are too boring to be blocked, go to discuss poorly made amateur pornography and blurred photographs of disused buses.

A place to upload your image if it's really free, as opposed to a copyvio fair use.

communication v.

The act of templating an editor's talk page to tell them that their article or image is about to be deleted.

conflict of interest n.

Editing an article on any subject that you actually understand.

Uncommon, and sanctionable, expertise.

A torch and pitchfork, tools traditionally wielded by large groups who have reached consensus.

consensus n.

One of the three states that can be reached at the end of a discussion after all parties have become thoroughly fed up with it; the alternatives are no consensus or for pity's sake, I wish I'd never gotten involved in this. Consensus is calculated by counting the votes on either side of the debate, remembering that each vote cast by an editor with whom you are on good terms should be counted at least twice.

Any group in agreement about something whose opinion is the same as yours; antonym of cabal.

The concept by which it has been decided that the official language of the English Wikipedia is now Mandarin Chinese.

see also: The 19th century history of consensus, The Madness of Crowds

conspiracy n.

The only conceivable reason why your impeccably sourced and persuasively expressed assertion or edit is being resisted by other editors.

content dispute n.

See harassment (whichever editor has the lower edit count is the harasser).

contributor n.

An editor to be {{welcome}}d (qv) and subsequently patronised. Obviously of no value to the project because he or she is distracted into improving articles, instead of participating in the noticeboards or other similarly useful symposia.

controversial administrator n.

Administrator who blocked you.

Administrator who blocked your friend.

(rarely) Batshit insane administrator.

controversial editor n.

Blocked editor. See block.

cool-down blocks n.

97.4% of all blocks are issued as cool-down blocks. Please note that it is strictly against Wikipedia policy to call them this. You will swiftly fail an RfA if you, at any time, misuse the acronym WP:CDB.

Wikipedia's equivalent of the brank, or Scold's bridle. When removed, expect the scolding to continue, at a higher pitch and intensity—and hotter than ever.

copyedit v.

To make an article unrecognisable by changing all the spellings and paraphrasing in a manner that makes it clear you don't understand it at all.

~cruft

Suffix applied to anything you don't like, as in Listcruft, or Linkcruft.

D

The likely result a misplaced dash will have on an unsuspecting article at FAC

dash n.

The most important aspect of an article. Anyone reading through, for example, the featured article on the main page, will carefully note each of the dashes, and suffer a mental breakdown if an en dash is used instead of an em dash, a hyphen is used instead of an en dash, or even worse, an em dash — which looks like this — is spaced.

dedicated wikipedian n.

Editor without a girlfriend or boyfriend.

Editor soon to be without a girlfriend or boyfriend.

Editor who is too young to know what a girlfriend or boyfriend is.

See wikipedian.

deletionist n.

See exclusionist.

deprecated adj.

Utterly impermissible, yet utterly unenforceable.

developer n.

A member of the true inner cabal. Those with all the powers, but whose names appear in no rights logs.

DGAF n. (Don't Give A Fuck)

A laid-back New Age philosophy certain to distress any sysop attempting to impart the knowledge of their rank gained over many years since running the gauntlet of their RfA. Designed to confuse any administrator under the age of 14 due to its use resulting in the removal of computer privileges by either parent.

Did you know?

Did you care?

diff n.

Something you add to an argument to prove your point in a discussion, thereby winning over other editors and boosting the vote count in your favor. The contents of the diff are irrelevant, as no one reads them.

A thumb in the eye of Context. A toothsome morsel for those who cannot read all three words of "Attention Deficit Disorder" without becoming either disoriented or blocked for non-responsiveness.

disambiguation n.

A page you redirect to when your article has the same name as another but is less notable and worse written. This way, if your article cannot be the primary target of a search, no one else's will be either.

discussion n.

A frank exchange of views.

A vote.

disruption / disruptive editing n.

Editing an article that someone else already edited.

drama n.

See wiki-drama.

DUCK n. or "The duck test"

If it has four legs, moos and gives milk, and if consensus says it's a duck, it's a duck. Calling it a cow results in a block. note: Wikipedian version of a loyalty oath.

E

edit n.

Some typing, followed by a mouse click. After a short delay, a reversion, an outburst of wrath, and a noticeboard thread. Often followed by a block.

edit v.t. or v.i.

A circular activity that can take a number of equally productive forms, such as nonsensically linking and then nonsensically unlinking dates in thousands of unsourced stub-articles. Generally done by bots, leaving the humans free to play grab-ass with each other on drama boards.

An edit conflict. The two contributors are looking for the talk page.

edit conflict n.

Not an intuitive description of Wikipedia's collaborative content-creation process, but a technical term for the MediaWiki software spasm that occurs when attempting to save an edit to a version of an article that's been altered since you opened the edit window.

• In mainspace, a good reason to overwrite the offending interim alterations; tagging a sentence with {{fact}} is clearly more important than someone else's four-hour copyedit. No editor can be counted a true article-writer until, through the use of multiple browser tabs, they've inadvertently edit-conflicted themself.
• In talkspace, often an indication of a particularly juicy thread. Any post prefixed by (ec) or one of its variants means that the preceding post doesn't count and should be ignored.

edit count n.

The true measure of an editor. Users with a high edit count are definitely on the fast track to adminship. However, if this edit count was obtained by evil, despicable means such as using automated tools, then the user clearly needs to be humiliated for such iniquities at RfA.

edit summary n.

A creative opportunity to simultaneously insult the previous editor, continue the talk page dispute, and place the verisimilitude of your edit beyond any reasonable doubt, in 200 characters or less.

edit war n. & v.

Repeatedly replacing the current error with the previous error.

editor review n.

A social networking service aimed at matching up masochists with sadists for their mutual enjoyment and satisfaction. Nowadays, the service is becoming very subtle yet still potentially powerful, with many requests for editor review being ignored, thus not providing any matches. In this way, the refusal to provide satisfaction to one party satisfies both. In a yet further development, it appears that editors are no longer putting themselves forward for review, thus denying themselves the pain of a review, as well as denying reviewers the opportunity of inflicting the pain of a review on them. So, in this way, denying satisfaction to both parties satisfies both. Very efficient!

election n.

Everyone votes on candidates, and then Jimbo chooses the winner(s) regardless of number of votes won. Not to be confused with erection, which is an important concept on Commons.

encyclopedia n.

A work containing a detailed analysis of every episode of The Simpsons.

Inadvertent byproduct of a massively multiplayer online role-playing game.

encyclopedia builder n.

An editor who writes a string of formulaic articles on topics no-one cares about, while at the same time driving away dozens of genuinely useful editors with their puerile talk-page behavior.

Content of Wikipedia, June 2008

encyclopedic adj.

English: Comprehensive, complete, thorough, exhaustive.

WikiSpeak: Limited, censored, excluded, particularly with reference to subjects of which the writer disapproves or of which the writer has no knowledge. Example "OK, theoretically Beethoven wrote four symphonies before 'da-da-da-dum'. But if I-- who knows absolutely nothing about music-- has never heard of them, how can they possibly be notable? Not encyclopedic. Delete!"

essay n.

A carefully written userspace rant monograph setting out notions so obviously lunatic and/or so eminently sensible that it will never become policy.

established contributor n.

Someone who has been quietly and doggedly writing and improving articles for years, instead of furthering the project. Not to be confused with contributor, for whom there is still some hope of reform.

evil adj

Anything I or my friends don't like.

File:CarryNation.jpeg

Deletionist/exclusionist armed with new definition of "Notability" in her left hand preparing to Prod and AfD Wikipedia into a bloody pulp

exclusionist n.

An editor who believes that nothing (not even nothing) is a worthy subject for a Wikipedia article. See also inclusionist.

An inclusionist whose article on the garage band in which they played tambourine for a summer during high school has just been deleted.

The larval phase of the species of editor which eventually emerges from its cocoon as a full-blown administrator.

An editor who believes no new content should be added—or ever should have been added—to Wikipedia. This type of editor generally strives to make Wikipedia more concise by cutting existing article content in half, doubling talk-page content and multiplying rules and regulations by 10.

synonyms: deletionist, anti-encyclopedist

expert n.

An editor who has lied about his or her qualifications.

• ... especially if they lied about it in an interview with The New Yorker.

expertise n.

See conflict of interest.

external link n.

A hyperlink that directs a reader to a website that doesn't have the word "wiki" in it. Many articles thoughtfully incorporate a dedicated section for these, where you can add external links to your website, blog, MySpace page, school, or the sites you plagiarized examined for useful content. See also reliable source.

F

FAC n.

Acronym for "Featured Article Candidate." The acronym also expands to "Facts Aren't Compulsory;" some claim this is merely a coincidence.

See also GAN.

A rare glimpse into the FAC process

FAC reviewer n.

Abusive editor.

Sadist.

Jealous editor on a power trip.

{{fact}} n.

I thought about checking this, but couldn't be arsed.

A last ditch effort to cast doubt on statements in an article that you don't agree with but have failed to successfully blank. See also ^{[citation needed]}, weasel words.

No reasonable person would disagree with this, but I like to force people to do unnecessary time-wasting research anyway.

fair use adj.

Picture you got from the Internet that you think is cool. See also unfair use.

fanboy n.

An editor who opposes the deletion of an article that you want deleted. For example, should the article on the character Falstaff come up for deletion, a fanboy might defend the article by arguing that the character is commonly quoted, years after his creation. An extreme fanboy might then proceed to cite references to the character in print. A useful counter-argument to such fanboy tactics would go something like, "Oh get a load of the Falstaff fanboy! He don't want his precious Falstaff article deleted?! Boo hoo! Aw, somebody get the poor widdle Falstaff fanboy a hanky!"

{{fancruft}} n.

A tag designed to let you slip fancruft into as many edit summaries as possible on the basis that you are just informing other editors of the tag you have used.

The ratification of the Alaska Mental Health Enabling Act as a featured article

featured article n.

Article with proper use of em- and en-dashes, just the right number of references included with meticulous syntax and placing, and more than two pictures. Factual accuracy is strictly optional. See also good article.

The very best that Wikipedia has to offer on a wide range of subjects.

An article that retains none of the author's writing style or flair following the onslaught of FAC reviewers. See good article.

An article that grants its batshit insane author a free pass at RfA and life-long immunity from incivility blocks.

An article included in a random list of articles, which may or may not one day be linked from the main page.

featured article candidate n.

A well-written and well-referenced article that gets re-written and re-referenced because the reviewers are envious of the nominator's superior writing style, and can't be bothered to get hold of the sources to check them for themselves.

featured article process n.

A black hole formed from the collapsed enthusiasm of the editors whose work has been mercilessly criticised by one or more FAC reviewers.

An example of the law of diminishing returns.

featured article review n.

Deep, thoughtful, scholarly and authoritative scrutiny of an excellent article by a panel of international experts.

featured list n.

Content	Contributors
Factoids in sortable tables	People who can't write full sentences
Trivia in boxes	People who resent any suggestion that Featured lists are not shining examples of Wikipedia's best work

"find my secret page"

"I am too ugly for Facebook and the coding on Myspace looks complicated." In the case of any userpage in which the phrase "Congratulations, you found my secret page" occurs more than three times, the E-meter (see userboxes) is automatically set to zero.

fnord

See WP:FNORD.

Hey buddy, "God told me to" doesn't give you the right to put footnotes before the punctuation. And "Revealed Word of the Lord" sounds like original research to me.

footnotes n.

Any fact so blatantly fabricated that it would be spotted in the main body of the article. Because there is no way to differentiate a footnote from an in-line citation without actually checking, they have the added bonus of giving the impression an article is sourced.

founder n.

Jimmy Wales. Full stop. Definitely not in collaboration with [name redacted]. Next question.

Friendly n.

An automated tool for reverting vandalism and templating n00bs. Called Friendly to avoid personally attacking, and to spite new users. Synonym: !Twinkle.

G

GAN n.

Sheep to the shearing. See also FAC.

Godking n.

Jimbo Wales Malleus Fatuorum the keeper Giggy The Oxi Clean Guy The ShamWow Guy"Bob"

Good Article n.

An article with attractive images, proper formatting, and just enough references to look impressive. Accuracy and neutrality are irrelevant, if not outright disqualifiers.

Boring article with more than two pictures written by an editor who's recently had an argument with somebody active at featured article candidates.

An article that retains very little of the nominator's writing style or flair following the onslaught of GAN reviewers. See featured article.

The term "Good Article" should not be confused with the unrelated term "good article."

Good Article Candidate n.

An article you've asked one of your friends to pass. See featured article candidate.

good faith n.

A blind and uncritical acceptance of whatever nonsense the editor asking you to assume good faith has presented. n.b. Questioning another editor's good faith will always result in a response that to so question is bad faith. To point out that pointing out your questioning of the other editor's faith is bad faith is in itself bad faith, and will result in blocking.

Just admit I am right and be on your way.

good faith block n.

Only about 2.6% of blocks are good faith blocks, so in the unlikely event of you stumbling across one be sure to quickly:

• add "endorse" to the talkpage of the editor who has been blocked, thereby getting some of the credit for the block, and then immediately
• go to WP:AN to share your firm grasp of blocking policy by emphasizing that you tried to do the block yourself, but were "beat to it". Use lots of ALLCAPs, and add random diffs to things as evidence of the appropriateness of the block. (Don't worry about where the diffs go, no one clicks on them anyway.)

guestbook n.

For editors of a certain demographic, the third stage of their foray into building the world's largest online encyclopedia (stages one and two being the creation of a userpage and a signature).

guideline n.

A policy that can be flaunted when you want to give its supporters heartburn.

H

harassment n.

The Swiss Army knife of WikiSpeak. Covers most things, from real-life sexually motivated stalking to pointing out flawed logic or even pressing the "edit this page" button.

highly active user n.

Any user under the age of 14.

Any user who is unemployed.

Any user who spends way too much company time on Wikipedia

Not to be confused with actively high user.

honesty n.

A term for incivility when commited by yourself or a friend. Has little resemblance to the dictionary definition of honesty.

Huggle n.

Rollback that has washed down the crack-cocaine with a Red Bull. It's that quick. But no, it won't give you wings.^{[citation needed]} Sorry.

A particularly hilarious in-joke. This one was such a rib-tickler that Jimbo Wales preserved it on his userpage.

humor n.

Obscure in-joke nobody except you thinks is remotely funny.

I

IANAL

Not as exciting or titillating as it sounds, unless lawyers in denial turn you on.

IDONTLIKEIT

An incredibly valuable !policy for use in AfD debate. Quoting IDONTLIKEIT instantly exposes the complete lack of merit in any exclusionist arguments for the deletion of an article you like, and establishes your credentials as a) an AfD insider, and b) a dedicated wikipedian. Unless the nominator is an admin, in which case the correct procedure is to vote "per nom". See also ILIKEIT.

ILIKEIT

An incredibly valuable !policy for use in AfD debate. Quoting ILIKEIT instantly exposes the complete lack of merit in any inclusionist arguments for the retention of an article you don't like, and establishes your credentials as a) an AfD insider, b) a dedicated wikipedian, and c) potential Administrator material. See also IDONTLIKEIT.

Ignore All Rules

Ignore all rules except the ones I agree with, which it is a blockable offense to ignore. See also block.

image n.

Wikipedia's most efficient method of preventing novice editors from editing articles. In the futile hope that one day he/she will provide an image that will not be deleted, the novice is kept busy through a Sisyphus-like process of studying ever-changing, but strictly-enforced guidelines, finding and/or creating images, uploading them and then witnessing their deletion. Once an aspiring editor comes to the realisation that Wikipedia simply does not accept images, he/she has become an editor in good standing, and ready to proceed to the next stage of Wikipedia editor maturity: the AfD.

immaturity n.

A negative character trait shared by every poopy-pants pee-pee head who disagrees with you. See also maturity.

in popular culture

In Family Guy.

A section provided in articles about music for you to show everyone how clever you were to recognise [insert piece of music] (or something that sounded a bit like it) on the soundtrack when you were playing [insert computer game] or watching [insert film or television program].

incivility n.

See uncivil. Note the "u", dumbass.

Inclusionists vainly attempt to save an extremely useful article from deletion.

inclusionist n.

An editor who believes that every atom in the universe, and every possible combination or subparticle thereof, deserves its own article, and that every article deserves its own meta-article etcpp.

An editor who believes that Wikipedia can become a vast encyclopedic enterprise containing innumerable fascinating, well-written and sourced articles on interesting subjects hitherto unexplored by academia. See also exclusionist.

indefblock n.

A technical measure to prevent an editor from ever answering back again. Usually results from having said something rude about an administrator or one of his friends.

indiscriminate information n.

Any information you don't like and want deleted; see also unencyclopedic.

involved admin n.

See uninvolved admin.

IP editor n.

Vandal. It is quite safe to revert the edits of any unregistered user and issue a warning—even if not obvious vandalism—as nobody will listen to their explanation anyway.

IPA n.

Abbreviation for International Phonetic Alphabet, a phonetic system devised by the International Phonetic Association. It is incomprehensible to the vast majority of the English speaking world, and therefore has been adopted as the standard pronunciation aid for English Wikipedia.

IRC n.

Abbreviation for Internet Relay Chat. Very useful for real-time canvassing; no need to wait for someone to check their talkpage.

J

Michelangelo's depiction of a momentous event, which was also celebrated by Haydn in Und Gott schuf grosse Walfische ("And God created great Wales") from his oratorio The Creation. You won't be able to get this image out of your head for at least a week.

Jimmy Wales n.

User who racked up a total of 50 mainspace edits during the entire year of 2009 and has made fewer contributions in nine years than a reasonably experienced user can make in a month, but nonetheless knows better than you what the current issues affecting Wikipedia are.

Heir to the British throne (after Charles, William and Harry Wales).

K

Kid in Africa, the n.

Wikipedia's target user. Despite having to walk three miles each day to get fresh water, then work for 12 hours in the fields, the Kid in Africa nevertheless owns a computer with a fast ADSL connection and has a burning desire to know exactly when Brigg railway station was opened.

L

An administrator expels Adam and Eve from Eden for making a legal threat.

lede n.

Lead. No, seriously. Cf. neologism.

legal threat n.

There are no legal threats on Wikipedia. Threatening legal action is one of the few things for which an editor may be blocked instantly from editing Wikipedia – no warnings, no second chances, no Mr. Nice Guy. A remark that may be interpreted as a legal threat is the same as a legal threat. Mentioning that your sister once dated a lawyer is the same as a legal threat. Thinking about someone who has a similar name to the lawyer that your sister once dated is the same as a legal threat.

If you make a legal threat, Wikipedia will sue you for everything you're worth.

link n.

A means of adding colour to a dull and dreary article.

A means of escape from a dull and dreary article.

linkspam n.

External link added by an editor you don't like. See also unreliable source.

M

The FAC reviewers uncover an editor who put footnotes before the punctuation.

MADEUP adj.

A rule barring you from using Wikipedia to document anything you or your friends invented. It is bad form to point out that this rule was simply MADEUP (qv).

mailing list n.

(public) A place you can rant and attack other editors with colourful terms since no one reads them.

(private) A place you can plot with your fellow cabalists on which editor to ban next.

mainspace n.

That part of Wikipedia written by those incapable of good drama, and with poor Myspace skills.

Manual of Style n.

A random collection of personal opinions, prejudices, and arbitrary rules. Thankfully, nobody has to abide by it, because it's just a guideline, not policy.

maturity n.

A positive character trait shared by everyone who agrees with you.

meatpuppet n.

Anyone who agrees with anyone. See WP:TEAMWORK.

mediation n.

A process initiated by an aggrieved party, designed to convince them that they are just as guilty as those whose behaviour they are complaining about.

meme n.

A widely held view that you find inconvenient but are unable to refute.

mentor n.

An experienced, knowledgeable, and well-respected editor, who through a momentary and inexplicable lapse of judgement finds him or herself performing a role that resembles a cross between Dennis the Menace's father and Hannibal Lecter's defence counsel. Only two eventual outcomes are possible: either the mentor can do the honourable thing and, having nailed their colours to the mast, go down with the ship when their padawan is community-banned by general acclamation; or, having been informed of their apprentice's nth appearance at WP:ANI, jump ship and join in the pile-on. Both are equally entertaining for bystanders. See also Schadenfreude.

mentoring n.

A means by which control freaks can indulge their passion under the guise of formally assisting and guiding editors in their use of Wikipedia.

meta aspects of the project n.

See project space.

minor edit n.

Any edit you don't want anyone else to examine too closely.

MfD n.

A place to send essays like this one.

mopster

See administrator

A cleaner-up of messes; a wielder of Wikipedia's metaphorical mop.

moral support n.

I think you're an idiot and I refuse to honor you with so much as a serious oppose.

Ten other people already think you're an idiot and I want to be the one person here who doesn't get flamed.

N

neologism n.

A term nobody had ever heard before Wikipedia popularised it.

neutral v.

A statement used in votes (see discussion) to show that you can edit, but at the same time avoid pissing off your friends who happen to be split between support and oppose.

New page patrol n.

Target practise.

newbie n.

Any editor who still makes the majority of his edits in the mainspace.

Nope, no consensus here, I'll revert.

no consensus n.

An excuse to revert to your preferred version. If you are an administrator, you can enforce your POV NPOV against no consensus with protection and blocks.

nomination statement n.

A statement in which the nominator foresees all possible concerns (i.e. "I know many people will think that this is a bad faith nomination ...", "I know some might say this article isn't suitably referenced for FA ...", "I know I've been blocked 15 times and banned twice ...", ad nauseum). This obviously turns the concerns into ludicrous nonsense, and anyone bringing them up is assuming bad faith.

nominator n.

Incurable optimist.

Inexperienced first-timer: unwitting, innocent lamb to the slaughter.

Experienced veteran: possesses the skin of a rhinoceros and balls of steel.

non-notable adj.

I've never heard of it.

It doesn't come up on the first page of a Google search.

IDONTLIKEIT

Does not currently have an article on Wikipedia. Note: A good rule of thumb when starting a new article is to first check if Wikipedia already has such an article. If an article on your subject does not already exist on Wikipedia, it is non-notable, so don't bother starting one.

n00b n.

Anyone with fewer edits than you, thereby making them clearly incorrect and you their intellectual superior.

notable adj.

Mentioned on The Simpsons, Family Guy, or is a part of Star Wars.

Lots of Google hits, now cutely called "ghits" (like "gits" (snigger)).

ILIKEIT

* Please note: Subjects are often nominated for deletion due to concerns over their notability. At these AfD trials, Wikipedia prefers total ignorance of a subject in order for one to judge whether it is notable. For example, if you, as a self-appointed judge of notability, should see a subject on ancient Korean culture appear at AfD, and if you do not speak a word of Korean, and in fact, couldn't tell Korean from Swahili, then you are the ideal participant at this AfD. Should a Korean-speaker accidentally stumble into the AfD, and sputter, "But I see mentions of it in Korean sources here, here, and here", the proper response is to do a half-hearted Google search in English, find nothing, say so, and then accuse the Korean-speaker of either assuming bad faith, trolling or sock-puppetry. Hopefully you will get the Korean-speaker into a battle during which you can endlessly quote Wiki-law verbatim, while flaunting your proud and total ignorance of the subject at hand.

"not here to build an encyclopedia"

I don't like you but I can't actually find any specific instance of you doing anything wrong.

noticeboard n.

A place for public punishment, humiliation, and shaming: Wikipedia's equivalent of the cucking-stool or stocks. Noticeboards are also popular venues for entertainment, as those who initiate an action, intending to have another editor pilloried, often end up on the whipping post themselves.

NPOV n. & v.

—n. The point of view of the last editor who edited the article.

—n. The point of view of any editor who has access to the block button. See administrator.

—v. To rewrite an article as a promotional press release, as in the edit summary "NPOVing a few things".

The point of view achieved in a tug-of-war between groups of screaming, froth-mouthed extremists on opposite sides of any particular issue. An article on Earth produced by this process will read something like, "The Earth is flat.[Note, some dispute this fact and claim the Earth is triangular.]" An impartial Admin will protect the article in this state and permanently topic-ban the round-Earth community for edit-warring and personal attacks.

O

obvious n.

Said of a conclusion or interpretation necessary to promote the writer's personal agenda.

Ogg Vorbis n.

An audio file format. It is not supported by most commonly used audio software and is unheard of by anyone other than extreme free software nerds, and therefore has been adopted as the standard audio format for Wikipedia.

Ogg Theora n.

A video file format. It is not supported by most commonly used video software and is unheard of by anyone other than extreme free software nerds, and therefore has been adopted as the standard video format for Wikipedia.

oppose v.

I wouldn't have written the article like that, so it's obviously crap. See featured article.

I don't like you, so I'm going to make up a reason to oppose your RfA.

Prima facie—'Nuff said.

A stake in the heart of consensus, and a singularly effective way for an egotistical person to call attention to himself. Most effective when delivered after five or ten "supports"—which comment is, by the way, a wimpy and unmanly utterance redolent of "groupthink". The quickest way to rise to power in Wikipolitics is by strategic use of "oppose" in highly visible debates, always after a string of supports, preferably after a section break, and followed closely by a fierce assault of indignant invective.

optional question n.

The pet bugaboo of a !voter, with a tacked-on question mark, at your RfA; leave it unanswered and earn their undying enmity.

Orange bar n.

Garishly coloured banner that interrupts you for no good reason every ten minutes when you're trying to concentrate. As an added bonus, it often causes automated tools to crash. Named after the bar in which Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger got drunk enough to think that allowing a mob of random strangers to edit with no checks or vetting procedure would be a good idea.

original research n.

Personal knowledge, also known as The Truth. Not to be confused with expertise.

Anything not directly plagiarised.

Inconvenient facts.

n.b. Original research is strictly forbidden during the writing of an article. However, it is openly encouraged—and any reference to a reliable source strictly frowned upon—during the mob-frenzy-based creation of any of Wikipedia's multi-faceted definitions of notability.

OTHERSTUFFEXISTS

Often used at AfD debates. In this context means that the articles I like and want to keep should not be risked by you in defence of an article that I don't like.

oversight n.

An ingenious measure to remind administrators that their power is limited, and to deny them the pleasure of reading the really juicy stuff reserved for the developers.

ownership n.

rv – see talk

The concept which those editors who won't leave my article alone seem to fail to grasp.

P

pedophilia n.

A Power Word: "As this block is related to pedophilia-related articles, you may only appeal this block privately via email to arbcom-l". Generally used to ensure that a hasty, ill-thought out block, can never, ever, be undone. If you're a Brit please feel free to annoy American editors by inserting the missing "a" into the correct place.

penis n.

A meaningless word, often inappropriately thrust into Wikipedia articles. By the time those responsible have discovered the thing's proper uses, another crop of naïve penis-inserters has arrived. Bless them: it is thus that the cycle of Wikipedia life continues.

"per nom"

I have strong feelings about this, but I don't want the grief that will follow by typing any more than these six letters and four tildes.

I don't have strong feelings about this, but the nom is a friend of mine, and is never wrong.

I don't have strong feelings about this and I have no idea what I'm doing, but my admin coach told me to contribute more in Wikipedia space.

A personal attack: an uninvolved admin (left) is about to recommend the dispute resolution process.

personal attack n.

A wide-ranging term intended to be used liberally whenever someone points out a fault in your logic, presentation, article quality, or other action on Wikipedia without prefacing it by with respect. If an editor decides not to start their post to your talkpage with with respect, and indeed says I think you're talking bollox, then you can return fire with please refrain from personal attacks. Appears on screen often as WP:NPA. See also allcap blue civil.

The "money notes" of noticeboard opera. Truly spectacular high Cs result in applause, laughter, and long blocks.

plagiarism n.

Anything that's not original research.

Any well-written prose by someone other than you, that vaguely resembles something written by the person mentioned in the footnote.

Please do not bite the newcomers

A prime example of why ignore all rules is policy. In order to defend Wikipedia against newcomers (i.e. likely trolls and vandals), they must not only be bitten, but feasted on and spat out on a regular basis.

POINT n.

When in black: "You have made a statement I totally agree with."; when in blue: "You have made a statement I disagree with, and I therefore wish to disparage you and indicate your opinion is worthless, by linking to an essay I have barely read and certainly do not understand."

Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. Disrupt Wikipedia just for shits & giggles.

pointy adj.

Belligerent. To use the word belligerent, though, would obviously be a personal attack.

Pokémon n.

A cultural artifact of unknown significance. On Wikipedia, chiefly used as a Godwinesque debate intensifier. For example, as any debate between inclusionists and deletionists lengthens, the probability of either side referring to Pokémon approaches one.

policy n.

A big stick that permits you to speak softly, or even incomprehensibly.

popular culture n.

The single subject Wikipedia does best.

The single most reviled subject on Wikipedia.

porn n.

There is no porn on Wikimedia. Only educational images.

POV pushing n.

Shorthand term for "I don't agree with you, but I have no arguments." Its nuanced meaning can vary from "POV pushing" to the quasi-synonymous "NPOV pushing". Used exclusively by POV pushers. See also NPOV.

preventative adj.

Punitive. Often used in conjunction with block, as in preventative block. Editors who find themselves in disagreement with an administrator are advised to surrender immediately, otherwise a preventative block is almost inevitable.

preview button n.

An infrequently used tool which allows timid editors to see the likely consequences of their disruptive edits before their submission.

process creep n.

The tendency of Wikipedia policies to become more complicated over time. Process creep is greatly encouraged, as it provides work for administrators and makes them feel important, as well as providing excuses to block people they don't like for failure to understand the new policies. If processes still worked like this instead of like this, people might spend more time writing articles, and Wikipedia might run out of server space.

{{prod}}

I don't much like this article, but it's been a long day and I just can't be arsed to search through all the speedy deletion criteria to find one that might work.

project space n.

See drama.

protection n.

A feature used by administrators to ensure that their contributions are not modified by trolls.

puffery n.

Any assertion of notability—sourced or not—added to an article during the execution of an AfD. Since the only intent of a claim of notability is to disrupt the proper outcome of an AfD ("Delete"), proper etiquette is to first remove the puffery and then put a banner on the article marking it as rife with puffery. The puffery is now gone, and the banner can remain to further damn the article in the eyes of !voters.

Q

questions n.

A mechanism of bugging people so you will get more messages on your talk page.

R

An expert politely but firmly corrects a Randy.

Randy n.

Short for Randy in Boise. An editor who dares to disagree with you on your all-time favourite subject even though they have never attended a convention and may even have gaps in their fanzine collection. Antonym of expert.

RBI n.

An indefinite banning of an editor who mistakenly made three dubious edits in a row, and whose appeal for an unblock will safely fall on deaf ears.

reasoned argument n.

This is a portion of text written by an editor that begins by stating something so innocuous and self-evidently true it hardly seems worthwhile mentioning. Then, by a series of logical manoeuvres, transformations, and manipulations, each one of which everyone thinks uncontroversial, it gets transformed into a conclusion so fantastic and outlandish that no one can accept it. Often used by editors acting in a "devil's advocate" role to persuade people to reject critical thinking as a tool that can help resolve disputes on Wikipedia.

recent changes n.

Imminent reversions.

red tape n.

See bureaucrat.

redact v.

The <censored> of <censored> statements by another <censored> in order to <censored> and <censored>, thereby stimulating <censored> and a free exchange of <censored> and ideas.

The favored technique of discourse among those who are on the losing side of an argument, know they are right, but can only prove it if no one on the other side of the argument can say anything in reply.

(Redacted)

redirect n.

Relic of a wheel war that lies forgotten for at least a year after the event.

An elaborate trap set up to lure foolhardy non-administrators into recreating deleted material, which is a blockable offense. For the less daring, the page history serves as an example of what to avoid.

redlink n.

A clever trap placed for newcomers. It leads directly to speedy deletion: first of the article, then of the newcomer.

An obsolete feature of Wikipedia. A redlink was formerly used to indicate areas needing further coverage. Since the sum of human knowledge has now been more than adequately covered by Wikipedia, any remaining red links should be removed whenever discovered.

redundancy n.

A fatal, deadly and often lethal flaw or error in the type or style of writing known as "redundant", in which ideas and concepts are stated more than once, and statements and assertions are repeated multiple times (generally by being stated more than once). In addition this also may annoy the reader, particularly when a repeated point is repeated to the point of annoyance. It has been said that writing of this type also may include from time to time a number of more or less somewhat vague phrases. Redundancy is an excellent, first-rate and high quality strategy or tactic for getting trivial articles fluffed up enough so that they pass the DYK Did You Know 1500 character minimum to qualify for DYK, which has 1500 as the minimum number of characters that is adequately sufficient enough to satisfy its 1500 character minimum. Keep in mind that this technique of repetitious writing has been considered by some to be a fatal flaw.

redundancy n.

See redundancy.

Those tireless frequenters of Wikipedia's ref desk, twenty minutes after someone asked how to evaluate $\int _{0}^{\infty }{\frac {\cos(x)-1}{x^{2}}}\,dx$

ref desk n.

A free but not necessarily accurate resource for homework answers, relationship advice, identifying pictures of scary insects, and tracking down that film you saw ten years ago which might have had a lead character called Steve who drove a red car.

An experiment in artificial intelligence that generates random answers from a list of stock phrases such as "do your own homework", "we don't give medical advice", "look it up on Google" and "it's probably the motherboard".

regards

(Also with regards and variants.) Used as prefix to a signature when making a veiled threat or giving "constructive" criticism. Its sarcastic use is designed to infuriate the receiver whilst giving the appearance of leaving a polite message. The matching bookend to with respect.

N.B. When conversing at Simple English Wikipedia, the identical synonym "Fuck off" is preferred.

regulars

The !owners of an article, project or set of guidelines. (Note: Wikipedia does not have !owners, it has regulars.)

reliable source n.

Any source, no matter how insignificant or patently insane, that agrees with you. See also unreliable source.

Not you.

* ...not even if you are editing the article about yourself to correct a simple mistake, such as when you were born.

* N.B. an unimpeachable source from a respected, mainstream academic journal becomes unreliable if you are its author.

respect n.

Often used as in with respect, or with all due respect, euphemisms for I think you're talking bollocks. Most frequently seen in the postings of editors with aspirations to become an administrator, or those who do not have the courage to say I think you're talking bollocks. See also regards.

{{retired}} adj.

The single purpose of this account was rumbled, so I made a new one.

One of my other sockpuppet accounts already made it through RfA, so I don't need this one any more.

Not retired, but sick and tired of being flamed on my talkpage.

Lonely, in need of Wikicookies from 12-year-old editors pleading with me to come back.

Busy working on a revenge that is truly worthwhile.

see also {{Wikibreak}}, user essay

revert v. & n.

—v. To correct the well-meaning but misguided efforts of less experienced editors by restoring an article to its most accurate version (i.e. the condition it was in following your last edit).

—n. The source of Wikipedia's most productive editor interactions, the products being edit wars, blocks, and protracted reports on the Administrators' noticeboard.

Sketch of a Siouan RfA ceremony by George Catlin

RfA n.

An institutionalised process of ritual humiliation that every candidate applying for access to the administrator tools is required to endure. In many ways identical to an RfC, with the exception that the RfA is often more harrowing for the examinee, who, having done nothing uncivil to warrant the examination, is expected to continue acting in a civil manner ... unlike the subject of an RfC. Wikipedians submit to the process because it is the final trial before becoming an administrator. For RfA-like rituals in non-Wiki cultures, see: Flyting, The dozens, Sun Dance, "yo mama so fat...", and admissions.

The process by which Wikipedia separates the merely good editors from the good editors who also have an uncontrollable lust for power.

A chemical reaction producing in abundance heat, light, hot gas, ash, and other waste matter, the latter of which is often enhanced with administrative privileges. Occasionally the process fizzles, producing only a bad smell.

(For a detailed analysis of what an "oppose vote", a "neutral vote", or a "support vote" means at RfA, please see the RfA decoder)

RfC n.

(editor conduct) A place to bring anyone you have a longstanding grudge against. There, they'll be subject to countless attacks by uninvolved editors (also known as "outside views") and generally be tortured until they agree to submit to your every whim. This is, of course, unless they are a popular editor, in which case the RfC will be dismissed as bad faith and you blocked indefinitely for some purportedly unrelated reason.

(content dispute) A place where editors who know absolutely nothing about the subject chime in in an attempt to destroy an article further.

A diagram showing features of a typical Wikipedian exchange likely to lead to an RFAR

RFAR n.

A request for arbitration. It is recommended that you get into an edit war before you file one of these.

RFCU n.

Especially sneaky tool used when involved in an edit war with two or more editors. A forum to present your circumstantial speculation of a suspected sockpuppeteer's efforts and then have them verified by the equally dubious IP speculation of the Checkuser. A favorite haunt of amateur sleuths, conspiracy theorists, and opponents of intelligent design.

Right to vanish n.

The calm before the vendetta. Invoked as a prelude to sockpuppetry, disruption, and the really good noticeboard drama. "Vanished" editors can thus become the most prominent and noisy of all.

rollback n.

A tool that reverts edits quickly. Its almost mythical status is based on the fact that only administrators can grant rollback. As a result, it is seen as a trophy, an award, a line on the resumé that virtually guarantees a successful RfA.

The most satisfying of clicks. Often executed with mouse-destroying force.

S

"Save page" button n.

Sets in motion a bizarre sequence of events which, by strange quirks of fate, ultimately lead to either a block (see also edit), or purgatory RfA.

See also v. t.

!Spam – a random list of Wikipedia pages whose topics would be mentioned in the article if only they were in any way relevant to the subject.

"Show changes" button n.

Reveals the extent of the productive work put in by others on the same article while you have spent 25 minutes deliberating one stupid minor edit.

signature n.

The primary means of identifying the perpetrator editor. Ideally, a "sig" should contain links to at least five other pages, bear no relation to the Username originally registered, and occupy no less than 40% of the edit window as viewed on a widescreen VDU. Bonus points if one of the links is to a guestbook, and the sig changes more than twice a week. See also highly active user.

Silence implies consent

A phrase used by the party on the losing side of a debate to instigate a Wiki-Staring contest. In real life, when one comes to the realisation that one's opponent is a driveling idiot, one has the option of simply walking away from the argument. Not so on Wikipedia. No matter how carefully considered one's argument and how water-proof one's logic, should the opponent's, "Yeah, but you're a poopyhead" go unchallenged, all work has been in vain, all previous points are invalid, and one is, under legally binding Wiki-law, a poopyhead, until this assertion has been challenged. "I know you are, but what am I?" is an effective rebuttal.

single-purpose account n.

New user who expresses an opinion that you dislike. Demonstrate your intellectual superiority to them by calling them a word that ends in "puppet".

snow

A rationale used to speedily end a debate in your favour before the opposition shows up.

Suspected sockpuppets awaiting blocking

sockpuppet n.

Anyone who agrees with someone who disagrees with you.

spam n.

Any article about a company or product you've never heard of. These articles can be dealt with in one of three ways:

• If the article is unreferenced, it can be safely deleted as nobody will bother to check how important it is.
• If the article is referenced, it can be safely deleted and the author blocked for adding external links.
• If the article is referenced and well-written but you've either never heard of, or don't like, the author, it can be deleted and the author tagged as a suspected sockpuppet of MyWikiBiz.

Any reliable source used in more than one article.

speedy deletion (or WP:CSD) n.

Where you send articles that are created by red usernames. Double bonus points for also changing their red talkpage to blue with your deletion warning template.

Using automated tools to tag articles for deletion as soon as they are created, thus boosting your edit count and showing your worthiness to be an administrator. There are many categories, most of which mean that the article just doesn't look right somehow.

start-class article n.

A stub with at least one reference and an image. These need not have any relation to the text.

strikethrough n.

A form of meta humor meta humor metahumor.

stub n.

A small collection of words in no particular order. Punctuation optional, no references or images. Often accompanied by an AfD notice.

A means of turning a red link temporarily blue.

suggestion n.

200kb of semi-coherent gibberish demanding a solution to a problem that only the author thinks exists.

sum of all human knowledge n.

A minuscule fraction of a complete description of the universe. Its collection and publication is the stated aim of Wikipedian idealists. Regrettably, the vast majority of human knowledge is of little interest to the vast majority.

42 − ε (not quite the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything).

An anonymously-written condensed version of the Encyclopædia Britannica, which leaves out the bits of no interest to English-speaking teenage boys.

synthesis n. & v.

An application of logic utterly prohibited in article-writing. Should one source state that A equals B, and another state that B equals C, making the transitive connection that A must therefore equal C singles out an editor as a loose cannon with little respect for proper scholarly research. Their GAN/FAC/RfA may be opposed in good conscience. Such behaviour is, of course, strongly encouraged everywhere else.

T

tag n. & v.

Permissible vandalism.

A way to increase your mainspace edit count for your pending RfA without actually knowing a lick about how to add content to the mainspace.

These two contributors do not seem worried by the policy of undue weight

tag team n. & v.

Two or more editors who demand adherence to those annoying policies on reliable sources and undue weight.

Two or more editors who disagree with you.

Either of the above is automatic grounds for an RFCU.

talk page n.

A discussion page which accompanies every article on Wikipedia. While intended to be a forum for discussing improvements to the article, it really should only be used after extensive edit warring, indef bans, full article protection, six weeks of wheel warring, ArbCom, and if possible, Wikimedia's lawyers, have all failed to resolve the conflict.

talk page stalker n.

See highly active user.

{{talkback}} n.

A template you should add to another user's talkpage after you've left an extraordinarily witty retort on your own talkpage that must be read immediately.

tenditious adj.

Least-used word in Wikipedia mainspace (two counts only, but plenty in userspace), closely followed by "sorry". Can be used with impunity to make the user appear intelligent, to impress during an RfA, or to win any argument since most editors have never heard of the word, and never question its meaning for fear of appearing thick.

One of the words used by editors who wish to appear profound but merely end up being obscure. Fortunately, because most people miscategorize obscurity as profundity, and furthermore, don't wish to reveal their true level of intelligence (see previous meaning), the tactic of using the word goes unchallenged.

Alternative word for Americans those who can't spell "tendentious".

Today's featured article n.

The name given to the article that is chosen to be the day's magnet for vandalism. Only those unskilled in vandalism fall for this lure because their efforts are so obvious, but there seems to be an inexhaustible supply of such inept vandals.

transwiki v.

A process for moving content from Wikipedia into one of its sister projects, then deleting it from both.

trivia n.

Any information about anything in popular culture.

See also ~cruft; indiscriminate information; unencyclopedic.

trolling v.

Disagreeing with someone who has a higher edit count than you, or who has been on Wikipedia longer than you.

trollish adj.

Insufficiently meek.

trout v.

The action of whacking someone with a certain type of colourful fish, since the word "trout" is so clearly a verb and not a noun. Generally, this is used to admonish an editor who has done something you disagree with.

trust n.

A necessary requirement that editors should have in a candidate who has been nominated for adminship. Because it is necessary, it is neither defined nor expanded upon, because we all have trust in each other to know instinctively what it means in the context of Wikipedia, and we all know that we speak with one voice here. Not to be mistaken with "trussed"—which is what Wikipedia would be, having had "red tape" used against it if, as some say, we tried to make clear the nature of trust to assist and inform us in appointing administrators.

truth n.

Obvious bollox, and as a POV pusher you are rightly subject to ridicule if you believe in truth.

truthiness n.

The closest a highly active user who speaks American English can get to the word "truthfulness".

tweak n.

Used as an edit summary when:

• you couldn't be bothered to concoct one.
• a proper, reasoned justification for your edit would fill up the article's talk page.
• your edit is not susceptible to explanation.
• you really haven't a clue what you've just done.
• you don't wish to take the opportunity to simultaneously insult the previous editor, continue the talk page dispute, and place the verisimilitude of your edit beyond any reasonable doubt, in 200 characters or less. See also edit summary.

Twinkle n.

Tool to abuse utilize rollback without having to bribe ask an admin. Excellent for reverting minor corrections of comma splices with an edit summary of vandalism and leaving a polite threat to block the user if they ever even think of doing it again, all with one click of the mouse.

A tool which makes it possible to delete content from the encyclopedia without lowering oneself by touching the keyboard like vulgar Inclusionist riff-raff.

U

{{unblock}}

A means by which a recently-blocked editor can request to have their block endorsed by an uninvolved administrator. The request is then followed with either of two responses:

• Decline; hasn't addressed reason for block. (Translation: There's no way I'm reading that 30kB of prose and diffs you've produced. You look guilty.)
• Decline; endorse reason for block. (Translation: I haven't actually read the reason for your block but I'm friends with the blocking admin.)

uncivil adj.

Did you get here by following the link from incivility? If I'd told you to put your hand in the fire, would you have done that as well? What's happened to the education system so much of our taxes are spent on, when people like you still can't think for themselves?

Not incivil.

unencyclopedic adj.

I don't like it.

unfair use adj. or n.

Image uploaded by someone you don't like.

Image you think is porn.

Image with a description in a non-machine-readable format, such as English, which thus must be tagged for deletion by various bots.

uninvolved admin n.

See involved admin.

uninvolved editor n.

My friend.

My sockpuppet.

unreliable source n.

Any source that disagrees with you, such as the Oxford English Dictionary or the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Any source that would require more than 30 seconds of effort to verify. Example: "The Moving Metropolis isn't in my school library. Therefore, it is not a reliable source for articles about public transportation." (Note: this conversation really happened) (Also known as Print source)

You.

{{unsourced}} adj.

A tag to put at the top of articles on subjects of which you disapprove. The existence of sourcing at the article is irrelevant, if not a provocation.

userbox n.

Wikipedia's equivalent of the E-meter, which enables the usefulness of an editor to be measured scientifically. The proportion of any given editor's userpage taken up by userboxes is in a perfect inverse relationship to the probability of any given edit made by this editor being useful. Some commonly found userboxes and their meanings are:

• This user is female. This user is male.
• This user is male. This user is 12.
• This user is an administrator. Go vandalise someone else's userpage.
• This user is not a Wikipedia administrator.

• This user desperately wants to be a Wikipedia administrator but realises that self-nominations always fail and hopes you'll take the hint.
• This user failed an RfA under very acrimonious circumstances.

• This user is not a Wikipedia administrator, but would like to be one some day. This user will never be a Wikipedia administrator.
• This user is not a Wikipedia administrator and does not want to be one. This user wanted very badly to be an administrator, but it didn't work out.
• This user is an expert Wikipedia editor. This user makes messes for expert Wikipedia editors to clean up.
• This user performs non-admin closures at articles for deletion. This user makes messes for expert Wikipedia editors to clean up.
• This user is a member of the Counter Vandalism Unit. This user makes messes for expert Wikipedia editors to clean up.
• This user has Rollback rights on the English Wikipedia. This user makes messes for expert Wikipedia editors to clean up.
• This user is a member of the League of Copy Editors. This user makes messes for expert Wikipedia editors to clean up.
• This user identifies as a fascist. This user is a journalist who has realised that their "my month on Wikipedia" article is going nowhere and desperately hopes someone will start a flamewar.

user talk page n.

User stalk page.

V

V1.0 n.

An attempt to prove that it is possible to nail jelly to a wall.

vandal n.

An editor with fewer than 100 edits and an opinion. Excellent candidate for a cool down block. Should help them realize that everything they've done was silly and wrong, and will most likely make them into a valuable and constructive editor in no time.

vanity n.

The principal motive for all contributions to the project.

vandalism n.

Knowingly and willingly adding nonsense to, or removing content or images from, Wikipedia by an IP editor. To be distinguished from knowingly and willingly adding nonsense to, or removing content or images from, Wikipedia by a registered editor.

May be met with severe penalties unless done by a bot, in which case it usually leads to Adminship.

A term used by deletionists when any non-U.S. pop culture material, or U.S pop culture older than 1995, is added to an article.

Five of these are running 24/7 at the Proposals Village Pump. Like the servers, they're powered by cats.

Village pump n.

The central venue for the ceremonial drowning of editors who have had two bad ideas in a row, the second being to make the first public. It comprises four sections:

• Policy – The place where the news first arrives after n00bs commit suicide by pasting {{policy}} on pages without approval from the cabal.
• Technical – The shrine of the Universal Truth of Troubleshooting: "Bypass your cache". It's written at the very top, but most people conveniently ignore it for the thrill of a brief word with the developers.
• Proposals – Here editors strive to formulate the best version of a question regulars are sick of replying to, aspiring to an eventual induction to the Hall of Fame.
• Miscellaneous – Nobody really knows what this is for.

There used to be one more section, Assistance, but it didn't survive competition with the Help Desk consortium.

voting n.

A process that interferes with achieving consensus, as it does not allow the proper weighting to be given to the votes cast by those editors with whom you are on good terms. It is therefore deprecated and considered evil.

n.b. Should an editor cast a !vote in opposition to your campaign to delete a topic, feel free to remove that !vote and block the editor if s/he restores it. Remember, Wikipedia is not a democracy. It is a kakistocracy. And you're in charge!

W

watchlist n.

Wikipedia's equivalent of Big Brother, although even the Party couldn't monitor information that did not yet exist.

A large shoulder suitable for placement of abundant chips. A subversive anti-productivity tool designed to bring your day-job, or your career, down in flaming ruin.

weasel words n.

Some argue that under certain circumstances it may be acceptable to add any statement to an article that your dorm mate's brother's cousin told him last Thursday, as long as you feel it could be cited, someday.

{{welcome}} v.

A template that earns you a barnstar when it's added numerous times with an automated tool.

WHAAOE acronym initialism

"We Have An Article On Everything" (actually, we have lots of articles on anything and everything, even one about nothing).

"What Wikipedia is not" policy

For established editors, this is a useful list of the sort of content Wikipedia discourages in an attempt to help Wikipedia attain its goal of becoming an anonymously written, third-rate imitation of Encyclopædia Britannica, without the superfluous articles on the less-notable U.S. Presidents, and people like Lee Harvey Oswald, whose claim to fame is based on one event.

For IP editors, this is a Kafkaesque list devised by neo-Nazi book-burners with the specific aim of preventing them from writing about the garage band in which they played tambourine for a summer during high school.

For everyone, this is an attempt to make use of the principle that if one says A is not B often enough and prominently enough, then A is not B, even when A really is B. The principle can be named "The power of hope over reality principle." As expected, it fails.

wheel war n.

An escalating disagreement between administrators. The feelings of anyone caught in the crossfire, such as contributors, are disregarded and quickly forgotten by the administrators. The possibility is documented here for completeness – it is largely academic since administrators are all in the Cabal and therefore always agree with each other.

wiki n.

A model for the creation of enormous, diverse and constantly-updated online libraries of human behaviour, for the benefit of sociologists and social historians. Accessing resources based on this model with certain web-browser technology causes artefacts to appear. For example, in one a partially accurate and occasionally usable online encyclopedia may sometimes be observed (see Wikipedia); in another, a collection of useful and interesting images (see Commons). According to reliable sources, the wiki model was at different times and in various forms proposed by Urukagina, Democritus, Taliesin, Vlad the Impaler, John Locke, The Marquis de Sade, Little Tich, George Orwell, Harpo Marx (in a series of whistles and honks interpreted by Chico), Martin Bormann, Alan Turing, The Doctor, Douglas Adams and Muhammad Bazlul Haq.

wikibreak n.

A voluntary period of abstinence from Wikipedia, taken for any of a number of reasons. These could include:

• a cock-up so monumental that, were the editor responsible not friends with at least three admins, they would already be indefblocked.
• a desire for 'me time', devoted to quiet reflection, therapy, or heavy substance abuse, in the aftermath of one of Wikipedia's community review processes. See also AfD, FAC, GAN, RfA, Wikistress.
• a lack of Internet access, perhaps whilst on holiday. See also the Kid in Africa.

{{Wikibreak}} n.

"Hold on, I need to use the bathroom, I'll be back in a minute."

Wikicops about to spring into action and pummel a new editor with policies, guidelines, PRODs, AfDs, and relentless "AGF" warnings

Wikicops n.

A group of editors whose sole purpose at "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is to prevent anyone from editing it.

wiki-drama (alt. Teh DRAMAZ, Teh DRAHMA). n.

A discussion that you're losing by being out-consensussed.

The ATP of Wiki-life.

wikilawyer n.

A Procrustean editor, who believes that if Wikipedia policies do not fit his contributions then they must be hacked or stretched until they do. Wikipedia guidelines and essays are policy if they support his contributions, but policies are guidelines and essays (that don't mean what they say) if they support the other side. Strangely, wikilawyers constitutionally ignore IAR, because it is hard to mutilate. It is hugely counterproductive to call a wikilawyer a wikilawyer: any semi-comptetent wikilawyer will seize on such accusations as an opportunity to broaden the discussion interminably.

WikiLove n.

A shared spirit of collegiality and mutual understanding among wiki users, more often than not freely spread by editors on illillegal shubstanances ... hee hee! Damn, thish ish gooood shit!

wikimarkup n.

A mechanism (extended HTML) the simplest text may be rendered almost impossible to edit.

Wikipedia n.

A sandcastle on the shore of the sea of time. Within play dramas on miniature stages, as the actors argue over the exact position of each grain of sand, unaware of the approaching tide.

A unique experiment in collaborative editing, invented in 2001 by Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales. The name is derived from the Hawaiian wiki, "edited at high speed", and the Greek παῖdh, "by children".

Evidence that an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of keyboards may not produce the complete works of Shakespeare, but will certainly produce an ever-growing pile of monkey shit.

The first recorded attempt to compile an encyclopedia by giving the janitors managerial control over the writers.

A group of 12-year-olds debating the alleged "notability" of some ancient dude called Frank Sinatra.

The Wikipedia Community n.

A Lord of the Flies for the Information Age.

"Wikipedia is not a battleground"

A policy statement with which to taunt your opponent during Wiki-battle. Employment of this strategem will ideally enrage the enemy so that s/he will commit tactical blunders, enabling you and your allies to encircle the enemy camp and inflict further damage. In the resultant melee, you can then administer a final coup de grâce, emerging victorious.

"Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy"

A mantra. Helps to alleviate the oppressive feeling of futility that bureaucracy inevitably engenders.

Of course WP:WIKIPEDIA is WP:NOT a WP:BUREAUCRACY: Anyone can WP:EDIT and WP:IAR as long as their edit isn't WP:MADEUP, and the change is approved by a WP:CONSENSUS of WP:ADMINs through WP:RFC and WP:AFD, and conforms to WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:C, WP:N, WP:RS, WP:5P, WP:NFCC and WP:OMGWTFBBQ.

"Wikipedia is not a democracy" policy statement

A democracy is a system in which the majority is persuaded through a complex system of lies, half-truths, bait-and-switching, wedge-issues, and diversion into putting into power incompetent, arrogant and power-hungry leaders who harm the society they are supposed to benefit. Wikipedia, on the other hand, is a system in which consensus is persuaded through a complex system of lies, half-truths, bait-and-switching, wedge-issues, and diversion into putting into power incompetent, arrogant and power-hungry leaders who harm the society they are supposed to benefit.

"Wikipedia is not censored" policy statement

Stock response to anyone who thinks that two dozen penis images might be a bit excessive, especially for an article on rice flour.

Wikipedia Review n.

Retirement home for former Wikipedia editors who have become so dull, irritating and whiny that nobody on Wikipedia listens to them any more.

A place to complain when your fully sourced article about your band/website/school gets deleted by the atheist anonymous idiot pedophile conspiracy.

Wikipedia without the articles.

Wikipedians

Wikipedian n.

Free labour.

A bored refugee from Yahoo!'s now-defunct flame-war boards.

Wikipert n.

A person with pretensions of expertise based soley on reading a Wikipedia article

WikiProject n.

A group of like-minded editors who have come together in a spirit of collaboration to ensure that those articles within their interest are well-maintained, accurate, and cannot be successfully edited by anyone else.

A group of editors united by their ignorance of and hostility towards a particular subject area.

wiki-stalking v.

Reverting all of someone's vandalism

Checking whether the error you found in one article has been repeated elsewhere.

Noticing that someone is ruining more than one article simultaneously.

Wikistress n.

Insanity

A feeling of angst, grumpiness and the need to listen to Emo after someone deleted your page.

A condition admins have the tools to inflict upon anyone they choose, including themselves.

Slang term for WikiLove.

X

XfD

The great expanse of wasteland including places of suffering and darkness such as AfD, MfD, etc. Here, the ghosts of departed editors can be seen moaning and drifting about the dry, barren earth as their former articles / categories / templates / redirects / WikiSpeak essays are torn to pieces by the ravenous wolves (also known as deletionists).

Also known as CRAMITfD (for Categories, Redirects, Articles, Miscellany, Images, Templates for Destruction).

WP:X

The most non-sensical all-cap blue redirect in all of Wikipedia.

WP:XXX

Three times the fun of WP:X and eight times the popularity.

Y

An inclusionist, frustrated because he can't think of a subject for an article that starts with a Y

you n.

A person inferior to me. Not even the second person. Unless you are one of them.

Someone who can be blocked for obvious disruption (unless one of my sock- or meat-puppets, or some other editor in my cabal).

Z

Zoo n.

An exhibition that allows public entry. The live exhibits, their varied surroundings, and the sideshows create a constant source of fascination and entertainment. The casual visitor gains a warm feeling of superiority over the squabbling animals, who can be poked, teased, and jeered at when their harassed keepers' backs are turned. The dedicated student of behaviour finds a huge range of individual and social habits with which to fill their dissertations. Remind you of anywhere?