explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2287: Pathogen Resistance

2020-04-01T04:55:13Z

172.68.47.42: /* Explanation */ condom materials

{{comic
| number = 2287
| date = March 30, 2020
| title = Pathogen Resistance
| image = pathogen_resistance.png
| titletext = We're not trapped in here with the coronavirus. The coronavirus is trapped in here with us.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a MACROPHAGE HUGGING A BACTERIOPHAGE. Should briefly summarize the immune system (esp. macrophages and antibodies) and why it is so terrifying to pathogens. Also maybe use [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170307142718.htm this link]. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is the 13th comic in a row in a [[:Category:COVID-19|series of comics]] about the {{w|2019–20 coronavirus outbreak|2020 pandemic}} of the {{w|coronavirus}} - {{w|SARS-CoV-2}}.

Rather than expressing humanity's fears and pessimism about the pandemic, this strip anthropomorphizes some of the pathogens which afflict humanity and presents ''their'' fears and pessimism about possibly going extinct. This serves as a roundabout way of expressing hope and wonder at the ingenuity and tenacity of humans in the face of diseases past (with water sanitation, mosquito netting, and condoms) and present (with the power of social distancing and {{w|Gloria Gaynor}}'s hit song ''{{w|I Will Survive}}''). Gaynor recorded [https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/12/entertainment/coronavirus-gloria-gaynor-i-will-survive-trnd/index.html a video of herself washing her hands] for 20 seconds (the recommended length of time to wash hands for optimal cleanliness) to the background of her hit song.

The three pathogens presented are a {{w|bacteriophage}}, a small colony of a {{w|coccus}}-shaped bacterium (such as ''{{w|Streptococcus}}''), and a {{w|protozoon}} (a caricature of a {{w|ciliate}}). Bacteriophages do not infect human cells (as the name suggests, they only infect bacteria), and have been studied for use as "{{w|phage therapy}}" ''for'' humans, especially in dealing with antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections (which is usually what people mean when they talk about "resistance" in the context of pathogens), but they are iconic, instantly-recognizable viruses, and some have been found to [https://phys.org/news/2015-11-bacteria-bacteriophages-collude-formation-clinically.html collude with bacteria] in forming certain antibiotic-resistant {{w|biofilm}}s. {{w|Balantidiasis|Only one kind of ciliate}} is known to cause human disease. However, ciliates are iconic for protozoa just as bacteriophages are for viruses (see, for example, Gary Larson's now-venerable [https://www.thefarside.com ''The Far Side''] cartoons). The ciliate may be a 'stand-in' for protozoa that cause widespread and dangerous human diseases, such as {{w|malaria}}.

"The scariest thing in the universe" to these microbes is the human immune system, represented in the second panel and later by antibodies (Y-shaped drawings) and anthropomorphized white blood cells. Specifically, the white blood cells shown are {{w|T cell}}s, the immune system's 'first responders'. As briefly described [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170307142718.htm here], if a T cell encounters an antigen that it is programmed to recognize (such as, for instance, a molecule of the viral protein coat), it 'hugs' the cell presenting the antigen as a precursor to summoning the immune system's heavy artillery. Hence the faux-Care Bears battle cry of the T cells, "Who wants a HUUUG?"

The comic humorously considers pasta as an essential part of humans' fight against coronavirus. Pasta is an example of a dried food that can last a long time, if the orders to stay indoors continue. However, not every culture consumes or likes pasta.

The colony of cocci protests that it shouldn't be possible for humans to evolve "pathogen resistance" in the short period of months since the breakout of COVID-19, when humans require over a decade to reach sexual maturity, and in modern times often wait at least two decades before having children. Bacteria and viruses, on the other hand, reproduce in a matter of minutes, so that there may be hundreds of generations per day (comparable to the number of generations that have passed for humanity since the beginnings of agriculture), each of which presents opportunities to evolve new antigens that are not recognized by any antibodies present in the body or to evolve resistance to whatever antibiotic drugs a human might be using. However, as the bacteriophage explains, humans generally do not become resistant against pathogens by genetic drift (although there are researchers who are seeking to identify genes that encode resistances to various diseases and then propagate them to other humans through gene editing, as in the {{w|He Jiankui affair}}). Instead, humans "evolve" pathogen resistance through behavioral changes. The behaviors presented in this comic strip include:

* Municipal water supplies, which are filtered and treated to prevent the spread of waterborne diseases, like cholera and dysentery.
* Mosquito netting over beds, and also anti-insect poisoning, to prevent the spread of vector-borne diseases, like malaria.
* Condoms (described as plastic in the comic, but more commonly latex rubber in real life), to prevent the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases, such as AIDS and syphilis.
* Social or physical distancing, hand-washing, storable food, and electronic communications, to prevent the spread of diseases through casual contact, like COVID-19.

These behaviors do not come from our genomes, passed along through reproduction, but from our brains, passed along by communication. Some of the language of epidemiology is also used in discussion of communication, most notably "going viral" -- in this case, information is going viral to prevent viruses from going viral.

The title text reverts to the point of view of humans and references a famous line from the graphic novel ''{{w|Watchmen}}'', where {{w|Rorschach (character)|Rorschach}}, whilst in prison and surrounded by enemies who want to kill him, proclaims: "I'm not locked up in here with YOU. You're locked up in here with ME." This presents an alternate perspective on quarantine and isolation that some may find more bearable: rather than passively hiding indoors in fear of the virus, we are taking action to fragment the virus population so that our immune systems (and medical intervention, in more serious cases) can {{w|defeat in detail|defeat it in detail}}.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[A small colony of coccus bacteria, a bacteriophage, and a protozoon are floating together.]
:Bacteriophage: I'm worried about humans developing resistance to us.
:Bacteriophage: Using pasta.

:[Cutaway to macrophages and antibodies chasing three protozoa. One protozoon is already covered in antibodies.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): The human immune system is a nightmare.
:Bacteriophage (narrating): It's the worst.
:Bacteriophage (narrating): It's the scariest thing in the universe.
:Macrophage: ''Who wants a HUUGGG''
:Antibody-covered protozoon: ''Nooo!''

:[Close-up on bacteriophage]
:Bacteriophage: We can only survive by staying ahead of it. Keep jumping from person to person, keep mutating and evolving.
:Bacteriophage: But now humans are adapting too fast.

:[Water pipes. A mosquito net with a bed under it. An unopened condom package.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): We spread through their water. They built pipes.
:Bacteriophage (narrating): We used mosquitoes. They put out nets and poison everywhere.
:Bacteriophage (narrating): We spread through sex, and suddenly they all had these plastic things.

:[Depictions of coronavirus with spikes. Hairbun and Cueball shaking hands, with droplets spraying from both their mouths.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): This time, we really thought we had them.
:Bacteriophage (narrating): One of us got good at transmission through everyday contact.

:[A row of 4 sets of human lungs, the first with several black dots, the second and third with increasing black parts, the fourth completely filled with black. A graph showing exponential growth.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): It was great. We were tearing through lungs, spreading like wildfire.
:Voice offscreen: Hooray!
:Voice 2 offscreen: I ''hate'' lungs.

:[Close-up of bacteriophage "head".]
:Bacteriophage: Then, all of a sudden, humans everywhere just...''stopped''. They stopped working, stopped seeing friends.

:[Megan is sitting on a couch, watching a flat screen. Cueball is at a sink with a mirror, washing his hands. They are facing away from each other.]
:Voice offscreen: What are they ''doing''?
:Voice 2 offscreen: Nothing!
:Voice 2 offscreen: They're just sitting there in their houses washing their hands.

:[A single human in a empty room, surrounded by fallen droplets. Among the droplets is a coronavirus.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): Suddenly humans became dead ends. We tried to jump from one to the next, but there's no one to jump to.
:Bacteriophage (narrating): We can't escape.
:Coronavirus: Help!

:[Coronaviruses, encroached on by macrophages and streams of antibodies.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): We're trapped in there with those ghastly immune systems.
:Antibodies: ''IT'S HUUG TIIIIIME''
:Macrophage: Come here for a HUUUG
:Macrophage: HUUUUGS

:[Coronaviruses covered in antibodies and surrounded by macrophages. Some of the macrophages are devouring viruses. Others contain broken-down remnants.]
:Bacteriophage (narrating): Even if we win a fight, there's nowhere to go.
:Macrophage: HUUUUUUUGGSS
:Macrophage: HUUUUGS
:Bacteriophage (narrating): By staying inside, humans have become resistant.

:[Back to the discussion between the coccus, the bacteriophage and the protozoon.]
:Coccus bacteria: How could they evolve that fast? Humans take decades to reproduce!
:Bacteriophage: It's not evolution. It's something with their brains.
:Protozoon: I ''wondered'' what those were for!

:[Bacteriophage pointing to: Cueball and Megan looking at their phones; Megan and Cueball walking to the right; Megan and Cueball at separate sinks washing their hands.]
:Bacteriophage: Humans started looking at their phones, talking, writing words, and making signs. A human named "Gloria Gaynor" filmed herself singing at her bathroom sink.
:Bacteriophage: And then they bought lots of pasta.
:Bacteriophage: Then, around the world, they all went home and started washing their hands.

:[Bacteriophage and protozoon.]
:Bacteriophage: They saw what we were doing and changed their behavior to stop us.
:Protozoon: Brains are the ''worst''.

:[Coccus, bacteriophage and protozoon.]
:Coccus bacteria: It's not over, right? They can't sustain this. They must be bored and tired.
:Coccus bacteria: Will they give up?
:Bacteriophage: I don't know. They seem determined to protect each other.

:[Coccus, bacteriophage and protozoon.]
:Bacteriophage: And
:Bacteriophage: They have a ''lot'' of pasta.

==Trivia==
* The title text originally contained a typo in the form of a double negative "We're not not trapped..." This has since been corrected.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:COVID-19]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]

Talk:2152: Westerns

2019-08-03T18:59:54Z

172.68.47.42:

How many times longer than the {{w|Regency era}} (a decade) have {{w|Regency romance}} novels existed? A fair bit more than three, I'd guess! (Perhaps 8.4, if we credit 1935 as the start and the Regency period as ten years) [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 05:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:A similar question has been answered about WW2 by Randall: https://what-if.xkcd.com/100/ [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::Trivia about What-if #100: in another example of xkcd-inspired achievements, there now exists a short movie about the Anglo-Zanzibar war (http://www.imdb.com/keyword/anglo-zanzibar-war/). Plot keywords: stupid world record, cell camera, anglo zanzibar war.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.241|162.158.154.241]] 10:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M*A*S*H_(TV_series) M*A*S*H TV show] lasted more than 3 times the length of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War Korean War].
[[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

I would have thought Randall would understand the difference between "longer than" and "as long as". [[User:Mattcoz|Mattcoz]] ([[User talk:Mattcoz|talk]]) 14:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

:Hmmm... "A is as long as B" means pretty much the same as "A is as short as B". But "A is 3 times as long as B" is very different from "A is 3 times as short as B". English is weird. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.46|172.68.54.46]] 15:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::That leads onto a personal bugbear. "Lasts three times longer (...than competing product)" logically means 4x the duration ("lasts one time longer..." would be original plus the new claim, or 2x, etc), not triple. And, in the same (mis)spirit of above there's the closely associated "five times less (...thing that each product tries to banish/destroy/mitigate)". And there are even worse phrases (either badly composed or deliberately weaselish misinforming advertising/etc) that I won't even try to perpetuate by directly quoting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.206|162.158.34.206]] 00:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that using the same logic as this page, Trojan War, a 10 years long conflict which started to be depicted in Greek no later in 8th century BC when Illiad was written and continuing to be depicted in poems, literature and movies up to today, would easily win this. There could also be several contestants from Rome - while both Roman Republic and Roman Empire lasted hundreds of years, the time period depicting fall of the Republic and rise of the Empire, starting with First Triumvirate 60BC and ending with Nero's death AD 68, is 128 years heavily depicted in literature and movies since it happened to, again, now. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:32, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

This makes me think of how the British TV show [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dad%27s_Army Dad's Army] lasted for longer than the Second World War. --[[User:OliReading|OliReading]] ([[User talk:OliReading|talk]]) 23:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

: Dad's Army ''aired'' from 31 July 1968 – 13 November 1977 (A period of 9 years, 3 months, 14 days.) However, it had a ''run-time'' of only 2445 minutes (40 hrs, 45 minutes) [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dad%27s_Army_episodes List of Dad's Army episodes.]] That's a distinction that most of these comparisons are overlooking. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The famous pony express existed only for 18 months. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.9|162.158.74.9]] 02:19, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Bill Cody alias Buffalo Bill pulp and shows started around 1870
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.159|162.158.93.159]] 06:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

I hate ambiguity when dealing with "mathish" language. This is not as irritating as when people say things like "three times as cold" or "twice as small", but it still bugs me. Does "three times longer" mean the same as "three times as long"? Given an initial event time of "t" and the longer time of "x", if "x" was "two years longer" than "t", that would mean "x-t= 2 years". It feels like "three times as long" means "x=3t" while "three times longer" means "x-t=3t" thus "x=4t". [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 12:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I agree, that three times longer than 40 years should be 160 years, not ~120 as in this case --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:: Actually, this description seems to say the left bracket is THIRTY years - 1865 to 1895 - while the right bracket seems to indicate roughly 1900 until now, which is indeed nearly 120 years and indeed about 4x as long. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

The commentary about how the Wild West segued from being "contemporary" to "historical" entertainment without a lapse in popularity reminds me of how Sherlock Holmes did the same. When the first Holmes story was published in 1887 it was contemporary, the popularity of the stories have never flagged, but now the antiquarian aspect is a key part of its appeal. BTW, I think the commentary is stretching it too far to assert that the "Wild West" extended into the 1920s. This is presumably because of the "Posey War" in 1923, but this is rather similar to the 1921 Tulsa Race Riot - it was just white vigilantes running non-whites off their land on a pretext. Even the 1918 Bear Valley War is too late, just a short Mexican border skirmish involving 60 people total. The 1915 Bluff War is about as late as can be credibly claimed for an event that is anything like the Wild West period, and it was really just an extended manhunt. Usually the last real Indian conflict was Battle of Kelley Creek in 1911.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.47.42|172.68.47.42]] 16:49, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2152: Westerns

2019-08-03T16:54:36Z

172.68.47.42:

How many times longer than the {{w|Regency era}} (a decade) have {{w|Regency romance}} novels existed? A fair bit more than three, I'd guess! (Perhaps 8.4, if we credit 1935 as the start and the Regency period as ten years) [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 05:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:A similar question has been answered about WW2 by Randall: https://what-if.xkcd.com/100/ [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::Trivia about What-if #100: in another example of xkcd-inspired achievements, there now exists a short movie about the Anglo-Zanzibar war (http://www.imdb.com/keyword/anglo-zanzibar-war/). Plot keywords: stupid world record, cell camera, anglo zanzibar war.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.241|162.158.154.241]] 10:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M*A*S*H_(TV_series) M*A*S*H TV show] lasted more than 3 times the length of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War Korean War].
[[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

I would have thought Randall would understand the difference between "longer than" and "as long as". [[User:Mattcoz|Mattcoz]] ([[User talk:Mattcoz|talk]]) 14:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

:Hmmm... "A is as long as B" means pretty much the same as "A is as short as B". But "A is 3 times as long as B" is very different from "A is 3 times as short as B". English is weird. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.46|172.68.54.46]] 15:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::That leads onto a personal bugbear. "Lasts three times longer (...than competing product)" logically means 4x the duration ("lasts one time longer..." would be original plus the new claim, or 2x, etc), not triple. And, in the same (mis)spirit of above there's the closely associated "five times less (...thing that each product tries to banish/destroy/mitigate)". And there are even worse phrases (either badly composed or deliberately weaselish misinforming advertising/etc) that I won't even try to perpetuate by directly quoting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.206|162.158.34.206]] 00:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that using the same logic as this page, Trojan War, a 10 years long conflict which started to be depicted in Greek no later in 8th century BC when Illiad was written and continuing to be depicted in poems, literature and movies up to today, would easily win this. There could also be several contestants from Rome - while both Roman Republic and Roman Empire lasted hundreds of years, the time period depicting fall of the Republic and rise of the Empire, starting with First Triumvirate 60BC and ending with Nero's death AD 68, is 128 years heavily depicted in literature and movies since it happened to, again, now. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:32, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

This makes me think of how the British TV show [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dad%27s_Army Dad's Army] lasted for longer than the Second World War. --[[User:OliReading|OliReading]] ([[User talk:OliReading|talk]]) 23:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

: Dad's Army ''aired'' from 31 July 1968 – 13 November 1977 (A period of 9 years, 3 months, 14 days.) However, it had a ''run-time'' of only 2445 minutes (40 hrs, 45 minutes) [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dad%27s_Army_episodes List of Dad's Army episodes.]] That's a distinction that most of these comparisons are overlooking. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The famous pony express existed only for 18 months. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.9|162.158.74.9]] 02:19, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Bill Cody alias Buffalo Bill pulp and shows started around 1870
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.159|162.158.93.159]] 06:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

I hate ambiguity when dealing with "mathish" language. This is not as irritating as when people say things like "three times as cold" or "twice as small", but it still bugs me. Does "three times longer" mean the same as "three times as long"? Given an initial event time of "t" and the longer time of "x", if "x" was "two years longer" than "t", that would mean "x-t= 2 years". It feels like "three times as long" means "x=3t" while "three times longer" means "x-t=3t" thus "x=4t". [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 12:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I agree, that three times longer than 40 years should be 160 years, not ~120 as in this case --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:: Actually, this description seems to say the left bracket is THIRTY years - 1865 to 1895 - while the right bracket seems to indicate roughly 1900 until now, which is indeed nearly 120 years and indeed about 4x as long. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

The commentary about how the Wild West segued from being "contemporary" to "historical" entertainment without a lapse in popularity reminds me of how Sherlock Holmes did the same. When the first Holmes story was published in 1887 it was contemporary, the popularity of the stories have never flagged, but now the antiquarian aspect is a key part of its appeal. BTW, I think the commentary is stretching it too far to assert that the "Wild West" extended into the 1920s. This is presumably because of the "Posey War" in 1923, but this is rather similar to the 1921 Tulsa Race Riot - it was just white vigilantes running non-whites off their land on a pretext. Even the 1918 Bear Valley War is too late, just a short Mexican border skirmish involving 60 people total. The 1915 Bluff War is about as late as can be credibly claimed for an event that is anything like the Wild West period, and that is an isolated one.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.47.42|172.68.47.42]] 16:49, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2152: Westerns

2019-08-03T16:49:55Z

172.68.47.42:

How many times longer than the {{w|Regency era}} (a decade) have {{w|Regency romance}} novels existed? A fair bit more than three, I'd guess! (Perhaps 8.4, if we credit 1935 as the start and the Regency period as ten years) [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 05:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:A similar question has been answered about WW2 by Randall: https://what-if.xkcd.com/100/ [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::Trivia about What-if #100: in another example of xkcd-inspired achievements, there now exists a short movie about the Anglo-Zanzibar war (http://www.imdb.com/keyword/anglo-zanzibar-war/). Plot keywords: stupid world record, cell camera, anglo zanzibar war.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.241|162.158.154.241]] 10:14, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M*A*S*H_(TV_series) M*A*S*H TV show] lasted more than 3 times the length of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War Korean War].
[[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

I would have thought Randall would understand the difference between "longer than" and "as long as". [[User:Mattcoz|Mattcoz]] ([[User talk:Mattcoz|talk]]) 14:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

:Hmmm... "A is as long as B" means pretty much the same as "A is as short as B". But "A is 3 times as long as B" is very different from "A is 3 times as short as B". English is weird. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.46|172.68.54.46]] 15:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::That leads onto a personal bugbear. "Lasts three times longer (...than competing product)" logically means 4x the duration ("lasts one time longer..." would be original plus the new claim, or 2x, etc), not triple. And, in the same (mis)spirit of above there's the closely associated "five times less (...thing that each product tries to banish/destroy/mitigate)". And there are even worse phrases (either badly composed or deliberately weaselish misinforming advertising/etc) that I won't even try to perpetuate by directly quoting. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.206|162.158.34.206]] 00:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that using the same logic as this page, Trojan War, a 10 years long conflict which started to be depicted in Greek no later in 8th century BC when Illiad was written and continuing to be depicted in poems, literature and movies up to today, would easily win this. There could also be several contestants from Rome - while both Roman Republic and Roman Empire lasted hundreds of years, the time period depicting fall of the Republic and rise of the Empire, starting with First Triumvirate 60BC and ending with Nero's death AD 68, is 128 years heavily depicted in literature and movies since it happened to, again, now. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:32, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

This makes me think of how the British TV show [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dad%27s_Army Dad's Army] lasted for longer than the Second World War. --[[User:OliReading|OliReading]] ([[User talk:OliReading|talk]]) 23:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

: Dad's Army ''aired'' from 31 July 1968 – 13 November 1977 (A period of 9 years, 3 months, 14 days.) However, it had a ''run-time'' of only 2445 minutes (40 hrs, 45 minutes) [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dad%27s_Army_episodes List of Dad's Army episodes.]] That's a distinction that most of these comparisons are overlooking. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:58, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

The famous pony express existed only for 18 months. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.9|162.158.74.9]] 02:19, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Bill Cody alias Buffalo Bill pulp and shows started around 1870
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.93.159|162.158.93.159]] 06:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

I hate ambiguity when dealing with "mathish" language. This is not as irritating as when people say things like "three times as cold" or "twice as small", but it still bugs me. Does "three times longer" mean the same as "three times as long"? Given an initial event time of "t" and the longer time of "x", if "x" was "two years longer" than "t", that would mean "x-t= 2 years". It feels like "three times as long" means "x=3t" while "three times longer" means "x-t=3t" thus "x=4t". [[User:J-beda|J-beda]] ([[User talk:J-beda|talk]]) 12:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I agree, that three times longer than 40 years should be 160 years, not ~120 as in this case --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:: Actually, this description seems to say the left bracket is THIRTY years - 1865 to 1895 - while the right bracket seems to indicate roughly 1900 until now, which is indeed nearly 120 years and indeed about 4x as long. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:06, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

The commentary about how the Wild West segued from being "contemporary" to "historical" entertainment without a lapse in popularity reminds me of how Sherlock Holmes did the same. When the first Holmes story was published in 1887 it was contemporary, the popularity of the stories have never flagged, but now the antiquarian aspect is a key part of its appeal. BTW, I think the commentary is stretching it too far to assert that the "Wild West" extended into the 1920s. This is presumably because of the "Posey War" in 1923, but this is rather similar to the 1921 Tulsa Race Riot - it was just white vigilantes running non-whites off their land on a pretext. Even the 1918 Bear Valley War is too late, just a short Mexican border skirmish involving 60 people total. The 1915 Bluff war is about as late as can be credibly claimed to be anything like the Wild West period.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.47.42|172.68.47.42]] 16:49, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

2184: Unpopular Opinions

2019-08-03T00:31:44Z

172.68.47.42: /* Explanation */ better explanation of title text

{{comic
| number = 2184
| date = August 2, 2019
| title = Unpopular Opinions
| image = unpopular_opinions.png
| titletext = I wasn't a big fan of 3 or Salvation, so I'm trying to resist getting my hopes up too much for Dark Fate, but it's hard. I'm just a sucker for humans and robots traveling through time to try to drive trucks into each other, apparently.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TOMATO WITH NO BAD SPOTS, '''REALLY'''. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Everybody has their own preferences as to what movies they like and dislike, and when your like or dislike of a movie seems to be different than the majority of people, you could call your preference the "unpopular opinion" because your opinion is the less prevalent one. This often takes the form of "I hate this movie and I don't understand why everybody else seems to like it", but this comic is talking about the opposite form, which it categorizes as less common, namely "I like this movie and don't understand why everybody else seems to hate it." The comic points out that it's relatively common to hate movies others appear to like, but the converse, in which you like a movie others seem to hate, is much harder to find. Hating a movie the majority like is seen as a badge of honor, as if you are a rebel and an individual. But if you like a movie the majority dislikes, you feel like you might be viewed as weird or a freak, or like you are missing something that everybody else sees but is for some reason eluding you.

To illustrate how hard it is to like a movie everyone else seems to dislike, the comic presents a challenge whereby you 1) identify a movie you definitely like, which 2) came out during your adult life (so it isn't tainted by childhood {{w|nostalgia}}), and which 3) the majority of other people don't like, as measured informally by having a popularity rating below 50% on the {{w|Rotten Tomatoes}} website. Supposedly you will find it hard to find a movie that meets all three criteria. The rules prohibit a movie that the viewer finds {{tvtropes|SoBadItsGood|"So Bad, It's Good"}} - the enjoyment of the movie must be genuine, for its positive qualities, rather than ironic enjoyment of its negative qualities.

The image in this comic gives an example of this effect, namely the movie ''{{w|Terminator Genisys}}'', the fifth in the {{w|Terminator (franchise)|''Terminator''}} series. This series, about time-travelling killer robots, included the highly rated (93% on Rotten Tomatoes) ''Terminator 2'', while ''Terminator Genisys'' is only 26%.

The title text refers to three movies in the ''{{w|Terminator (franchise)|Terminator}}'' franchise, ''{{w|Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines}}'' (2003), ''{{w|Terminator Salvation}}'' (2009), and ''{{w|Terminator: Dark Fate}}'' (due out later in 2019). The ''Terminator'' movie series has featured both time travel and trucks driving or attempting to drive into people, and Randall apparently finds himself drawn to such movies. He hopes that ''Dark Fate'' will be a good movie, but has low expectations, considering the [https://www.rottentomatoes.com/franchise/terminator less than stellar ratings] of the last 3 movies (69%, 33%, and 26%).

A [https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/dvd-streaming-all?minTomato=0&maxTomato=50&services=amazon;hbo_go;itunes;netflix_iw;vudu;amazon_prime;fandango_now&genres=1;2;4;5;6;8;9;10;11;13;18;14&sortBy=release|Rotten Tomatoes search ordered by release date limited to qualifying movies] can help individuals verify the difficulty of finding such movies for themselves.

==Transcript==

[Caption above the illustration:]

Unpopular ''positive'' opinion challenge:

Name a movie that...

(1) you genuinely like (not "so bad it's good")

(2) came out in your adult life post-2000, and

(3) is rated below 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.

[Ponytail, Cueball, and Megan all holding cell phones.]

:Ponytail: Wow, this is harder than I thought.
:Cueball: ...Terminator Genisys?
:Megan: Seriously?!
:Cueball: ''I like time travel, okay??''

[Caption below the panel:]

When people talk about their "unpopular opinions" about movies, they usually mean hating something everyone likes, but liking something everyone hates is much harder.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]

2184: Unpopular Opinions

2019-08-03T00:26:15Z

172.68.47.42: /* Transcript */ not an actual category

{{comic
| number = 2184
| date = August 2, 2019
| title = Unpopular Opinions
| image = unpopular_opinions.png
| titletext = I wasn't a big fan of 3 or Salvation, so I'm trying to resist getting my hopes up too much for Dark Fate, but it's hard. I'm just a sucker for humans and robots traveling through time to try to drive trucks into each other, apparently.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TOMATO WITH NO BAD SPOTS, '''REALLY'''. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Everybody has their own preferences as to what movies they like and dislike, and when your like or dislike of a movie seems to be different than the majority of people, you could call your preference the "unpopular opinion" because your opinion is the less prevalent one. This often takes the form of "I hate this movie and I don't understand why everybody else seems to like it", but this comic is talking about the opposite form, which it categorizes as less common, namely "I like this movie and don't understand why everybody else seems to hate it." The comic points out that it's relatively common to hate movies others appear to like, but the converse, in which you like a movie others seem to hate, is much harder to find. Hating a movie the majority like is seen as a badge of honor, as if you are a rebel and an individual. But if you like a movie the majority dislikes, you feel like you might be viewed as weird or a freak, or like you are missing something that everybody else sees but is for some reason eluding you.

To illustrate how hard it is to like a movie everyone else seems to dislike, the comic presents a challenge whereby you 1) identify a movie you definitely like, which 2) came out during your adult life (so it isn't tainted by childhood {{w|nostalgia}}), and which 3) the majority of other people don't like, as measured informally by having a popularity rating below 50% on the {{w|Rotten Tomatoes}} website. Supposedly you will find it hard to find a movie that meets all three criteria. The rules prohibit a movie that the viewer finds {{tvtropes|SoBadItsGood|"So Bad, It's Good"}} - the enjoyment of the movie must be genuine, for its positive qualities, rather than ironic enjoyment of its negative qualities.

The image in this comic gives an example of this effect, namely the movie ''{{w|Terminator Genisys}}'', the fifth in the {{w|Terminator (franchise)|''Terminator''}} series. This series, about time-travelling killer robots, included the highly rated (93% on Rotten Tomatoes) ''Terminator 2'', while ''Terminator Genisys'' is only 26%.

The title text refers to three movies in the ''{{w|Terminator (franchise)|Terminator}}'' franchise, ''{{w|Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines}}'' (2003), ''{{w|Terminator Salvation}}'' (2009), and ''{{w|Terminator: Dark Fate}}'' (due out later in 2019). The ''Terminator'' movie series has featured both time travel and trucks driving or attempting to drive into people, and Randall apparently finds himself drawn to such movies. He hopes the upcoming Dark Fate movie will be one that he likes but others don't, so that he can fulfill the challenge.

A [https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/dvd-streaming-all?minTomato=0&maxTomato=50&services=amazon;hbo_go;itunes;netflix_iw;vudu;amazon_prime;fandango_now&genres=1;2;4;5;6;8;9;10;11;13;18;14&sortBy=release|Rotten Tomatoes search ordered by release date limited to qualifying movies] can help individuals verify the difficulty of finding such movies for themselves.

==Transcript==

[Caption above the illustration:]

Unpopular ''positive'' opinion challenge:

Name a movie that...

(1) you genuinely like (not "so bad it's good")

(2) came out in your adult life post-2000, and

(3) is rated below 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.

[Ponytail, Cueball, and Megan all holding cell phones.]

:Ponytail: Wow, this is harder than I thought.
:Cueball: ...Terminator Genisys?
:Megan: Seriously?!
:Cueball: ''I like time travel, okay??''

[Caption below the panel:]

When people talk about their "unpopular opinions" about movies, they usually mean hating something everyone likes, but liking something everyone hates is much harder.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]

2184: Unpopular Opinions

2019-08-03T00:24:40Z

172.68.47.42: /* Transcript */ add categories

{{comic
| number = 2184
| date = August 2, 2019
| title = Unpopular Opinions
| image = unpopular_opinions.png
| titletext = I wasn't a big fan of 3 or Salvation, so I'm trying to resist getting my hopes up too much for Dark Fate, but it's hard. I'm just a sucker for humans and robots traveling through time to try to drive trucks into each other, apparently.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TOMATO WITH NO BAD SPOTS, '''REALLY'''. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Everybody has their own preferences as to what movies they like and dislike, and when your like or dislike of a movie seems to be different than the majority of people, you could call your preference the "unpopular opinion" because your opinion is the less prevalent one. This often takes the form of "I hate this movie and I don't understand why everybody else seems to like it", but this comic is talking about the opposite form, which it categorizes as less common, namely "I like this movie and don't understand why everybody else seems to hate it." The comic points out that it's relatively common to hate movies others appear to like, but the converse, in which you like a movie others seem to hate, is much harder to find. Hating a movie the majority like is seen as a badge of honor, as if you are a rebel and an individual. But if you like a movie the majority dislikes, you feel like you might be viewed as weird or a freak, or like you are missing something that everybody else sees but is for some reason eluding you.

To illustrate how hard it is to like a movie everyone else seems to dislike, the comic presents a challenge whereby you 1) identify a movie you definitely like, which 2) came out during your adult life (so it isn't tainted by childhood {{w|nostalgia}}), and which 3) the majority of other people don't like, as measured informally by having a popularity rating below 50% on the {{w|Rotten Tomatoes}} website. Supposedly you will find it hard to find a movie that meets all three criteria. The rules prohibit a movie that the viewer finds {{tvtropes|SoBadItsGood|"So Bad, It's Good"}} - the enjoyment of the movie must be genuine, for its positive qualities, rather than ironic enjoyment of its negative qualities.

The image in this comic gives an example of this effect, namely the movie ''{{w|Terminator Genisys}}'', the fifth in the {{w|Terminator (franchise)|''Terminator''}} series. This series, about time-travelling killer robots, included the highly rated (93% on Rotten Tomatoes) ''Terminator 2'', while ''Terminator Genisys'' is only 26%.

The title text refers to three movies in the ''{{w|Terminator (franchise)|Terminator}}'' franchise, ''{{w|Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines}}'' (2003), ''{{w|Terminator Salvation}}'' (2009), and ''{{w|Terminator: Dark Fate}}'' (due out later in 2019). The ''Terminator'' movie series has featured both time travel and trucks driving or attempting to drive into people, and Randall apparently finds himself drawn to such movies. He hopes the upcoming Dark Fate movie will be one that he likes but others don't, so that he can fulfill the challenge.

A [https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/dvd-streaming-all?minTomato=0&maxTomato=50&services=amazon;hbo_go;itunes;netflix_iw;vudu;amazon_prime;fandango_now&genres=1;2;4;5;6;8;9;10;11;13;18;14&sortBy=release|Rotten Tomatoes search ordered by release date limited to qualifying movies] can help individuals verify the difficulty of finding such movies for themselves.

==Transcript==

[Caption above the illustration:]

Unpopular ''positive'' opinion challenge:

Name a movie that...

(1) you genuinely like (not "so bad it's good")

(2) came out in your adult life post-2000, and

(3) is rated below 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.

[Ponytail, Cueball, and Megan all holding cell phones.]

:Ponytail: Wow, this is harder than I thought.
:Cueball: ...Terminator Genisys?
:Megan: Seriously?!
:Cueball: ''I like time travel, okay??''

[Caption below the panel:]

When people talk about their "unpopular opinions" about movies, they usually mean hating something everyone likes, but liking something everyone hates is much harder.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Movies]]

2184: Unpopular Opinions

2019-08-03T00:23:50Z

172.68.47.42: /* Transcript */ unlink

{{comic
| number = 2184
| date = August 2, 2019
| title = Unpopular Opinions
| image = unpopular_opinions.png
| titletext = I wasn't a big fan of 3 or Salvation, so I'm trying to resist getting my hopes up too much for Dark Fate, but it's hard. I'm just a sucker for humans and robots traveling through time to try to drive trucks into each other, apparently.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a TOMATO WITH NO BAD SPOTS, '''REALLY'''. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Everybody has their own preferences as to what movies they like and dislike, and when your like or dislike of a movie seems to be different than the majority of people, you could call your preference the "unpopular opinion" because your opinion is the less prevalent one. This often takes the form of "I hate this movie and I don't understand why everybody else seems to like it", but this comic is talking about the opposite form, which it categorizes as less common, namely "I like this movie and don't understand why everybody else seems to hate it." The comic points out that it's relatively common to hate movies others appear to like, but the converse, in which you like a movie others seem to hate, is much harder to find. Hating a movie the majority like is seen as a badge of honor, as if you are a rebel and an individual. But if you like a movie the majority dislikes, you feel like you might be viewed as weird or a freak, or like you are missing something that everybody else sees but is for some reason eluding you.

To illustrate how hard it is to like a movie everyone else seems to dislike, the comic presents a challenge whereby you 1) identify a movie you definitely like, which 2) came out during your adult life (so it isn't tainted by childhood {{w|nostalgia}}), and which 3) the majority of other people don't like, as measured informally by having a popularity rating below 50% on the {{w|Rotten Tomatoes}} website. Supposedly you will find it hard to find a movie that meets all three criteria. The rules prohibit a movie that the viewer finds {{tvtropes|SoBadItsGood|"So Bad, It's Good"}} - the enjoyment of the movie must be genuine, for its positive qualities, rather than ironic enjoyment of its negative qualities.

The image in this comic gives an example of this effect, namely the movie ''{{w|Terminator Genisys}}'', the fifth in the {{w|Terminator (franchise)|''Terminator''}} series. This series, about time-travelling killer robots, included the highly rated (93% on Rotten Tomatoes) ''Terminator 2'', while ''Terminator Genisys'' is only 26%.

The title text refers to three movies in the ''{{w|Terminator (franchise)|Terminator}}'' franchise, ''{{w|Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines}}'' (2003), ''{{w|Terminator Salvation}}'' (2009), and ''{{w|Terminator: Dark Fate}}'' (due out later in 2019). The ''Terminator'' movie series has featured both time travel and trucks driving or attempting to drive into people, and Randall apparently finds himself drawn to such movies. He hopes the upcoming Dark Fate movie will be one that he likes but others don't, so that he can fulfill the challenge.

A [https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/dvd-streaming-all?minTomato=0&maxTomato=50&services=amazon;hbo_go;itunes;netflix_iw;vudu;amazon_prime;fandango_now&genres=1;2;4;5;6;8;9;10;11;13;18;14&sortBy=release|Rotten Tomatoes search ordered by release date limited to qualifying movies] can help individuals verify the difficulty of finding such movies for themselves.

==Transcript==

[Caption above the illustration:]

Unpopular ''positive'' opinion challenge:

Name a movie that...

(1) you genuinely like (not "so bad it's good")

(2) came out in your adult life post-2000, and

(3) is rated below 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.

[Ponytail, Cueball, and Megan all holding cell phones.]

:Ponytail: Wow, this is harder than I thought.
:Cueball: ...Terminator Genisys?
:Megan: Seriously?!
:Cueball: ''I like time travel, okay??''

[Caption below the panel:]

When people talk about their "unpopular opinions" about movies, they usually mean hating something everyone likes, but liking something everyone hates is much harder.

{{comic discussion}}

2168: Reading in the Original

2019-06-26T21:58:59Z

172.68.47.42: /* Explanation */ copyedit

{{comic
| number = 2168
| date = June 26, 2019
| title = Reading in the Original
| image = reading_in_the_original.png
| titletext = The articles are much shorter, but I assume that's because this version predates the merger with the Hawaiian text that created the modern Hawaiian-Greek hybrid wiki-pedia.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a HAWAIIAN-GREEK HYBRID. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Many academics and aficionados argue that studying old texts in the original language is more valuable than reading translations. The argument is that translations are rarely able to fully capture all of the nuances, linguistic subtleties and intent of the original author, and may even alter the meaning in some way. The drawback to this is that it requires the reader to be sufficiently fluent in whatever language the text is written in, which is frequently an archaic dialect, and so only really useful for studying old texts. Mastering an obsolete language solely to enhance your reading experience is a big commitment, and so has become something of a signifier of a truly dedicated scholar. By the same token, bragging about such signifiers is often taken as a mark of self-involved academic arrogance. Because many of the foundational texts in Western civilization, including the ''{{w|Iliad}}'', the ''{{w|Odyssey}}'', the Biblical {{w|New Testament}}, and the works of philosophers like {{w|Socrates}}, {{w|Plato}}, and {{w|Aristotle}}, were originally written in Greek, commenting that you only read works "in the original Greek" has long been an indicator of high-level literary scholarship.

The joke in this strip is that Cueball has apparently taken the time to learn Greek, so that he can read Wikipedia in that language. However, he is not reading the "original" version of Wikipedia articles, but their equivalent in the [https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%A0%CF%8D%CE%BB%CE%B7:%CE%9A%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B1 modern Greek language edition of Wikipedia]. Wikipedia has editions in nearly every existing language; each article links to equivalent articles in other languages, but they are not usually translations of each other, having been written separately by speakers of the different languages. The dedication to appearing to be a committed scholar is contrasted with the ignorance of not understanding that Greek is not the original language of every text.

The title text is an etymology joke, since "Wikipedia" was coined from two parts, "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wiki#English wiki]", from Hawaiian, and "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-pedia pedia]", from Greek. However, words having roots in different languages is common and does not signify any link between the separate languages; for example, while the word "Wikipedia" does have etymological roots in Hawaiian and Greek, there is no hybrid of the two languages which articles could be written in.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is addressing Megan. He is holding a hand with a thumb up out toward her. Megan is spreading her arms out as she replies.]
:Cueball: It's in the "Languages" box in the lower left. It took a while to learn, but I find I get so much more out of it by reading it as it was '''''intended'''''.
:Megan: That's not how that works!

:[Caption below the panel:]
:People get mad when I tell them I only read Wikipedia in the original Greek.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Language]]

2168: Reading in the Original

2019-06-26T21:50:58Z

172.68.47.42: /* Explanation */ ce

{{comic
| number = 2168
| date = June 26, 2019
| title = Reading in the Original
| image = reading_in_the_original.png
| titletext = The articles are much shorter, but I assume that's because this version predates the merger with the Hawaiian text that created the modern Hawaiian-Greek hybrid wiki-pedia.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a HAWAIIAN-GREEK HYBRID. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Many academics and aficionados argue that studying old texts in the original language is more valuable than reading translations. The argument is that translations are rarely able to fully capture all of the nuances, linguistic subtleties and intent of the original author, and may even alter the meaning in some way. The drawback to this is that it requires the reader to be sufficiently fluent in whatever language the text is written in, which is frequently an archaic dialect, and so only really useful for studying old texts. Mastering an obsolete language solely to enhance your reading experience is a big commitment, and so has become something of a signifier of a truly dedicated scholar. By the same token, bragging about such signifiers is often taken as a mark of self-involved academic arrogance. Because many of the foundational texts in Western civilization, including ''The Iliad'', ''The Odyssey'', The Biblical ''New Testament'', and the works of philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, were originally written in Ancient Greek, commenting that you only read works "in the original Greek" has long been an indicator of high-level literary scholarship.

The joke in this strip is that Cueball has apparently taken the time to learn Greek, so that he can read Wikipedia in that language. However, he is not reading the "original" version of Wikipedia articles, but their equivalent in the [https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CE%A0%CF%8D%CE%BB%CE%B7:%CE%9A%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%B9%CE%B1 modern Greek language edition of Wikipedia]. Wikipedia has editions in nearly every existing language; each article links to equivalent articles in other languages, but they are not usually translations of each other, having been written separately by speakers of the different languages. The dedication to appearing to be a committed scholar is contrasted with the ignorance of not understanding that Greek is not the original language of every text.

The title text is an etymology joke, since "Wikipedia" was coined from two parts, "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wiki#English wiki]", from Hawaiian, and "[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-pedia pedia]", from Greek. However, words having roots in different languages is common and does not signify any link between the separate languages; for example, while the word "Wikipedia" does have etymological roots in Hawaiian and Greek, there is no hybrid of the two languages which articles could be written in.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball is addressing Megan. He is holding a hand with a thumb up out toward her. Megan is spreading her arms out as she replies.]
:Cueball: It's in the "Languages" box in the lower left. It took a while to learn, but I find I get so much more out of it by reading it as it was '''''intended'''''.
:Megan: That's not how that works!

:[Caption below the panel:]
:People get mad when I tell them I only read Wikipedia in the original Greek.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Language]]

90: Jacket

2017-10-17T06:31:27Z

172.68.47.42: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 90
| date = April 17, 2006
| title = Jacket
| image = jacket.jpg
| titletext = We have this conversation at least once a day in my apartment
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] clearly means to use ''[[wiktionary:fucking|fucking]]'' as an intensifier. However, the friend (likely intentionally in response to the unnecessary swearing) takes ''fucking'' to be an identifier of which jacket is being discussed, and gives a smart-aleck response. His counterpart gets confused by the sarcasm, and the topic is dismissed.
Fuck is an obscene term meaning sex and can be used as a noun, verb, adjective, and adverb. A "fucking jacket" would be a jacket worn especially while having sex or, less likely, a jacket that has sex.

The title text states that this often occurs in Cueball/Randall's apartment.

==Transcript==
:[Two men stand and talk to one another.]
:Cueball: Where's my fucking jacket?
:[Friend indicates something behind him.]
:Friend: Over there, next to your regular one.
:Cueball: My what?
:Friend: Never mind.

==Trivia==
*This comic is the first to use an all-caps lettering, except for [[78: Garfield]].
(So, it's the second, then?)

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Sarcasm]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]