explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2815: Car Wash

2023-08-14T23:09:25Z

Boatster:

You know, I've ''never'' been in a carwash. Not even through a hand-wash (these days set up in just about every other ex-petrol(/'gas') station forecourt not redeveloped otherwise. Driven (or walked) right past them on the ways to places (my walk to the supermarket goes past a hand-car-wash, grocery store and tyre business in an ex-petrol station - then I wander past the autocarwash 'booth' at the supermarket-aligned fuelstop, perhaps through the jetwash lanes if nobody's using them), but never took a car to one. There's buckets and sponges/etc at home. Am I missing something? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.11|172.71.242.11]] 20:40, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
:The bucket and sponge method takes time and effort. Automatic car washes are quick and easy. I'm mostly indifferent to car washes, but I like them more than doing it by hand because I'm lazy. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:46, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
::I'm indifferent to car washes too. Five years later you just have to do it all over again [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 23:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
::Time and money for the carwash: Driving there (risking incidents), possible queuing to get into retail park, queuing to pay (£££s!), possible queuing for car wash, waiting for it to do its thing (risk of damage!), possible queuing to get out drive back (risking incidents, also normal road-grime)...
::Time and money for home-wash: Don't need to leave home. Buckets are older than me, sponges/cloths/brushes may in some cases by younger than 50 years old (but all pre-millenium), car-wax/-shampoo bottle (used sparingly) is 5-10yo and nowhere near empty, water (with a water meter, so does cost) is perhaps equivalent to two days of (hand-!)dishwashing [possibly buying a home jet-washer could bring that down, if it "does a lot more with a fastly moving lesser amount", but I might then also be tempted to jetwash the drive/windows/rooftiles as well and I'm not even sure it'd be less water through the nozzle as the tap] and (depending on time of year) may involve various mixes of hot and cold (so heating, though practically individible from other hot-water uses other than the kettle for drinks). Time taken: maybe 15 minutes (±5), at leisure while I appreciate all the distracting luxuries of home, or a highly abbreviated (one-bucket) washover/rinse at significantly less than 5 minutes (I'd still be trying to get into the supermarket, even with no queueueuing; perhaps I'd have been handwashed if ''they'' have no queue, but I wouldn't be back again...) and done. Maybe occasionally get the vacuum out and self-valet the insides, for another <5 minutes and probably entirely covered in electricity by what the solar panels have been feeding in during carwashing-friendly daytime conditions.
::Of course, it'll typically rain shortly afterwards (the rain-gods perhaps even being hopefully invoked by the very act of de-mudding the wheel-arches), but that's not going to differ between either (or neither) efforts to wash. :P [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.45|172.70.85.45]] 21:40, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
:In Germany, you are discouraged and in many localities it's directly forbidden to wash your car on your premises; it is completely forbidden to wash your car on the street. This because of oil that will enter the sewer system. Automated car washes will recycle water and seperate oil from it. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.150.92|172.69.150.92]] 21:14, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
::Oil? If I notice oil in(/on) the water, I know there's a problem. Maybe a little residue from cleaning inside the fuel-port hatch. The way some people (over)use detergent, I could see ''that'' being an issue, but if you've an oil-leak then that's happening on or off your premises (and mostly off), I'd have thought and you might ''never even know...'' if you don't even wash your own car. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.45|172.70.85.45]] 21:40, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2808: Daytime Firefly

2023-07-29T02:25:29Z

Boatster:

Do fireflies still blink when it's light out? If not, I'm not sure how someone could easily tell that some random flying insect is a firefly. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
:I've seen some indoors, flashing. I think it might have been in a dim room. But really it's not that hard to tell them from other common insects even without flashing. I would think you can differentiate bees, flies, lady bugs, mosquitoes, etc. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.98|172.70.126.98]] 00:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Pat
::It's not easy if you never saw any clearly. Ok, from flies and bees, sure, but from other beetles ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 01:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Huge kudos to whoever made that Counting Crows reference in the "incomplete" box. [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 02:12, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Is it cannibalism if the predator is a different species? Perhaps "pseudo-cannabilzed"[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 02:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2808: Daytime Firefly

2023-07-29T02:24:40Z

Boatster:

Do fireflies still blink when it's light out? If not, I'm not sure how someone could easily tell that some random flying insect is a firefly. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 23:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
:I've seen some indoors, flashing. I think it might have been in a dim room. But really it's not that hard to tell them from other common insects even without flashing. I would think you can differentiate bees, flies, lady bugs, mosquitoes, etc. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.98|172.70.126.98]] 00:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Pat
::It's not easy if you never saw any clearly. Ok, from flies and bees, sure, but from other beetles ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 01:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Huge kudos to whoever made that Counting Crows reference in the "incomplete" box. [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 02:12, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Is it cannibalism if the predator is a different species? Perhaps "pseudo-cannabilzed"[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 02:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2803: Geohydrotypography

2023-07-19T00:01:04Z

Boatster:

100 words per minute seems… fast. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.64|172.69.33.64]] 04:47, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
:Yes, has anyone done the maths on this claim?[[User:Thisfox|Thisfox]] ([[User talk:Thisfox|talk]]) 09:52, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
:The claim is actually "per second"... and given the size of the Atlantic it's actually not thaaat much. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
:The height of 12pt text is stated as approx(!) 4.233mm, which is possibly from the tops of the risers to the bottom of sub-line descenders but not sure if it includes the extra line_spacing that prevents them touching across. If the (quoted) 13,000km figure is accepted as close enough, that's over 3x109 lines of text, ''each'' expanding by (up to) the "fingernail growth" rate often described. That's a lot of compound extension going on.
:The width is variable ('l' vs 'm'; then possible kerning of 'AV'- or 'rj'-like combinations vs 'AA' and 'rr', depending on font), so I don't really know where to start with the exact width-gain-per-line being mapped to characters (then to whole words that can be stocasticall inserted into the available new space). There are probably printers/publishers who have a good idea of how many pages some raw text (not yet actually suitably repaginated) actually might take up, at least to within the nearest quire. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.89|172.70.91.89]] 11:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Is it accurate to say it's a portmaneau of geology, hydrology and typography? Surely the geo- and hydro- could also be considered here to have come from the root words (the same way they have in geology and hydrology) because they're just adding scope to the -ography from typography, or rather specifying that it's typography involving *geo* and *hydro*. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.15|172.70.86.15]] 06:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

It may see obvious to most, but I'd like to suggest a bit more literal explanation of the mechanics involved. It took me far too many readings, both of the comic and the explanation, to realize that the comic's "expansion of the ocean basin due to plate tectonics" is independent from the characters being "written" on the ocean. The word-wrap effects are just due to the existing rate of expansion due to plate tectonics. I was looking for some kind of typically Randallian closed loop (as in [[688: Self-Description]]). [[User:Der57|Der57]] ([[User talk:Der57|talk]]) 07:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Why geology and hydrology when geography and hydrography are perfectly valid things? If it is a portmanteau, it could clearly be of three different "graphy" words.. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.108|172.71.102.108]] 09:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
:Agree [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:02, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
:There's a difference between geology and geography. The root "-logy" being of knowledge, "-graphy" that of measurement and recording.
:''Very'' roughly, the first I'd consider covers what we know of the underlying plate techtonics/etc, whilst the latter is how people understand/use the surface (not necessarily the land); I think geology applies to the comic more than geography (certainly far from many of its more prominant subfields, such as political geography). Yes, there's overlaps (where physical geography derives from/demonstrates various direct aspect of surface geology), but I think I'd say geology is the prime driver here.
:Hydrology vs hydrography, I'd skew the other way as far as relevence to the comic. It's the measure of the extent of the ocean rather than the understood movements of water (which, significantly to the layperson, includes aquifers and rivers and other land-observed watery analyses even more irrelevent to the hypothetical than that of the actual ocean currents which presumably Randall has no problem 'writing' over).
:..if only I could think of a reason to choose "typology" over "typography", then I could ''really'' go for a more awkward interpretation of what the composite word construction should be rooted in. ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.119|141.101.98.119]] 11:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
: I don't think it's a portmanteau at all - rather, it's a neologism: the measurement and recording of text on the water surfaces of the earth. So there is no -ology or -graphy applicable to the component parts of the word; just one -graphy applied to the whole thing. (Also, it doesn't necessarily mean that he himself enjoys typing on the water - just that he likes studying / measuring it.)[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.4|141.101.98.4]] 16:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Imho, this is some of Randall's finest work. In a very large portfolio of very fine work. [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 00:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2763: Linguistics Gossip

2023-04-14T15:53:25Z

Boatster:

Added initial explanation [[User:Bamboo|Bamboo]] ([[User talk:Bamboo|talk]]) 14:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Bamboo

Added possible explanation of title text [[User:Bamboo|Bamboo]] ([[User talk:Bamboo|talk]]) 14:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Bamboo

Has anyone asked O what they think of all this?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.152|172.70.91.152]] 14:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

NOTE: I'm assuming the IE/VE ligature is IE, where the I is tilted
Could this also be a reference to the historical Latin pronunciation of Æ, and its separation into "AA" (which could be represented by "ar" in English ("r" is silent), hence the ligature "AR") and "IE" (which would be pronounced "ee" as in "relieve") [[User:1844161|1844161]] ([[User talk:1844161|talk]]) 15:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
: I disagree. The title text strongly points towards VE as the logical interpretation [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 15:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2763: Linguistics Gossip

2023-04-14T15:52:42Z

Boatster: Title text suggests VE

Added initial explanation [[User:Bamboo|Bamboo]] ([[User talk:Bamboo|talk]]) 14:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Bamboo

Added possible explanation of title text [[User:Bamboo|Bamboo]] ([[User talk:Bamboo|talk]]) 14:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Bamboo

Has anyone asked O what they think of all this?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.152|172.70.91.152]] 14:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

NOTE: I'm assuming the IE/VE ligature is IE, where the I is tilted
Could this also be a reference to the historical Latin pronunciation of Æ, and its separation into "AA" (which could be represented by "ar" in English ("r" is silent), hence the ligature "AR") and "IE" (which would be pronounced "ee" as in "relieve") [[User:1844161|1844161]] ([[User talk:1844161|talk]]) 15:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- I disagree. The title text strongly points towards VE as the logical interpretation [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 15:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2756: Qualifications

2023-03-30T22:56:21Z

Boatster:

This reminds me of Ken Thompson's Turing Award lecture, https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rdriley/487/papers/Thompson_1984_ReflectionsonTrustingTrust.pdf [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 21:23, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

if you’re playing with your llama and build a time machine, make sure to rescue not only randall but everyone else too ! (edit: llama is a powerful language model presently popular, originally shared to non-researchers on 4chan. the joke relates to consumer and general AI being on a huge up-curve without mention in the comic.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.54|162.158.63.54]] 23:34, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

'''over''' 600 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.76|172.70.111.76]] 00:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Featured on r/overemployed [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.3|162.158.155.3]] 16:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

The first sentence of the second paragraph should be reworded. Hairbun seems to be content to have verified the claim but the reader doesn't know if Cueball is as credulous as Hairbun. [[User:Inquirer|Inquirer]] ([[User talk:Inquirer|talk]]) 04:07, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

"''This is essentially a more elaborate version of Black Hat's ploy in another interview 17 years prior.''" that sentence has made feel older than any of Randall's "feel old yet?" comics, yeez! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.82.187|172.70.82.187]] 15:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

So, Cueball and Hairbun are registered voters in NYʻs 3rd Congressional district? With hugs to Randall, the best line in comics remains Walt Kellyʻs: "We have met the enemy and he is us." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.18|162.158.187.18]] 16:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

17 years! Thanks for making me feel very old [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 22:56, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2743: Hand Dryers

2023-03-01T13:46:42Z

Boatster:

The mouseover text is trolling, since that would be impossible. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.200.140|172.70.200.140]] 16:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
:Indeed, Randall wrote about that in ''How To 2''. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

The Pratt & Whitney J58 is capable of producing exhaust velocities exceeding that of Mach 2 at ground level. It would be possible (though extremely inadvisable) to dry one's hands in the exhaust, at least for the brief period where one still has hands. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.115.72|172.70.115.72]] 16:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC) J. Kupec

:There are hand-sized supersonic blowers used to clean and dry train tracks. https://www.ge.com/news/reports/this-software-guided-supersonic-air-blower-sweeps They are very dangerous to exposed skin even several feet away. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.142.21|172.71.142.21]] 06:52, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

::You are supposed to dry your hands with them, not your feet. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.55|162.158.203.55]] 08:50, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
::: Feet away, hands away, any body part you like really [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:46, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

With a low enough vacuum in the surrounding area, a supersonic hand dryer should be able to apply drying without enough energy dissipation to damage the skin. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.65.184|172.69.65.184]] 17:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

As far as I understand it, the low velocity dryers heat the air, the high velocity ones don't, but rely on the air being compressed and air speed is of the essence. The other problem with the idea of very high speed is that 'stuff' could penetrate the skin (there is a type of needle-less vaccination gun on that principle).[[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 19:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

That matches my memory, the first ones I remember were fairly low airspeed and had a data tag "1500 watts" for the heating element. Has anyone tried one of these with *dry* hands, to see how long the element takes to get hot? I don't think they heat up instantly. They certainly get hot--motorcycling on cold days I've pointed the nozzle inside my clothing to warm up at a rest stop.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.76|172.70.111.76]] 19:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't think this effect fully explains observations. For example, the airflow feels warmer sooner when someone has used the dryer just before you. [[User:P1h3r1e3d13|P1h3r1e3d13]] ([[User talk:P1h3r1e3d13|talk]]) 21:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

"though this was first achieved many decades ago, in the 1950s" Yeager broke the sound barrier in level flight on Oct. 14, 1947, and planes had been doing it in dives for years. [[User:Cser|Cser]] ([[User talk:Cser|talk]]) 21:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
:Without reading your comment, I further changed the (as it was for me) "1940s" version of the statement to include the original "inadvertent" barrier-breaking (of prop-planes in almost always irrecoverable dives, without control surfaces that would work well in supersonic/transonic airflows) and included the developments made, which these days are somewhat more trivial than having to sit on a rocket that is released from a high-altitude bomber's wing, and fight to keep it flying straight and level. (We even had a supersonic airliner, for several decades!) There's a lot of interesting history to this, but not really the place to say it all. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.57|172.70.85.57]] 01:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Should we make an "airplane banner" category? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.76|172.70.111.76]] 02:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:I was thinking the same thing, but I'm here about Covid (below). [[User:Bismuthfoot|Bismuthfoot]] ([[User talk:Bismuthfoot|talk]]) 04:16, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
::I agree to that. If we can find at least three others. Can see two are mentioned below. Are there more than those two and this one? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:Previous usages of planes with banners: [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1965:_Background_Apps Background apps] and [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1355:_Airplane_Message Airplane Message], both of which's banners bore information and the first one commented on the cheapness of the banners. Maybe mention them in the explanation and/or add a category about them? [[User:Xkcdjerry|Xkcdjerry]] ([[User talk:Xkcdjerry|talk]]) 08:05, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
::Found one more [[2463: Astrophotography]]. I will make the category --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Done. Please add more if you can find them: [[:Category:Airplane banner]] --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Hand dryers were disabled in the early days of Covid in 2020 before hand transmission was ruled out as significant. I still feel awkward using one in a bathroom with others. I'm old and still mask when indoors publicly more than briefly. In 2023, I submit that you risk appearing hypocritical with a mask and a hand air dryer. Thus, I saw this XKCD as a reminder that hand air dryers had nothing to do with Covid. Still, there seems to be a bunch of fuss about the dryers. Apparently, some use mechanical air force (jet air) more than warm air for drying, from respectable gavi.org and wired.org in 2021 (https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/we-know-hand-dryers-can-circulate-germs-through-air-why-are-they-still-used and https://www.wired.com/story/wash-your-hands-but-beware-the-electric-hand-dryer/). I'm just rambling here; I'm not ready to do any editing. [[User:Bismuthfoot|Bismuthfoot]] ([[User talk:Bismuthfoot|talk]]) 04:16, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
: The alternative to dryers was often a stack of paper towels. Always a 'contact threat', in my eyes (I never really like using a shop's communal hand-sanitiser bottles, on entry, for that very reason; I just didn't touch anything, that I wasn't already taking off the shelves to take with me, if I could help it), although thankfully that wasn't a great a problem as it was initially feared.
: Ditto, the precaution of taping off every other seat (or two out of every three, etc), in order to prevent congregation of people in public seating areas. This forced every new arrival to always choose from the more limited number of pre-touched seats, rather than just advising people to randomly choose to sit only in any non-neighboured seats and so diluting the hypothetical risk.
: (I still mask up for entry to supermarkets/shops/indoor places of similar kinds. I would for buses/trains, if I used them. I'm otherwise still mostly "bubbling" with close family, or only going to places where we're mostly/all going, together or separate, but that probably equally applied before 'things changed' as well.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 05:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

On the '30 or so seconds it takes for user's hands to be dried', at least for the Airblade style ones, the cycle is much shorter, they turn off after 12s. It just *feels* that long. There is one at the place where I do rock climbing (where you want your hands to be very dry) and I heard people complaining that they'd prefer paper towels (for dryness reasons and because that would be faster, not because the Airblades spew everything everywhere). So I started to actively take mental notes of the efficacy of each drying-mode. My conclusion: Yes, with towels you get the palm somewhat dry very quickly. However, forget about any water left between your fingers. If you want all around dry skin on your hands, the Airblade is just better and faster. If you just want dry enough hands to proceed in your normal day, towels are sufficient, convenient and silent. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.203.41|162.158.203.41]] 09:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:Personally I find that it takes at least three cycles on the Airblade to actually get my hands dry (the between the fingers bit being a particular trouble spot), so it's still 30 or so seconds, just with the additional annoyance of having to pause a couple of times in the middle to wait for it to reset.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.135|172.70.162.135]] 10:40, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone think that the title text is a reference to the fact that hand dryers that blow cold air call themselves "hypersonic"? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2737: Weather Station

2023-02-14T22:28:30Z

Boatster:

I'm not sure if the comment about the spinning speed in the explanation section is needed, still, added it for clarity. Feel free to remove it if it seems out of place. [[User:Xkcdjerry|Xkcdjerry]] ([[User talk:Xkcdjerry|talk]]) 07:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

:Totally needed. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
:: It's what Randall would have done [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 22:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

''Wheeeeeeeeeeeee!'' [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 10:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

It would be great if the explanation also offered a comparison between Cueball's arm speed and the wind speed of most tornadoes, as knowing the speed that Cueball's spinning it at in a bid to make it think there's a tornado doesn't mean much if one doesn't know how fast tornadoes also go. --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.191|172.71.242.191]] 13:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

FYI the rain gauge in Borrowdale, Cumbria, England - reputedly the wettest place in England - is set into a wall at thigh-height, with a collecting spout. A local farmer told me that as a boy, the gauge was between the school bus drop-off and the farm, so he and his brothers used to regularly top it up by taking a p1ss....distorting weather records has a long history!
15:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.187|172.71.178.187]] 15:34, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

:And wait until chinese weather balloons come into play ;-) --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.139|162.158.129.139]] 17:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

::They don't. That's the point of shooting them down. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
::I haven't been watching Chinese weather reports, but have they been reporting that the weather over North America is explosive? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 22:17, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2736: Only Serifs

2023-02-14T22:22:13Z

Boatster:

first two letters are "A" and "R" I think [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.10|172.71.167.10]] 04:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Bumpf

It's AaBbCcDd. Most likely in Caslon, based on the uppercase A. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.149|172.68.174.149]] 04:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

So much for a hidden message. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.238.22|172.68.238.22]] 05:05, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

If we've come to this page for an explanation, we probably don't know what a "solum-serif font" is. update the transcript with something more widely known? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.65.224|172.69.65.224]] 05:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:Agreed, enthusiastically! Someone trying to show off, Google doesn't even know what it means, it found ONE result, which is a font of curved corners someone made (when I put "solum-serif" in quotes, to not allow Google to just search one or the other). But while I was Googling someone fixed it before I could, LOL! Which is weird as it's past midnight here in the Eastern time zone. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:: Perhaps you haven't realised that nighttime for Americans is daytime for, um, somewhere around 80-90% of the world's population? [[User:Paddles|Paddles]] ([[User talk:Paddles|talk]]) 14:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
::: Of course I realize this. :) Seems like YOU don't realize that this site is one of many where it seems like most activity centers around the EST time zone... Perhaps related to Randall being in this time zone, perhaps not, but I'm usually alone at this time of night (for example, I almost NEVER get Edit Conflicts because seemingly everyone is asleep). For years I'm almost always the only person making contributions at this hour. Maybe think of that before making a misguided condescending reply. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::::You really live up to your username, eh? Charming ''and'' US-centric.

::I think that's probably because it was a joke. In fact the ridiculous of the notion of a "solum-serif" font is more or less the entirety of the joke of this comic. You're right, in the future we should make sure that these descriptions are devoid of humor.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.92|172.70.211.92]] 18:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:::But that's in the transcript particularly, the transcript should make sense as to what the image shows without prior knowledge [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.10|108.162.216.10]] 02:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Yes, as Mr./Ms. 216.10 pointed out, this was the transcript. PLENTY of room for jokes in the Explanation, but the Transcript should be as concise and straightforward as possible, in an effort to be clear. NOT the place for what seemed to be a self-coined term and trying to be clever. :) I've heard some blind and sight-impaired people follow the comic by having a reading program read these Transcripts, last thing they need is a non-word the program might trip over and can't define for them. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::::Exactly the transcript should not try to explain the comic. But should include all text as written text for later possibility to search for it. And finally the image should be described in some detail for those that are sight impaired. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::For anyone who is confused, 'solum' (solus) is Latin for 'only', as opposed to 'sans' (from the Latin 'sine'), without. I suppose the joke is rather hard to get, though, since the top Google search results for 'solum' refer to soil. (Not my joke, by the way. Also, first ever comment - hope I've done this right.) [[User:CryptekCathekh|CryptekCathekh]] ([[User talk:CryptekCathekh|talk]]) 21:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Thanks for the clarification, yes that makes sense. And yes, finely commented there. :) Yes, I got loads of industrial results for "Solum", which is why I had to force the search to include the "serif". [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

There was a whole thing on Wikipedia about formatting the f symbol for an arbitrary function. One camp held that f is just f, it always is and always was and if you italicize f in a san-serif font, you get an oblique ''f'' but if you italicize f in a serif font, you get a proper italic version, which I'm not sure how to display here. The italic f resembles ƒ, a character called the "hooked f," which is technically an oblique f with a descender ("hook"). That symbol has been used for florins, but sometimes it is also used to imitate the italic f to represent functions, because it has the descender in all environments. But Wikipedia uses a san-serif script, while most mathematical literature uses a serif script. However, it renders expressions in LaTeX with serif fonts and therefore these equations get an f with a descender. So some people were arguing that given this environment, the ƒ character was practically superior, even if it was conceptually wrong, because it most closely resembled the formatted LaTeX expressions. And on and on with the back and forth. I'm glad they eventually settled on just using f for f, like they use g for g and h for h, but still, it was amusingly nitpicky. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.100.50|172.70.100.50]] 07:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:What you listed as resembling italic f looks on my system like ⨍. There are lots of fun variations (some unrelated, just similar looking): ∫⨎ʄ∮∬∰⨏ƒʆᶘᔑ [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 08:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:That entire argument seems silly. Obviously the correct answer to "how do you write the function $f$ outside of math mode" is "don't". Just use math mode and let KaTeX handle the formatting. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.61|162.158.63.61]] 16:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

The title text teases the idea of a font made by adding the Times New Roman serifs to Comic Sans, and now I actually want to see such a cursed font. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.237|108.162.241.237]] 11:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:Ask and ye shall receive: [[File:2736MovedSerifsV2.jpg]] :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::Is it weird that I kind of like Sans New Roman? (anonymous) 12:49, 13 February 2023 (EST)
::Thanks I will include this in the explanation. Great work. Ugly as hell ;-) It might send some graphic designers your way! ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::: i think it improves both typefaces [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 22:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I think Caslon is correct:
[https://ibb.co/J2WhP1g Caslon] [https://ibb.co/MG77JMX Overlay] [https://ibb.co/3yQtqbN Low Opacity Overlay]
via [http://www.identifont.com/identify?58+.+5J+1JU+3YB+3RZ+35YX+94+JIA+58C+97+22X+8R8+1JY+2Z3A+6ZR+3Q+5BU+9J+1L0+76P+8Z+1QN+7UF+DG+5QE+J+JPK+8C+99+PAE+2AA6+2ZI+8X+8W+8J+1KS+JI6+2Z36+79+8E+53K+2E+1KI+8N+7VS+7S+2C6+1U6+8A+8R0+8F+3WO+2ZGL+1LA+7G+1QY+8B+A0 questions] in Identifont. If someone can add these to the wiki, please do. [[User:DragonDave|DragonDave]] ([[User talk:DragonDave|talk]]) 12:55 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I wonder if this is related to the US State Department dropping Times Roman in favor of Calibri, under the argument that the latter is easier to read. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.198|172.70.114.198]] 13:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I call these fonts seul serif, keeping with the theme of using French terminology. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.59|172.71.147.59]] 16:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

A free, existing example of [http://www.fontgrill.com/fonts/free/comic-serif/comic-serif.php Comic Serif].
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.242|172.70.214.242]] 16:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

:^ TBH Comic Serif doesn't look half bad, if only it had a consistent baseline [[Special:Contributions/198.41.231.179|198.41.231.179]] 17:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:Of course, since Comic is supposed to mimic casual handwriting, and people don't hand write serifs {{Citation needed}}, this messes up the concept, LOL! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::Does not, if you go back far enough. Remember that a lot of old handwriting had serif-like parts due to the use of quills.
:::True enough, but going back isn't appropriate, as computers '''''AREN'T''''' "back far enough", or at all. :) NOW, in the present day, nobody handwrites serifs. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

This comic reminds me of something I once actually did as a child: I once wrote a notepad full of game ideas and story concepts but wanted to keep them a secret; so I created my own "cipher" font where any straight lines in letters were removed, leaving only the curved lines. However, because some letters such as c and d would look similar without the straight lines, I gave some letters curved "serifs", which would be retained in my "font". --Jinji@donphan.social 20:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm most instances where the word "font" is used, the correct word is "typeface". "Times Roman" is a typeface whereas "Times Roman bold" is a font. -Jez [[Special:Contributions/172.70.93.42|172.70.93.42]] 20:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:I'd be inclined to suggest that "font", in common parlance, means what everyone here means it to mean, and that means that it is "correct". Nobody - OK, fine, potentially a negligible number of people - might wonder what's going on when "font" is used where you would prefer "typeface". It's not a matter of being "correct" though, unless we are (and we aren't) a community of people using typesetting language in a formal, technical sense. You know what ''is'' incorrect though? Writing "I'm" when you mean "In". Would I have said any of that had you not been so pedantic? You bet your sweet ass I wouldn't.[[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 22:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::Yorkshire Pudding there said everything I was tempted to and more last night, but said better than I would have. Thank you! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

That can't POSSIBLY be the right link under the word "events". We have an entire category of "my hobby"/"Cueball getting kicked out of events" comics and that isn't any of them. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.90|172.71.158.90]] 22:29, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
:I concur. It links directly to comic 514, which has nothing to do with events or getting kicked out (I can't even think what comic they meant). I took a peek at 1514 and 2514, but those don't fit, either. ??? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 07:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
::Maybe [[541]] was meant? But I guess just linking to Category:Banned_from_conferences or even adding this to Category:Compromise would be better. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.166|198.41.242.166]] 14:58, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Yup, I feel sure you got it. I tried checking around 514 (going up to like 518, going down to like 510), didn't try transposing the digits. What's funny is that I often think of that specific comic 541, whenever I want a smiley face inside brackets, :) I'll update the explanation. EDIT: Ugh, someone removed it instead of fixing it. :( [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It looks very similar to [http://tom7.org/lowercase/ Comic Sands] by tom7! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.30.106|172.71.30.106]] 16:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Bumpf
:Oh incredible, I quite like the "futura work" section of that paper [[User:MrCandela|MrCandela]] ([[User talk:MrCandela|talk]]) 03:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

;A note for No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO
:''(...because you don't have a Talk page I can write to...)''
In response to recent edits from you with, for example, "(am i doing something wrong? THERE ARE TWO MANY JOKE TAGS!)" as the comment... The tag is the Incomplete (i.e. {{template|incomplete}}, and it is indeed arguable if all those marked as such are truly so (though you can bet your bottom dollar that plenty of times where the tag is removed, someone will then quite soon find something worth editing into an Explanation). But the "joke tag" is the community replacing the 'Bot-created reference to being created by A BOT with something an editor decides is funny. (They aren't always right, but someone else may impose their own humour - right or wrong - in place of the first comedian's attempt... And possibly the process repeats a few more times.)
 So, anyway, that's what the joke ''part'' of the tag is about, though the presence of the tag itself is a bit more serious. Maybe you could say that an explanation a couple of weeks old (from time of creation, at comic-publication) is only going to be 'normally and irregularly tweaked, from now on', and so would lose the Incompleteness happily enough, but some might say sooner ''or'' later than that, perhaps depending upon the comic concerned. Mega-comics in particular (e.g. interactive April Fool ones, or Time-like in scope, or those needing a "larger" version to be linked to to red properly) where genuinely there are potentially still more discoveries to be made for quite some time.
 Far more certain are the Incomplete Transcript statuses, because as soon as everything in the comic image is properly described (give or take subjective opinions), and it's in the de facto meta-notation, then removal of that status can be swift and painless (and still open to edits). Though do note that Transcripts do ''not'' currently need to contain the Title Text (it's already transcribed into the comic template header area, if done correctly), and in fact this is discouraged by the consensus view. The transcript just puts in text what is not aready in machine-readable text (for various purposes). So it's not Incomplete if every bit of Randall-drawn text is in there, every bit of drawn imagery is (sufficiently) described and - if necessary - the layout and relationships of things are also described (e.g, "There is a table which has...", rather than trying to render the table only in wikitable markup). It may not be ''correct'', but it should at least be considered complete, give or take a detail or so. ;)
 You might understand the community process best by actually going through page history for a comic's page, from the very first creation by theusafBOT (or whoever) and looking at successive diff-pages. Depends on how much time you have, though :-p [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 01:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:Who '''''are''''' you talking to? There's no comment like that or user name like that here (at least I don't see a comment when scanning through them). I was GOING to say instead of relying on a Talk page you should Reply to his comment, with a colon, like this... [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::There's a [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/No_Idea_If_There%27s_A_Character_Limit_LMAO relatively new user], who has (it seems) being confused over (+ removing), Incomplete template stuff. They currently have no Talk page, so looks like the chosen approach to 'message' them was to post something in the latest Discussion spot and hope they spot it by default. May not be the ideal way, but I can imagine it maybe working?
::My POV is that Incomplete tags are supposed to help direct people to explanations needing completing, but don't really. For several reasons both technical and logistical. So their harmless fall-back as a s/A BOT/SOMETHING 'FUNNY'/ canvas is probably more a thing to be cherished. Which is not to say that they should stay that way forever, but I wouldn't persoally rush to remove them.
::(And, though it may confuse new readers, as with Citation Needed, if it gets them thinking about what they might add then it's a sneaky nudge to get fresh blood actively into the editing community. Win-win? Opinions will vary!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.134|172.70.162.134]] 12:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm gonna make the comic sans/times new roman hybrid when I can get some time. Just calling dibs! [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 07:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:yeah, this is just "comic serif". It already exists [https://twitter.com/kiersi/status/1492183706009694210 here] [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 08:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::No it's not, it SAYS "remove the serifs from Times and add them to Comic", Comic Serif has its own serifs AND is missing a Times missing serifs. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:Sorry, I already decided last night I would and I just made it before I read your dibs, guess I should have said something, :) Not going to throw out my work! :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::It's fine! I kinda abandoned it anyways and I don't think I would have done quite as good a job [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::I'd gotten as far as starting to manually tweak the tween-frames in a rather self-indulgent animated version. But your thing is as good as needs to be, and I don't have upload permissions here anyway, so it would have been too much fuss and probably just contributed to my own personal procrastination over the weekend. ;)

In case anyone wanted to know what it would look like if you moved the serifs from Times New Roman to Comic Sans, here's the before and after. :) [[File:2736MovedSerifsV2.jpg]][[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:Please also adapt the [[kerning]]! This hurts my eyes. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.166|198.41.242.166]] 11:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Randall's font isn't only serifs - there are some ball terminals in there as well.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.114|172.70.91.114]] 11:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Any guesses on what the text in the comic actually says? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.111.75|172.70.111.75]] 15:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:As the second comment in this talk box suggest, I think the serifs are consistent with AaBbCcDd (an easy way to showcase a typeface in a few characters). If I'm not mistaken, the transcript used to imply as much as well; does anyone know why that was removed, and can we be confident enough about the text to put that back in the transcript?
:Also, sorry about not signing above. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 19:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
:It's also mentioned in the (rather long) first paragraph of the Explanation. Better place. Might do better with some restructuring of the text, I might split/refactor the scrawl at some point, along the lines of various sub-points all squashed in there... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.113|172.70.91.113]] 23:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I wonder whether this was a play on Only Fans -> Only Sans -> Only Serifs? {{unsigned ip|172.70.230.25|03:22, 14 February 2023}}

:If I know my fellow XKCD fans, it's only a matter of days until we'll see someone upload SEULSERIF.TTF --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.129.138|162.158.129.138]] 18:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2733: Size Comparisons

2023-02-04T14:01:55Z

Boatster: Trolling Texans

But Texas isn't even the largest US State. It's the ''second'' largest state, behind Alaska. Mind you, if you took Alaska and divided it into two then Texas would no longer be in second place... It would now be third! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.203|172.71.242.203]] 02:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:LOL, poor Texans. I'm from Australia. We only have 6 states, and 4 of them are bigger than Texas. So Texas would be in the smallest 50% of states if it was part of Australia [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 14:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

I started an explanation. My first, so I hope it's OK. Notice how I resisted [Citation needed]. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:20, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

:... and ninjaed. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Fixed the beginning, now it says Texas is the second-largest state. [[User:WhatDoWeDoNow|WhatDoWeDoNow]] ([[User talk:WhatDoWeDoNow|talk]]) 03:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:Alaska isn't usually considered part of the "contiguous US", so Texas is indeed first there. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 03:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Note that if you scale Rhode Island up to the size of the Solar System, the ants would be even larger. [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 06:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Trivia: In Germany we like to compare big things to the size of the Saarland, the smallest federal state that is not a city state. But since it is also the state with the least people living in it almost noone really knows how big the Saarland really is (and of the rest noone really cares to find out). This reminds me a lot of this Texas vs. Alaska discussion and I wonder if every country has something like this...? --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.39|172.71.160.39]] 07:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:In the UK, at a certain range of scale our general comparison standard is (half/three times /etc) "the size of Wales". e.g. the quantity of rainforest that is doomed, at any particular time. There ''are'' a lot of people there (often, according to the Welsh themselves, too many English incomers) and it is usefully easy to identify (I think of it as the "head of the pig that the gnome is riding", but that might just be me), given its prominant appearance in the outline of Great Britain itself. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3715512.stm Usually!] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.81|172.70.85.81]] 08:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
::In Australia we seem compelled to use Sydney Harbour as the unit of measurement for any large amount of water[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Notably, the larger the state you scale up the smaller the ants will be, as you would have to scale it by a smaller factor. The comparison would be more accurate if it read: "Texas is so big that if you expanded it to the size of the Solar System, the ants there would "only* be as big as Rhode Island."
[[User:Svízel přítula|Svízel přítula]] ([[User talk:Svízel přítula|talk]]) 10:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:Wait, Jordan Brown already said that. [[User:Svízel přítula|Svízel přítula]] ([[User talk:Svízel přítula|talk]]) 10:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2733: Size Comparisons

2023-02-04T13:57:55Z

Boatster: Units of measurement, parochial

But Texas isn't even the largest US State. It's the ''second'' largest state, behind Alaska. Mind you, if you took Alaska and divided it into two then Texas would no longer be in second place... It would now be third! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.203|172.71.242.203]] 02:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

I started an explanation. My first, so I hope it's OK. Notice how I resisted [Citation needed]. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:20, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

:... and ninjaed. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Fixed the beginning, now it says Texas is the second-largest state. [[User:WhatDoWeDoNow|WhatDoWeDoNow]] ([[User talk:WhatDoWeDoNow|talk]]) 03:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:Alaska isn't usually considered part of the "contiguous US", so Texas is indeed first there. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 03:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Note that if you scale Rhode Island up to the size of the Solar System, the ants would be even larger. [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 06:46, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Trivia: In Germany we like to compare big things to the size of the Saarland, the smallest federal state that is not a city state. But since it is also the state with the least people living in it almost noone really knows how big the Saarland really is (and of the rest noone really cares to find out). This reminds me a lot of this Texas vs. Alaska discussion and I wonder if every country has something like this...? --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.39|172.71.160.39]] 07:44, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:In the UK, at a certain range of scale our general comparison standard is (half/three times /etc) "the size of Wales". e.g. the quantity of rainforest that is doomed, at any particular time. There ''are'' a lot of people there (often, according to the Welsh themselves, too many English incomers) and it is usefully easy to identify (I think of it as the "head of the pig that the gnome is riding", but that might just be me), given its prominant appearance in the outline of Great Britain itself. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3715512.stm Usually!] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.81|172.70.85.81]] 08:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
::In Australia we seem compelled to use Sydney Harbour as the unit of measurement for any large amount of water[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:57, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Notably, the larger the state you scale up the smaller the ants will be, as you would have to scale it by a smaller factor. The comparison would be more accurate if it read: "Texas is so big that if you expanded it to the size of the Solar System, the ants there would "only* be as big as Rhode Island."
[[User:Svízel přítula|Svízel přítula]] ([[User talk:Svízel přítula|talk]]) 10:31, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
:Wait, Jordan Brown already said that. [[User:Svízel přítula|Svízel přítula]] ([[User talk:Svízel přítula|talk]]) 10:32, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2695: Soil

2022-11-07T14:05:29Z

Boatster:

Published unusually early? —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]]) 11:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
:Lately yes, I usually didn't see the monday comics on monday European time. (Maybe if I would have checked during evenings) - But in the past publishings were often during European daytime. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
:And an AM (central Europe; or UK, give or take that hour diffence) is far more rare. Slightly pre/post end-of-day midnight is when I tend to expect anything, early evening being a pleasant surprise. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.58|172.70.91.58]] 13:19, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
:This is the first time I have seen the Monday comic on Monday in Aus. [[User:TomW1605|TomW1605]] ([[User talk:TomW1605|talk]]) 13:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
::(¡ɐᴉlɐɹʇsn∀ ollǝH ...I know, I probably talk to Australians all the time, without knowing it, and have done for years, but it's nice to be told about these things occasionally. ;) ) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.24|172.70.85.24]] 13:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
:::We tend to pop up suprisingly often, i am often suprised to find how many Australians there are in a given small online comunity (happens a lot on discord). [[User:TomW1605|TomW1605]] ([[User talk:TomW1605|talk]]) 13:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
:::: another Australian here. Just missed seeing his on Monday where I am. When it came up early i thought it might be election related but i guess its only Tuesday for me so not special where Randall is [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 14:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

2690: Cool S

2022-10-26T14:37:03Z

Boatster:

{{comic
| number = 2690
| date = October 26, 2022
| title = Cool S
| image = cool_s_2x.png
| imagesize = 325x327px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Although I hear they were caught cheating off of Rosalind, who sat at a desk in front of them.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COOL MIDDLE SCHOOL RESEARCHER - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
References the 'cool s' or 'middle school s' drawing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_S which, when repeated in a chain form, has visual similarity to DNA https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA

Title text is a reference to Rosalind Franklin who made a material contribution to the discovery of DNA but was controversially not included in the subsequent Nobel Prize https://web.archive.org/web/20160927113256/http://www.biomath.nyu.edu/index/course/hw_articles/nature4.pdf

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

:[10 drawings evolving from simple dashes, to a "cool S" symbol, to a representation of DNA.]

:The structure of DNA was originally discovered by a group of especially cool middle school reseachers.

{{comic discussion}}

2690: Cool S

2022-10-26T14:36:16Z

Boatster: Tile text, Rosalind Franklin reference

{{comic
| number = 2690
| date = October 26, 2022
| title = Cool S
| image = cool_s_2x.png
| imagesize = 325x327px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Although I hear they were caught cheating off of Rosalind, who sat at a desk in front of them.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COOL MIDDLE SCHOOL RESEARCHER - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
References the 'cool s' or 'middle school s' drawing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_S which, when repeated in a chain form, has visual similarity to DNA https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA

Title text is a reference to Rosalind Franklin who made a material contribution to the discovery of DNA but was controversially no included in he subsequent Nobel Prize https://web.archive.org/web/20160927113256/http://www.biomath.nyu.edu/index/course/hw_articles/nature4.pdf

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

:[10 drawings evolving from simple dashes, to a "cool S" symbol, to a representation of DNA.]

:The structure of DNA was originally discovered by a group of especially cool middle school reseachers.

{{comic discussion}}

Talk:2690: Cool S

2022-10-26T14:30:04Z

Boatster:

Wow. Never seen a blank one before [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 14:23, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Apologies for my mediocre attempt, new to this [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 14:30, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

2690: Cool S

2022-10-26T14:28:11Z

Boatster: Very scratchy first draft

{{comic
| number = 2690
| date = October 26, 2022
| title = Cool S
| image = cool_s_2x.png
| imagesize = 325x327px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Although I hear they were caught cheating off of Rosalind, who sat at a desk in front of them.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a COOL MIDDLE SCHOOL RESEARCHER - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
References the cool s or middle school s drawing https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_S which, when repeated in a chain form, has visual similarity to DNA https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA

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

:[10 drawings evolving from simple dashes, to a "cool S" symbol, to a representation of DNA.]

:The structure of DNA was originally discovered by a group of especially cool middle school reseachers.

{{comic discussion}}

2690: Cool S

2022-10-26T14:26:08Z

Boatster:

Talk:2690: Cool S

2022-10-26T14:23:22Z

Boatster:

Talk:2625: Field Topology

2022-05-29T15:52:44Z

Boatster:

First [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.64|172.70.86.64]] 12:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Why is football on the two-hole field? Where are the holes? I don't think the goal posts in American football introduce any since they're not closed. Maybe it's soccer? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.68.88|172.69.68.88]] 12:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: I think it is because the goal posts extend into infinity and the topological definition of a hole: something you can draw a circle around that you cannot contract to a point. [the user placed a horizontal rule instead of a signature by accident.]

:Well, you might still be able to call them holes. They would be if they were fully rectangles. --[[User:BlackBeret|BlackBeret]] ([[User talk:BlackBeret|talk]]) 12:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: Gridiron football's field contains two areas (the endzones) that can be thought of as not being part of the "normal" field of play, for lack of a better way of saying that pre-coffee. Association football likewise has the areas within the nets. [[User:Noëlle|Noëlle]] ([[User talk:Noëlle|talk]]) 13:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: My immediate thoughts were also that football (soccer) and football (gridiron) are the same, or indeed the other way round. In both cases the closed hole (assuming not a Y-like vertical holder, but H-like as per rugby football) plays no more or less topological part. Threading through the hole from behind has no relevence in either, and in fact defining it as a region that is 'a special enclosed gap with meaning' (which doesn't really matter in the topology sense, just like golf would be a topologically hole-less surface and as a coffee-cup's inside 'dimple' doesn't count, just its handle-hole that makes it equivalent to a doughnut) actually counts for something in association football. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 13:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

:: It's not the space bounded by the goal that is the 'hole' - it's the goal post itself (or in the case of the high jump, it's the bar, not the space under it). The reason soccer doesn't have 'holes' where the goals are is that they're positioned on the edge of the playable area - you can't play around the bars, because as soon as you cross the goal line you're out of play. And it doesn't matter whether it's a Y-shaped or H-shaped goal - topologically, they both form one continuous 'hole'. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 13:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

::: I don't think that's the reason why soccer doesn't have holes. The goalposts in football are also outside the playable area, and so are the poles in volleyball. I think soccer is listed as zero-holes because soccer goals are typically not fixed to the field, and are instead separate objects that can be dragged around and removed from the field. On the other hand, the same is true of volleyball and badminton nets (and those nets contain many holes!) so the comic seems a bit inconsistent.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.175.146|172.70.175.146]] 14:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

:::: Speaking from a "football is soccer" nation (well, mostly, the exceptional subregions would argue that it's rugby) a soccer goal is typically ''not'' draggable around the field, but permanent (or a unit frame that has to be painstakingly hoisted out of the ground if you ''don't'' want them in your football stadium, when you repurpose it for other purposes) and it's only the optional net that gets added to the park's permanent goalposts for the official five-aside competition evening or day of the weekend. Draggable goalposts need a further level of intermediate organisation that goes beyond the typical "shipping container with windows cut in it (with shutters bolted over them) as a cheap changing room/officials' cabin" that might be found near the edge of the field but rarely even has as much as a corner flag left in them, between games".
:::: I presume that US 'football' posts are considered holes because they are an infinitely-tall window (even though the delineating poles only reach so high) that is a meaningful slice (where the goal is, you have to loop around it in mutually different unsimplifiable paths to reach the other side), but then that should make for ''two'' holes per end, if you count getting a field-goal and then returning round the sides (or vice-versa) as another valid surface-path.
:::: ...but, yeah, I can imagine the problem of definition (and cultural famiarity) here is going to produce more problems even than the understanding of topology. One of the less internationally-accepted comics, this. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.177|172.70.85.177]] 18:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
: O_O . Randall is united-statesian, so football means the thing where you tackle each other and hold the ball in your hands. I've never been into football, and I've always seen it with two large goal posts with a horizontal bar between them. The hole is formed under the horizontal bar. When I played football in computer games, you had to get the ball over the horizontal bar. After this, I'll search the web to see if the horizontal bar still exists. Regarding soccer, there aren't two holes because the nets are closed at the back. You cannot pass through the field structure by going through a goal: you bump into the net the ball bounces off of when a goal is made. So, Randall is considering soccer fields topologically equivalent to a plane (ignoring all the holes in the netting). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.229|172.70.114.229]] 14:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
: I looked up the goal thing and found that what I was imagining are called H-frame or H-style goal posts. Not the norm; the have two posts instead of one. I'm a weirdo that I thought they were what was up. But Randall could have been thinking of H-frame goals. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.230.63|172.70.230.63]] 15:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::Many high school and amateur football fields still use H-frame goals. The resulting space can be used as a goal in some other sports. That does raise the question of why they didn't just have one field with lots of holes, and just plug the ones up that aren't needed for the sport being played. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.191|172.70.134.191]] 15:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Tetherball, in many variants, does contain an obstruction -- the pole, which you're not allowed to touch. The Topology Department is getting tired of having to switch out the fields. [[User:Noëlle|Noëlle]] ([[User talk:Noëlle|talk]]) 13:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:But you can surely jump over it, so it's topologically the same as a zero-height pole... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 13:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:Tetherball does not have a *hole*. The pole, rope, and ball are just a stretched out bit of the continuous surface.

Croquet has six hoops and a peg. How does that make for nine holes? Is it including the opponents' two balls as holes? And if so, why aren't opposing players counted as holes in the other sports? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 13:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croquet#Nine-wicket] 'Nine-wicket croquet, sometimes called "backyard croquet", is played mainly in Canada and the United States, and is the game most recreational players in those countries call simply "croquet".' (Wikipedia) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.215|172.70.126.215]] 18:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

American football goals are Y-shaped. Rugby goals are H-shaped. Did... did Randall get those confused? Also, I fail to see how basketball and American football get two, croquet gets a bunch, but soccer gets zero. Aren't soccer goals (in-game at least) basically the same shape as croquet wickets, just waaaay bigger? Granted, I don't know anything about topology and I came to this wiki specifically cuz I'm dumb, so I'd love if someone could splain this all for me ;) --mezimm [[Special:Contributions/172.69.69.170|172.69.69.170]] 13:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
:The soccer goal has a net, so the ball can't go through it. Topologically it's just a wall (Randall seems to be ignoring all the tiny holes in netting, presumaby because they're smaller than the balls so they're insignificant to the sports). [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::I agree with that explanation - the net is the only thing that makes the soccer field not to have holes. It should be included in the comic explanation.
::The hole for the volleyball only makes sense taking in account that the bottom of the net doesn't reach the floor, although this space is not used in the game.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::I agree about soccer; the explanation should be that soccer goals (with net) are topologically part of the plane. The same is true of ice hockey, even though you can travel "around" the net, it is topologically part of the field with no holes. As for (American) football, the topology only makes sense for H-shaped goals, which are more often seen on primary/secondary play fields than in higher level play. [[User:Aramisuvla|Aramisuvla]] ([[User talk:Aramisuvla|talk]]) 16:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
::Agreed. Soccer goals are shaped such that their bottoms connect smoothly to the ground in a single continuous piece. So they are topologically equivalent to the plane. This wouldn't be the case if not for the back part holding the net. That's unlike basketball hoops, which are actual holes. The holes in football must be referring to the H-shaped uprights that were standard until 1967 in professional leagues and are still seen in some high school fields and even a couple college fields. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.128|172.70.131.128]] 03:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::EDIT: I should point out that the net actually has, like, hundreds of holes. But I think the net here is being treated as a continuous sheet. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.215|172.70.126.215]] 03:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:::I mentioned all the little holes in the net in my comment that you're replying to. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

The group link pointing to group (mathematics) doesn't bear any relation with the sentence or the comic. I would remove the link.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
: The joke seems important to me because their no consideration of the word 'field' being a math pun, and it raises the idea in readers. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.74|162.158.79.74]] 15:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:When I first saw the comic title I assumed that part of the joke would be a pun on the word "field" being used for both sports and math. And even though the comic doesn't explicitly make this joke, I'll bet it inspired Randall. It's worth mentioning. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

In rugby (both League and Union) the goalposts are within the field of play: significant game activity takes place behind them. This is not the case with soccer. I have no clue what difference this makes topologically.{{unsigned ip|}}

I've been thinking about this classification system, and can't quite work out the baseline for it. I think we're supposed to assume that the whole 3d manifold is represented in a 2d 'field', or at least any path through the air flattened to an arbitrarily thin surface 'bulge' during topological rationalisation. But there are several possible field-of-play definitions we can be using...
* A single valid 'play' or traversal
** For ball-sports (or indeed other play-objects) this could be where the item can travel. But in this case I think almost 'all' codes of football are Type 1 (first of the topologies) as almost every football code deals with both 'goal' and 'endzone' (where valid) as the same as a hole (dimple) in golf... It goes into it and it might as well come out of it again, there's no continuation of play 'through the defined' space, and so the topological hole (the barrier defined the scoring membrane's edge) never comes into play. Unlike in Gridiron, where a touchdown doesn't even need the 'ball' to touch the ground, rugby (league and/or union, and possibly further derivatives) requires this and a player can fail to score a Try if (s)he passes bodily over the line but is unable to plant the ball (not allowed to throw/drop it) and I'd have to check what happens if the defending player(s) keeping them sufficiently off the ground (assuming that's done in an allowable fashion) returns the intended scorer back over the line via a circuitous route around /back-through the suspended goal-mouth (above the cross-bar, between the verticals)... They keep changing those kinds of technical rules, so I can't be sure of the current technicalities involved. Likewise, a volleyball or shuttlecock that passes under the net-top-edge is out of play, so it is really a Type 1 under this definition. (Might as well be a solid barrier, floor-to-top-height, rather than a thin bar or a partial net.) The basketball case is interesting. Although a dunk ends the play of the ball, I'm not sure if the path of a ball ''up'' through the hoop does not. In that circumstance I could believe it is a Type 3 case, but if that's a game-stopping thing then Type 1. Croquet is indeed a varying number of paths through (I ''think'') an unordered set of holes, or at least nothing to say that they can be taken out of order (or 'un-passed-through'), and you can't necessarily restrict a 'play' to one shot at a time if certain conditions allow you to play on, so dodging in and around all scoring zones defined by the hoops gives you something like.
** For player/competitor/participant movement, similarly passing under the bar is not valid for the High Jump. I don't think there's anything to stop such transitions upon the Parallel Bars, but it is much more a feature of the ''Uneven'' Parallel Bars, whereas from what I've seen of the sport, the even-variety tends to be topologically used much as the pommel-horse. Players of football (American variations certainly, rugby of course, proper football if you don't bother with the nets) are not restricted from passing through the scoring area (either way) on a circuitous path that may be off the field of play but isn't off the field ''of players''. For the Olympic Swimming, I'm not suring porpoising over and under the lane-delineations is a thing, so I would have said that (under this definition), it should be a number of entirely disconnected Type 1 'zones', with no valid movement between them at all. So far as I'm aware, there are no rules for/against croquet ''players'' passing through hoops (intentionally or perhaps because they severely annoyed an opponent) so maybe that stands in this case, too. Ditto for basketball, if hoisted. Although in both cases it may prevent the balls passing through immediately afterwards, without game-stoppage to resolve the issue.
* If it's a game's-worth of play, then the status of the basket in basketball (unlike the pocket in snooker/pool/some-versions-of-billards) might be defined by the topological-hole-that-is-the-physical-hole's-edge, rather than treat it as the old basket-with-bottom from which the precusor to the net-ring almost immediately evolved. And the same could be said about the suspended scoring-hole (whether supported as Y-post or an H-post, the lower limb(s) are merely physical necessities that play little part in the gameplay specifics except as a general hazard to avoid, it is the crossbar and verticals-to-infinity (and the infinity itself) that is the gap through which a circular path cannot be rationalised back to a point). For most of the rest (including the participant-paths, with there being nothing to stop the traversal of a footballer of whatever stripe jumping the cross-bar, but that may only mean something in the topology of some variations, as far as the game is concerned...) it seems meaningless. Even in an Aussie Rules field with four 'posts' per end, and probably more interest in whether jumping onto an opposing player is against the rules or indeed an entirely legitimate and expected tactic.
* The general arena-wide area is a further superset (perhaps with no additional complications, i.e. exactly congruent) of the field-of-play(er) definition. For coin-operated table-top games (foosball/table-football) the path from each goal may (additionally to any on-top topological loop-disconnections) force passage of the ball underneath and out into the new-play insertion spot. So add a couple more (unidirectional) paths, at least. Or six for a coin-operated pool/etc table, and I assume the Skeeball (not something I'm familar with, at least by that name) is defined that way already...
Sorry, I found I needed to say a lot more than I thought I did, so the first point (and sub-points) went on a bit and I cut down what I might have said for the following points. I may come back to re-edit this. I've got a handy little table, in mind, but I'm not sure it'll work much better to summarise everything I've been cogitating about for most of today while away from the keyboard... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.5|172.70.162.5]] 15:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
:The "hole" in the goalpost in American football is relevant for field goals, not touchdowns. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 16:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
::I'm not sure it's relevent for either. The field-goal passes over the crossbar and between (but also maybe above) the raised verticles, but that route is topologically the same as one above the crossbar but wide, which is in turn the same as one rolling along the ground and wide... Or indeed carried across just like most touchdowns (any that isn't run through the middle of the H-post', un-netted but otherwise soccer-like 'goalmouth' lower section).
::Possibly running around the post(s) that support the field-goal defining beams counts as the path around the topological hole because any change to that route that attempts to transform it to a useless loop within the main field of play must either (at some point) pass through the support for the crossbar or else wholly through the region that defines (in one direction, at least) the goal-scoring area. Can anyone get Word Of God in his intentions, here? It looks weird, to me. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.77|172.70.162.77]] 03:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

As has been alluded to, this must be an American university's topology department. A rest-of-the-world university would include four holes for cricket. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.191|172.70.134.191]] 17:48, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, this is my (not yet properly tabularised, or properly wikimedialinked) idea of all the kinds of information I'd suggest go in there. But it's a monstrocity and I don't want to remove the very useful existing information already in the Explanation (that may even be better/more accurate than my interpretation). ...so here it is for review. If anything in it is useful to anybody else as inspiration for future edits then... well, your choice!
*Click to expand:
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed leftAlign" style="width:100%">
Competition
|-
Field diagram
|-
Usage description
|-
Topology
|-

'''Type 1 Field'''
|-
(First image in comic.)
|-
Any path looping around this area can be moved at will and shrunk to just one point that could result from any other path.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with no other notable features.

'''Baseball'''
|-
(Partial!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baseball#/media/File:Baseball_diamond.svg
|-
The playing area for baseball contains many important physical features for scoring and playing purposes, but is essentially one flat area (and continuous airspace) when you disregard the elevation of the pitcher's mound or even the outfield fence and stands (for any ball that carries that far, upon being hit).
|-
Randall explicitly classes this in the Type 1 diagram, and there isn't any obvious reason to argue this point.

Association Football ("'''Soccer''''"/"Football")
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Football_pitch_metric_and_imperial.svg
|-
An unobstruted rectangular playing area with a goal formed of two vertical posts connected between the tops by a crossbar. In official competition (and where otherwise desired) there is a net stretched behind each goalmouth to stop any ball that passes completely through it (with or without hitting any of the posts), although games can be played with no net in place, or in street/schoolyard situations by goals defined only as a goalpost-like markings painted upon a solid wall (hitting the wall within the bounds of the painted line constitutes a goal, give or take arguments about whether it counts if it hit the line).
|-
Stated by Randall as a Type 1 (a single unobstructed zone), which is likely due to the 'pocket' of the net-backed goalmouth being nothing more than a straight extension of the playing area.
However, an un-netted set of goalposts might be considered a Type 3, with each set of goalposts defining an impassible frame (the hole in the topology, ''not'' the same thing as the physical hole formed by the goal-frame) within which the balls can freely pass and return ''not'' through the goalmouth, or vice-versa.

'''Tetherball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tetherball_in_Georgetown,_Seattle,_Washington.jpg
|-
A ball attached to a cord anchored at the tip of a pole that is in turn stuck in the ground.
|-
Although the mechanism used to allow free swivelling of the tether around the pole may be quite complex (including being looped around a helical thread to help register how many excess orbits of the pole the ball has made in either direction), the basic premise can be simplified to a single extrusion from the playing area, which is topologically identical to a playing area with no extrusion at all. Thus Randall properly states this as a Type 1 variant.

'''Type 2 Field'''
|-
(Second image in comic.)
|-
Any path that canot be shrunk to just one point will be pass around the unpassable hole in the topology.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with a single central hole in it.

'''Volleyball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volleyball#/media/File:VolleyballCourt.svg
|-
A volleyball court consists of a flat area disected by a raised net in the centre. Valid shots pass over the net, but it is possible for the ball (or players) to pass between the net and the floor.
|-
Randall lists this under the Type 2 diagram. An argument can be made that the net could effectively reach to the ground, or questions asked about anchoring the net top/bottom to the posts at either side with separate straps (adding left and right 'passages' between the elements of the obstacle that is the net) but he clearly intends the loop around the hole to represent the ability to passing over the net one way and under the net the other (or vice-versa) as a topologically irreducible loop.

'''Badminton'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Badminton_court_3d.svg
(Note that this diagram completely abstracts the under-net area away.)
|-
The net setup is very similar to volleyball, i.e. raised above the ground, with very similar rules regarding valid shots between the areas on each side.
|-
As with Volleyball, Randall feels justified in this being classed as a Class 2, having similar reasons for this as well as possible arguments against.
(Note that another form of {{w|Badminton Horse Trials|Badminton}} is arguably far more topologically complex!)

'''High Jump'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1912_Platt_Adams5.JPG
|-
A bar supported at height between two supports. The idea is to successfully pass over the bar (without knocking it off, the bar being only supported to the supports, not firmly attached to them), although a competitor who decides to abort their attempt mid-run might well choose to pass underneath to default the attempt with the least physical and organisational aftermath.
|-
With an 'above' and 'below' path to potentially loop around (though not in a single jump), Randall chooses to ascribe this as a Type 2. If a competitor displaces the bar, during a failed jump, it can morph the topology into a Type 1 scenario

'''Type 3 Field'''
|-
(Third image in comic.)
|-
Any path that canot be shrunk to just one point will pass around one ot other ''or both'' of the holes in the topology.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with two holes in it, towards each end.

'''Basketball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Basketball_terms.png
|-
Played upon a court, at each end of which is a tall pole (or supporting wall or other structure) from which a 'basket' is projected over the playing area. The earliest baskets were an actual closed-bottom basket, but this required climbing up to retrieve balls successfully landed within them. By removing the bottoms of the baskets and, later, using just a hoop (with or without a bottomless net). Points are scored by sending the ball through the basket-loop ''from above'', to be retrieved for further play as it exits below.
|-
Topologically, the edge of each loop is directly connected to the ground, so it can be smplified as a two-hole Type 3 field (the hole in the field is the impassible rim in the basket-loop). This does not preserve the orientation (or intended unidirectional nature) of the basketball-shot, but this is Topology's fault, not Randall's!

American/Canadian Football ("Gridiron"/"'''Football'''")
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football_field#/media/File:AmFBfield.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Canadian_football_field.png
|-
A unobstructed rectangular playing area and two 'Endzones' at each end. Goalposts are either of an "H" shape or essentially a "Y" (crossbar, upper verticals and a single utilitarian post, usually set back beyond normal playing area with an extension over to hold the crossbar directly over the goal-line. The verticals are tall but are also conceptually projected upwards without limit, for scoring purposes, should a field-goal/etc be kicked high enough to exceed the structures.
|-
Stated by Randall as a Type 3 (a topological hole at each end of the field), which ''may'' represent the bound surrounding the elevated goal-scoring area. Alternately it represents the physical structure of the H-shaped posts which rationalise down to the open-backed ground-touching goalpost footings and the crossbar.

'''Parallel Bars''' or perhaps ''Uneven'' Parallel Bars
|-
PB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AlejandroonParallelBars.jpg
UPB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Paksaltoliukin.jpg
|-
The Parallel Bars are two horizontal bars supported at roughly hand-height, upon which a gymnast will perform various hand-supported feats strength and coordination. The participant will not usually fully use the space beneath either bar (and between the two supports for the bar), but a will needs the opportunity to grip fully around the bar, especially when the other hand is released for a complicated body movement and it would be impractical or a different discipline entirely to used a 'filled' bar-support.

The Uneven Parallel Bars are two similarly supported bars but at two different (and greater) heights, with the performance being generally that of keeping the grip of both hands (or knees/etc) on either one or other of the bars whilst rotating around its axis, when not actively transfering across between the bars themselves.
|-
Effectively two loops (as per basketball hoops but in a different orientation and scale). The Type 3 topology suggested by Randall is more meaningful for the use of Uneven Parallel Bars, but is probably applicable to the 'even' version in its own way.

'''Type 4 Field'''
|-
(Fourth image in comic.)
|-
Any path that canot be shrunk to just one point will pass around at least one (and possibly several) of the nine holes in this topology.
|-
A homogonously flat lozange surface with nine small holes dotted into it.

'''Olympic Swimming'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Swimming_pool_50m_2008.svg
|-
In competitive swimming, a swimming pool is often delineated into lanes (for Olympic purposes, Lane 0 to Lane 9, though usually not all will be used) by floating barriers and other markings. These provide a limited amount of wave-reduction but mostly keep competitors from inadvertently drifting across or into each others' paths.
|-
Randall considers this setup to require nine 'holes' in the competition area, presumably where the floats pass along the surface of the water, to make a Type 4 field of competition. He must then consider it perfectly possible for competitors to pass under ''or over'' these barriers, at will, with complete disregard for the usual competition (and risking disqualification). Otherwise, it might be best considered as (up to) ten ''separate'' Type 1 arenas, with just one swimmer in each.

'''Croquet'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Modern_croquet_equipment.JPG
|-
A game in which a number of metal hoops are placed in the ground such that a given number of players (or teams of players) must each propel their own ball(s), and possibly those of their opponents, through each loop either directly with their own mallet or through contact between balls.
Many variations exist with differing numbers of hoops and variations of rules and winning conditions. Randall appears to favour the "Nine-wicket Croquet" popular to North America.
|-
The topological simplification of nine hoops across a flat surface can be thought of as the Type 4 topology displayed.

Table Football ("'''Foosball'''"/"Table Soccer") - as per title-text
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Foosball_garlando_aerial.jpg
|-
An enclosed playing surface with (typically) eight rotatable and extendable bars supporting representative (soccer) 'footballer' figures, ready to strike a small ball across the surface, as might be desired by the two or more opposing players who are each able to control the movements of half of the 'bars' (each team's-worth having a goalkeeper, defence, midfield and attacking 'layer'). By skill and/or luck, the aim is to propel the ball into the opposing's player's goal.
On coin-operated games, often the playing area is usually sealed off from direct manual interference, and a ball that goes into the goalmouth finds itself in a lower chamber that stores the ball(s) and deposits them via some feed to carry the ball back up and 'thrown in' towards the centre of the table to start the next attempt at goal.
|-
With eight bars across, and potentially two goalmouth sinks, this may not actually add up to a nine-hole Type 4 field of play. But presumably Randall is thinking of a version that does.

'''Skee-Ball'''
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Skee_Ball.JPG
|-
An arcade game in which a ball is propelled by the player to land in (according to skill) one of various holes in a target-ridden surface (to return back to the player for another go).
|-
It would depend upon the exact confuguration of Skee-Ball machine but, again, Randall seems to think this matches the Type 4 topology.

Further (football) examples, unmentioned

Australian Rules Football ('Aussie Rules'
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Footygroundfix.svg
|-
An unobstructed oval field with four simple vertical posts upon the perimiter arcs at each end.
The ball passing between the (taller) central pair of each end's posts (projected upwards indefinitely) is a Goal. Passing between the outer posts and the adjacent central one (or bouncing off these) is a Behind.
|-
Type 1 if the protruding poles are rationalised to zero, without respect to scoring zones. Four ''or perhaps six'' topological holes (two or three per end) if respecting the imaginary projections indefinitely upwards for scoring purposes, depending upon if you care about chirality of the ball path.

Gaelic football ('Gaelic') - fields also used for Hurling
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaelic_football#/media/File:Gaelic_football_pitch_diagram.svg
|-
An unobstructed rectangular field with an H-shaped set of goalposts at each end, the area below the crossbar often being netted, while the upper verticals being nominally considered as projecting upwards without limit.
Valid balls sent over the crossbar and between the verticals are awarded Points; those sent into the netted goalmouth are Goals (equivalent to three Points for scoring purposes).
There is no in-play use of the area behind the line of the goalposts, unlike various other football codes with similar-looking posts.
|- Topologically, probably considered a Type 1. Goal-shots are into a 'pocket' extension (if nets are used), and Point-shots are topologically indistinguishable from passing over any other part of the boundary line.

Rugby League/Union ('Rugby'/'Rugby Football'/'Football')
|-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_union#/media/File:RugbyPitchMetricDetailed.svg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_league_playing_field#/media/File:NRL_Rugby_League_field.svg
|-
An unobstructed rectangular playing area and two 'In Goal' areas continuing on behind the 'Try Line' upon which the H-shaped goalposts sit.
The field of play extends into this area, the lower parts of the vertical posts play no purpose other than to hold the upper elements in the air. A 'Try' (roughly equivalent to a Touchdown) can be scored by placing the ball somewhere over the line or by touching the base of the (often padded) posts.
The cross-bar and the verticals upwards of it (towards and bounded at infinity) count as the hard boundary of a scoring area for "conversions" (taken immediately after a try) and other kicks (penalties and drop-goals).
|-
Might be treated as Type 3 (two holes), unless concerned about whether balls kicked through the goals or taking across the try line weave back one or other side of, or between, the lower vertical posts.
Alternately, is a Type 3 for the lower (not more special for scoring than any adjacent lower area) frames, while the open tops (meaningful for scoring purposes) rationalise as topologically irrelevent.
</div>
(TL;DR; - It's too long, you may not want to read it...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.213|162.158.34.213]] 21:47, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

The extended discussion in the explanation about the issues with "two-holes for football" goes away if the goals are the H-shaped kind rather then the Y-shaped kind. Since the comic specifically states that these fields belong to the Topology Department - and are NOT generalized across all sports fields - then we can use the "two hole" information to deduce that the department's fields have the H-shaped kind...which solves 100% of the confusion and eliminates the long (and excessively intricate) digression about other weird forms of "football" with different topologies. [[User:SteveBaker|SteveBaker]] ([[User talk:SteveBaker|talk]]) 13:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- agree [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 15:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

2625: Field Topology

2022-05-29T15:49:47Z

Boatster: Swimming pool holes are below lane ropes, therefore the number of holes is one less than the number of lanes (generally, sme pools have outer laneropes as well nut let's not go there)

{{comic
| number = 2625
| date = May 27, 2022
| title = Field Topology
| image = field_topology.png
| titletext = The combination croquet set/10-lane pool can also be used for some varieties of foosball and Skee-Ball.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by SOMEBODY HOMEOMORPHIC TO YOUR DOG - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

Field Topology is [https://encyclopediaofmath.org/wiki/Topological_field a subject in mathematics], but in this comic, Randall has taken the term literally. The comic strip depicts a situation where the common practice of multi-use athletic facilities has been organized by the "topology department" and constructed to be shared by all sports whose normal playing fields are {{w|topology|topologically equivalent}}. (Not to be confused with {{w|Field (mathematics)|mathematical fields}}, or the {{w|Fields Medal}} prize -- although successfully {{w|Straightedge and compass construction|constructing}} these fields might lead to medals of one kind or another being granted).

In topology, shapes which can be smoothly deformed into one another without adding or removing holes are considered to be "equivalent". Note that a topological hole is an area of the nominal space (or area, or other manifold) through which nothing restricted to this topology can pass. In describing a real-world archway, for example, this would be where the material of the arch is, not the actual 'hole' passing ''through'' the constructed arch, which is the path that one indeed may (or must!) pass through to get from one region of the layout to another. A loop is a path across the allowable territory of a topology (or a viable circuit to make through the world it describes) that end up where it started. If a loop cannot be tightened (ultimately adjusted to take a shorter path) down to a single point, then it must be wrapped around at least one 'topological hole' (i.e. through a physical one), and you have separately unique paths (or points, i.e. on different disconnected topologies) where you cannot adjust one loop to take the route of another, without severing a looped-path and reconnecting it.

{{w|Baseball}}, and {{w|tetherball}} are played on fields without any holes that the ball or players can completely pass through, so they are ({{w|Group (mathematics)|grouped}}) (physically and mathmatically) into one continuous field without holes. The goals on a {{w|soccer}} field presumably do not create holes because the goalposts and crossbar are connected to the field by the net, so the goals and field are topologically equivalent to a smooth disc. Any path taken into and out of the goal (any number of times) is topologically equivalent to one that does not go into this pocket of space at all.

{{w|Volleyball}} and {{w|badminton}} are played on a court through the center of which passes a net suspended from poles, and the {{w|high jump}} has a bar that contestants jump over. The space bounded by the bottom of the net (or bar), the supporting poles, and the ground can be considered to be a hole, a path over and under the net/bar cannot be simplified to one that does not, so their fields all have one "hole".

A basketball court has two physical pathable holes, the nets. Parallel bars can be thought of as two rectangles and thus as two topographical "holes". Both have opportunities to path through either (or both) structures, and so the material of the structures define a hole in the topological abstract of the playing 'surface'. Since we are told that these sports fields belong to the Topology Department - and are not necessarily generalized to all sports fields - we may safely assume that their "football" field is for "American football" and uses the older H-shaped football goals rather than the more modern Y-shaped ones. An "H" shaped goal creates a topological hole under the crossbar at both ends of the field. A more modern football field with Y-shaped goals would have no holes.

The lane dividers in a swimming pool create bounded holes on the 'playing surface' equivalent to one less than the number of lanes. And each hoop in croquet is a hole with one edge bounded by the playing surface. Similarly, as mentioned in the title text, this configuration is also {{w|homeomorphism|homeomorphic}} to a {{w|foosball}} table (with each rod sustaining the player figures above the table defining a hole) or a {{w|Skee-Ball}} lane (which is even more straightforward, as it is just a plane with several holes in which to throw balls).

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

A row of four signs, each held up by two posts, followed by a row of four roughly lozange shapes, one for each sign. The signs and lozange shapes are shaded as if three-dimensional objects, all being flattish with a small third dimension. The four oblongs are presented at an oblique angle, as if they are in "front" of the signs extending towards the viewer. All but the first oblong have various numbers of holes "through" them.

zero holes: "Baseball. Soccer. Tetherball."

one hole: "Volleyball. Badminton. High jump."

two holes: Basketball. Football. Parallel bars."

nine holes: "Olympic swimming. Croquet."

Image caption: "No one ever wants to use the topology department's athletic fields."

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Sport]]

Talk:2581: Health Stats

2022-02-16T00:02:58Z

Boatster: Link to article on nocebo gadgets

Pretty late comic! [[User:GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e|GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e]] ([[User talk:GcGYSF(asterisk)P(vertical line)e|talk]]) 06:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

It's positive feedback, not negative. Negative feedback is when the response is in the opposite direction of the stimulus (e.g. Cueball becoming more relaxed as blood pressure goes up) and often results in an equilibrium state. A vicious circle (positive feedback) by contrast is when the response ends up increasing the stimulus further, as is the case in this comic.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.233.29|162.158.233.29]] 11:19, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
https://www.albert.io/blog/positive-negative-feedback-loops-biology/#:~:text=Positive%20feedback%20occurs%20to%20increase,back%20to%20a%20stable%20state.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.221|172.70.126.221]] 11:50, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I feel Cueball's pain. My employer has a checklist where we are supposed to take our temperature every day before coming to work. My problem is, I run hot. My "normal" temperature is usually 99.6ish, not 98.6ish. I knew this for years prior to the pandemic - I used to be a frequent blood donor and would get turned away about a third of the time because they won't take anyone above 99.5. Even though I knew all this, the paranoia induced by daily monitoring and a value that would be abnormal for others but totally typical for me got so bad that I don't do it. No one is enforcing it at the door - it is basically the honor system, and it was causing me more anxiety than actually solving anything. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.69|172.70.114.69]] 18:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
:A simple "solution" to this, at least for forehead thermometers, would be to engage in some moderate exercise shortly before having your temperature taken, such that you get some perspiration on your forehead. Then you can discontinue the exercise, and the sweat will evaporate soon afterwards, resulting in a particularly low skin temperature for a short while. [[User:Dansiman|Dansiman]] ([[User talk:Dansiman|talk]]) 21:30, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I see this as mainly a joke on how consumer devices often provide more precision than is actually needed, and users don't understand that the extra precision is usually not significant. The only reason "normal" human temperature is 98.6F, to the 10th of a degree, is because average temperature was first measured in Celsius then this was convered to Fahrenheit. But 37C was originally rounded off from an average, so it wasn't precise enough to warrant using an extra decimal place in the conversion. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
:Also a saultory lesson in the misunderstanding of the relationship (i.e. that there really isnt one, at least reliably) between precision and accuracy. Without proper calibration, even moment-to-moment consistency of measurement can be sullied by it being (consistently) wrong, or wrongly read out. Adding more decimals may seem to give a more persuasive estimate, but doesn't do a thing to stop inaccuracy. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.225|141.101.98.225]] 19:51, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I think we can assume that customer devices have a significant inaccuracy but have build-in time consistency to increase the trust in the device. Thus, I don't think the inconsistency between two measurements can explain the variation. Since the hand is moved around on the comic strip positioning is a more likely cause. --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.38.243|172.70.38.243]] 20:10, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Saw an article a few weeks ago on the nocebo effect of fitness gadgets ... could be related. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-12-15/wrist-size-fitness-gadgets-make-for-great-gifts-but-beware-of-the-nocebo-effect [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 00:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2572: Alien Observers

2022-01-26T14:21:03Z

Boatster:

This is my first explanation, i know it is really bad but i wanted to give it a go[[User:ElijahRock|ElijahRock]] ([[User talk:ElijahRock|talk]]) 20:39, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
:Great you are helping. Often easier to continue and improve existing explanations rather than start as you did from scratch. Even if most of the original version end up getting changed. I make alot of edits but rarely begin the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
::thanks! glad i could be helpful [[User:ElijahRock|ElijahRock]] ([[User talk:ElijahRock|talk]]) 16:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't think it makes sense to track each human individually, I was under the impression that it was a "before and after" picture. - [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.153|172.70.130.153]] 22:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
:I think they ''both'' track humans individually, and that this is a (representative) before-and-after picture. They probably have minions/computers/whatever continuously updating the actual flight-boundaries as people move around (and go into camera/phone/cameraphone stores and come out with something new) but this is a 'management briefing' that extraordinarily reports this otherwise mundane development as an individual matter, with a visual aid to make the report sink in. Just going to show how aliens can be both so alien and yet amazingly human in their bureaucratic minutiae. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.73|172.70.85.73]] 01:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
::What I was trying to say is that they don't actually keep track of which phone any random person has (or alter their flight path respectively), it's just a matter of "this is the furthest human technology can go". - [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.122|172.70.131.122]] 00:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
:::I think they ''do'' track everyone's individual capabilities. (They're that good at observation!) That's why they're so specific about what two individuals have done to upgrade their media capabilities. On the other hand, I think the on-screen image is just a representative diagram, rather than real-time/real-geography with real UFO positions - but it depicts the effective alterations of approach distances that this person's now 'toy' has enforced upon these Little Green Voyeurs. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 00:46, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Feels like this is a partial rebuttal of https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1235:_Settled [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 23:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
:Didn't see your comment, before, but added this link myself in my own way. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.73|172.70.85.73]] 01:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
:: cheers [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 14:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

I think that Randall is also referring to the fact that all footage of "UFOs" show them flying erratically. This being due to the fact that this is the way refraction works. Sorry for the bad English, not sure how to explain it :) EDIT: It could also refer to the fact that a lot of people still believe in UFOs even though this is a well-known phenomenon that is known to be the cause of a lot of these sightings. As I said below though most of these kind of sightings are reported by pilots flying at high altitudes, so now I'm not sure...[[User:The Cat Lady|-- The Cat Lady]] ([[User talk:The Cat Lady|talk]]) 23:18, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
:(Ditto above, didn't see this before starting editing, but...) I put it down to zoom-wobble in what I just inserted. Though didn't say that this is just normal (acceptable) hand-wobble augmented by the zoom needed to frame the distant whateveritis. Yes, rapidly changing refraction through moving air is probably also a thing (usually heat haze during the day, or the subtler stuff that astronomical telescopes have to deal with at night with lasers and adaptive optics and/or electronic post-processing) but I'm happy to leave it at zoom-wobble without going back and adding your suggestion. Do edit it if you feel like it, though, that being how this site works. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.73|172.70.85.73]] 01:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

:: The zoom-wobble is a great explanation! I didn't think of that at all :P However, there's lots of footage that exists from non-zoomed, fixed cameras like security cameras and 8 mm film cameras on tripods, which sort of obviates that explanation. But also, I did a quick search for footage like that and it looks nothing like refraction phenoma (at least the examples I could find) so my explanation isn't quite correct either. I think those kind of sightings are mostly reported by pilots at high altitudes, as those are more likely conditions for this to happen. I'm still leaning more towards my explanation than yours for now though:) I'm going to leave this here for now and wait for more discussion before I change anything [[User:The Cat Lady|-- The Cat Lady]] ([[User talk:The Cat Lady|talk]]) 08:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Zoom is a misnomer for the lens setups modern phones come with. As an example, the Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra does not have any zoom - it has three distinct cameras, each with their own prime lens. You can switch between the cameras, but this is not zooming. [[User:Paul-Simon|Paul-Simon]] ([[User talk:Paul-Simon|talk]]) 13:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I have added that "Human 38XT11" is a reference to THX 1138... anyone who can spot something similar with Human 910-25J-1Q38 or B-C54? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
:1Q38 can be seen as the 1st quarter of 2038, also known as {{w|Epochalypse}}.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.202.177|162.158.202.177]] 11:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1Q84 1Q84] is the title of a novel by Haruki Murakami. The meaning of the title is the year 1984, since 9 in Japanese is ''kyū''. So perhaps 1Q38 is code for 1938? [[User:Entropy|Entropy]] ([[User talk:Entropy|talk]]) 14:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Can't they just be random numbers that Randall decided to use? Why does everything need to be a reference to something? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.206.205|172.70.206.205]] 18:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

:people like to see patterns even if there are none[[User:New editor|New editor]] ([[User talk:New editor|talk]]) 21:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

:If Randall had chosen them randomly, they'd both [[221:_Random_Number|have ended up]] as "4444-4444-4444-4444"... ;) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.125|162.158.159.125]] 20:44, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't get why starting a YouTube-channel should have any impact on flying patterns because it's the filming and not the publishing that is the problem. The videos shown on that particular channel can be years old so the erratic flight behavior should take place as soon as a human has the capability to '''shoot''' a video rather than '''publish''' it. [[User:Kimmerin|Kimmerin]] ([[User talk:Kimmerin|talk]]) 08:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2572: Alien Observers

2022-01-24T23:08:20Z

Boatster:

Talk:2562: Formatting Meeting

2022-01-01T01:59:40Z

Boatster:

I downloaded and ran theusaf's bot from its website to make this page. Not sure how to give page creation permission to [[User:Baffo32RunningTheusafBOT]]. When you run the bot you notice that Theusaf's username is "the usa f". [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.45|172.70.110.45]] 16:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

shouldn't it be ISO, not iso? actually, the whole title text is lowercase-d when I feel like it shouldn't be [[Special:Contributions/172.70.35.70|172.70.35.70]] 16:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)Bumpf
: you're probably right. as a geek, one uses lowercase 'iso' all the time in computer date code where it is usually lowercase. e.g. i type `date --iso=seconds` every day into my linux terminal; it outputs 8601 format. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.167|172.70.114.167]] 19:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Speaking as a European, we'd often read 2/3/22 as "2nd March 2022" (same order as the numbers), not "March 2, 2022", though obviously we'd understand both expressions. Also, the suggestion that the thousands/decimal punctuation is reversed in the EU is wrong, as this does not apply to all countries of the EU. For example, Ireland uses the same as the US (and the same as the UK, though that is no longer part of the EU and might eventually give up decimalisation altogether on account of fractions being more wholesome...) [[User:Rotan|Rotan]] ([[User talk:Rotan|talk]]) 18:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Another comic which references ISO-8601 is: https://xkcd.com/1179/ [[User:Rps|Rps]] ([[User talk:Rps|talk]]) 21:27, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

It's been more than 20 years since in 'casual' date writing I started prefering "D/Mmm/YYYY" format (today is 31/Dec/2021, for me right now, tomorrow is 1/Jan/2022) when I had a totally free hand. A combination of indicating to US colleagues in my multinational company of that time that I wasn't writing trying to write Jan/1/2022 (not that it would matter in that particular case!) and doing my bit to support the upcoming Y2K-compatability issues that other people were gradually getting to know about. Though for coded dates, YYYYMMDD[.hh[mm[ss[...]]]] always worked best for me. It numerically sorts (it will even when YYYY eventually becomes YYYYY!) and can be given arbitrary sub-day specification - at least until float-rounding errors start to creep in. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.43|172.70.90.43]] 22:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Around year 2000 there was short time when people were writing the years properly. Afterwards, the laziness won again and people started using just two digits again ... sigh ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 01:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Is localization spelled localisation in countries that use English? [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 01:59, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Talk:2487: Danger Mnemonic

2021-07-11T02:00:43Z

Boatster:

1) Strangely, I find even the established motherWiki page for the Red Sky motto to be a little short of full explanation. It could do with a diagram to demonstrate how line-of-sight extends one's view beyond the horizon and above surface effects to reveal the nature of the oncoming atmosphere, either imminent (upwind) or historic (downwind, with the implication of an oscillation in the other direction). But, not only that, a sky clear enough to give a good direct red-sky in the Sun's rising/setting direction also will allow Earth-skimming sunlight to red-illuminate the presence of clouds in the opposite direction (with the greater guarantee of 'weather system opposites' east-to-west), enhancing the 'forecast' even further and before/after rising/setting of the Sun as well. Not something to add to the Explanation, but fun to realise. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.152|141.101.98.152]] 08:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

2) Perhaps don't use a [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_sky_at_morning web link] to wikipedia when you can use a much more elegant {{w|Red sky at morning|wikilink}}..? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.152|141.101.98.152]] 08:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

3) The (''probably'' as apocryphal?) rhyme here is "Beer before wine and you'll feel fine; wine before beer and you'll feel queer", so I leave it up to you to work out what this means for how to ultimately mix your Chateau-Whatever and your no-'e' whisky. ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.152|141.101.98.152]] 08:50, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
:So if you combine the two aphorisms, the best order is liquor->beer->wine? I don't drink, so I can't attest to the truth of any of these. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 12:03, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't think the title text is warning against getting drunk, just the particular order of drinks that the old saying warns against. She's already told the kids to "get out of there", you don't want to get sick and stop to vomit. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 12:08, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Do you reckon this is a reference to the current wildfires ... three x dangerous but the colours of red and yellow and a mention of a nature setting ... [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 02:00, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2370: Prediction

2020-10-10T07:14:42Z

Boatster: Vote

Is that a JoJo's reference?!1!! [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.213|172.68.142.213]] 23:18, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
: Dunno who or what JoJo is (unless Jojo Siwa? But how would that be relevant?), but this is at least 70% likely to be a reference to the current election season in the USA and 538's (and others') predictions of Donald Trump's chance of winning the election in 2016 and 2020. In 2016, if I recall correctly, Trump had about a 30% chance to win (and thus Clinton had a 70% chance to win), and when 538's model launched earlier this year, the chances were basically the same (28-71 (with a 1% of an electoral college split because the USA's election system is phenomenally stupid)). Since then, Trump's chances of winning legitimately (538 does not attempt to model the chances and effects of election interference or votes not being counted) have slipped to about a 15% chance of winning which sounds bad, but will still happen in approximately 1 of every 7 tries, or about the number of Mondays in a week. Not great, but not impossible, either....)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.75.194|162.158.75.194]] 23:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

::Now, let's talk about another misconception: lot of people intuitively think that an if event has chance of 1/7, it will almost surely happen at least once in seven tries. In reality, that chance is just 66%. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:17, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
::Yup, this is another politics comic. It's very similar to [[1131: Math]], and also reflects similar frustrations as the more recent [[2357]], although from a different angle (2357 was about lack of respect for polls, while this one's about poor grasp of odds and probability in the context of election models). [[User:Pelosujamo|Pelosujamo]] ([[User talk:Pelosujamo|talk]]) 04:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't know of Randall's got a series of White Hat comics sitting ready (the last one being [[2368]]) but he didn't want it to look like a 'series' so padded with something else. If we've got another such dialogue before the end of next week, it may be a sign he's recently had a particularly bad conversation/message-session with someone and just wanted to vent a bit. And I wouldn't blame him, if that's so. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.82|141.101.107.82]] 00:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
:(PS, pre-post edit, but not for the want of trying: CAPTCHA wanted me to identify tractors. Two obvious tractors, no tractors on ''any'' of the other tiles (definitely) but one of them had a road-roller. Refused to accept the two tractors only, and I'm refusing to support the presumably incorrect Id of the roller, so come back to edit this in, do my own venting, and perhaps I'll get a better CAPTCHA when I retry in a moment... (Thanks to an Edit Conflict after I was finished fighting the Captcha I'm able to come back to tell you that the next one was Stairs, and I aced that one! But gotta suffer at least one more, yet...)) Also [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.82|141.101.107.82]] 00:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Probabilities are hard to understand intuitively when you're actually talking about a one-time event. If you roll a d6 a whole bunch of times, you'll get each face about 1 out of 6 times. But it's not like we can hold the election 100 times, and then we can see if Biden wins around 52 of them to prove Nate Silver right or wrong. Also, elections aren't random processes like rolling dice -- there are human beings making conscious decisions how to vote, and we like to believe that we understand human motivations and can predict what people will do, at least in aggregate (fields like economics and marketing depend on this). Unfortunately, it's tough to make predictions, especially about the future (thank you, Yogi Berra). [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 05:44, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Vote folks. [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 07:14, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2335: Photo Deposit

2020-07-21T01:44:26Z

Boatster:

Depositing cash through a smartphone app was one of the silliest and most useful features in GTA V. Unfortunately, depositing money would not duplicate it. Presumably the characters in the game are very honest and trustworthy, destroying any cash instantly after scanning it in. This honesty is to be expected from thieving killers such as these.

You can also withdraw cash via the app. How that works is beyond me.

--[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 23:38, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

"Other nations ... have started introducing plastic banknotes" Lol. Australia had *finished* introducing plastic bank notes 30 years ago. [https://csiropedia.csiro.au/polymer-banknotes/] [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 01:43, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2335: Photo Deposit

2020-07-21T01:43:53Z

Boatster:

Depositing cash through a smartphone app was one of the silliest and most useful features in GTA V. Unfortunately, depositing money would not duplicate it. Presumably the characters in the game are very honest and trustworthy, destroying any cash instantly after scanning it in. This honesty is to be expected from thieving killers such as these.

You can also withdraw cash via the app. How that works is beyond me.

--[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 23:38, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

"Other nations ... have started introducing plastic banknotes" Lol. Australia had *finished introducing plastic bank notes 30 years ago. [https://csiropedia.csiro.au/polymer-banknotes/] [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 01:43, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2020-06-11T12:30:27Z

Boatster: /* Should we* reference xkcd.com "black lives matter" banner */

<noinclude>{{Community portal}}</noinclude>

== The Community Portal's design ==

{{tl|Community portal}} looks too Wikipedia-ish (because that's where I got it). Someone who can design things should probably fix that. It isn't protected for the time being, though it probably will be in the future (high-visibility template). --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 00:54, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

== Common mistake ==

This affects all pages that ever say "alt text" in reference to the TITLE text on xkcd images. "Alt text" is incorrect; Alt text refers to the text that is shown as an alternative when images are not displayed. Title text is what xkcd uses and is shown as a tool tip-like bubble when images are hovered over.

I would correct this myself but I saw no way to edit the main page. --[[User:Jillysky|Jillysky]] ([[User talk:Jillysky|talk]]) 14:21, 6 August 2012‎ (UTC)

:You actually don't need to edit the main page to fix it, as what's there is just a mirror (transclusion) of the actual content from the comic page, at [[Curiosity]], which is open for editing by anyone. Then again, the "alt-text" in that case is generated by a template, {{tl|comic}}, so that's where we should fix this. The template's code, however, is currently a terrible mess (sorry!), so I went ahead and took care of it. Thanks for catching that! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:Ah? So it's wrong, for instance, on http://m.xkcd.com? because of that I took it for granted that we could call it the alt-text... - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 17:38, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:: Yes. If you look at the page's html source, you'll see:
<nowiki><img
id="comic"
src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/curiosity.png"
title="As of this writing the NASA/JPL websites are still overloaded. Trying CURIOSITY-REAR-CAM_[256px_x_256px].torrent.SwEsUb.DVDRip.XviD-aXXo.jpg instead."
alt="Curiosity"></nowiki>
::(line breaks added for clarity) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 23:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:::That was my error in the template. I knew "image text" that has been commonly used by Jeff was not techically correct, but I didn't actually go back and confirm it was alt text before I included that tag in the template. That's to Waldir (I believe?) for correcting the template. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 14:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

== When the "official" transcript is wrong? ==
I did [[903: Extended Mind]]. Interestingly, the transcript on xkcd.com is missing the bottom line "When Wikipedia has a server outage, my apparent IQ drops by 30 points." I assume we want a complete transcript, rather than whatever xkcd.com says it is...? [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 04:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

:We're focusing on the actual transcript of the comic, not the xkcd.com transcript. The official transcript is usually right, but even Randall makes mistakes sometimes. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 04:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

== Milestone: half the comics explained!! ==

Hi all! I'm pleased to announce that we have just broke the 50% mark for xkcd explanations! The page that balanced the count (568 explained, 568 to go, at the time) was [[877: Beauty]], created 01:31 UTC, 21 November 2012 by [[User:Davidy22]]. Congratulations!! :D --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 03:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

:The caterer's been called! The punch will be arriving soon! Go [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]! [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 06:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

::[[File:freedom.png]] Punch is served! [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 07:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

But the Main page says 407 explanations, 731 to go! What's up with that? --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 21:00, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

== Reverse? ==

Why in the Archive why are all the thing up until "Heatmap" in Reverse? Can someone please answer? [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:Archive? Can you provide a link or screenshot? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

http://xkcd.com/archive/ [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

::Ah, that's because the comic right after that, rtl, has a right-to-left character in it that flips all the proceeding text. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, ok, i see that now. When I 1st saw that RTL I just thought that it was random letters, thankyou for explaining it for me. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

It also depends on what browser you are on because on Google Chrome it was normal. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 09:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Do you think this question was asked by one of the xkcd people? ==

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090301060752AAtYugc [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Matthew Reilly ==

I would just like to tell everyone that I asked Matthew Reilly (the author) if he is ever scared that a velociraptor is going to attack him, and he said NO! He clearly needs to start worrying about them! [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 10:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

== What can we learn section ==
First of all I love your work. I believe deeper understanding of each XKCD can make a world a better place and I thank you sincerely for starting this webpage. I wanted to ask what you think about "What can we learn?" section I've been adding to some of the pages. Thank you - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:This site is actually the work of multiple editors working slowly and steadily to fill in explanations for all the old comics. Some of the xkcd comics are incredibly deep - comic [[956]] is such a poignant comic that digs into the DRM issue on so many levels. Your reflections on many of the comics are very much warranted and you're helping us create talk pages with high-quality opening posts, which is great for future discussion on this wiki. It'd be nice if you could refrain from putting headers in talk pages, technical limitations of the wiki make long explanation pages choke when headings are in the discussion page. Other than that, keep up the good work! '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::I've put in my 2 cents to comic [[956]], and thank you for teaching me how to comment and link to other comics - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::: FYI, you can always make pseudo-headings using a horizontal rule and a bold "header", but honestly I think a simple standard opening sentence would suffice. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

:Oh, and the guy who draws xkcd is called {{w|Randall Munroe}}. So many glowing things to be said about him. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::Yes, I can't thank him enough for simplifying complex issues to funny stories, I think it's exactly what our generation needs - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:I'm in favor of a Mr. Rogers style of 'what lesson can be learned' on the talk page, but make sure your comments don't come across as sanctimonious and holier-than-thou as that can be really off-putting. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 19:06, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:: You are absolutely correct, I have not thought of that, please trust me I did not do it on purpose. Thank you Mr. Lcarsos - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 19:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you David, and I apologize that I've not made it clear that by your work, I do mean your collective work (the wiki is only as good as all the people behind it). I was trying to put the headers to allow others to find the section easier in case they start looking for it, perhaps I could make a suggestion to make it a standalone section so that others would be encouraged to contribute their own understanding of lessons they have noticed from each comic. I know the lessons I've seen, but I would love to learn from others as much as I hope they can learn from me and Mr. XKCD, thank you. - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

== DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD ==

Hello fellow editors. Do you remember the last time we were hit by a surge of automated spam? Neither do I. ConfirmEdit has really done a number on the volume of spam that we're eating - one spam account has been created since we finished configuring confirmEdit, and zero anon edits have been spam. Zero. Can you say happiness? Can you say party? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:Hehe, I'm glad! Thanks for being so relentless on the spam-fighting all this time! Maybe we should make up a new reason to make Jeff remove the /wiki/ in the URL? ;) –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 18:11, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:: Awesome news! Finally the patrolling feature will be usable: [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideanons=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by registered users] / [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideliu=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by anonymous users] :) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

== 1000th comic explanation!! ==

Hi all! It apparently went unnoticed that '''we have recently surpassed the mark of 1000 comic explanations!''' Some calculations based on [[:Category:Comics]] and [[Special:NewPages]] led me to the conclusion that the 1000th explanation was [[681: Gravity Wells]], created by [[User:AlexRNL]] just yesterday! Yay! This calls for a celebration, no? Congrats to [[Special:ContributionScores|everyone]] who made this happen! I'll edit [[Mediawiki:Sitenotice]] with a congratulatory message. Way to go, guys! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:ps - I also took the opportunity to flesh out our [[explain xkcd|about/history page]]. Please take a look and fix/add any details I might have missed. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

== Style guide ==
Is there a style guide for this wiki? --[[User:PeterMortensen|PeterMortensen]] ([[User talk:PeterMortensen|talk]]) 20:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
:Oh, sorry, I did forget to answer here. A guide on this is not easy, many individual comics do need special layouts because they have content never can match to a style guide. But I will give a try [[Help:Style Guide]].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:18, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

== Adblock ==

I've whitelisted the site in adblock, but the ads are still blocked.
Anyone know what' going on here and how I can fix it?--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 04:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
:Huh. I was wondering why our impression counts weren't rising. I thought it was just because this site had high turnover. I've changed the webpage that the word whitelisting links to, try the instructions there instead. Project wonderful is our ad provider, and they've been pretty good to us so far. Also, thanks for helping to support the site! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::Great! I don't really mid ads as long as they aren't intrusive. Works now, Hope everyone else does it as well.--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 05:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::I saw you wrote "the webpage that the word whitelisting links to" so I went to the search box and typed whitelisting. My search didn't yield anything useful: [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=whitelisting&go=Go&title=Special%3ASearch]. I don't know how to create the missing page but there oughta be a link for someone like me who searches for whitelist or whitelisting, to take them to the instructions you refer to. [[User:SaxTeacher|SaxTeacher]] ([[User talk:SaxTeacher|talk]]) 10:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
:::We already have this linked somewhere, but [https://www.projectwonderful.com/adblock.php this] is the link you want. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I normally access this site through the android app "xkcd browser". That app only links to the content part of the site and doesn't show the side bar, so the adds aren't shown either. Might be worth discussing it with the author. [[Special:Contributions/109.158.126.139|109.158.126.139]] 08:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

:We support those avenues completely, you don't need to feel bad if you use an app to browse this site. We're only really concerned when we put up ads and our impressions are less than half our page hits, because that essentially means more than half our readers aren't contributing to server costs. That's really hard to deal with. We have enough daily page hits to qualify as web publishers at very big ad agencies, but we've had to settle for relatively low rates at the smaller Project Wonderful because 60% of our users were using adblock, so the agencies rejected us because our valuable "paying" audience was too low for them to consider us. That's been the difference between us using dedicated servers to host the site and hiring a contractor to set it up, and the (admittedly somewhat decent) shared hosting plan that we have to settle for now. We can only afford the shared hosting, because the small-scale advertisers at Project Wonderful don't even pay for full days of advertising; most of the time, we make less per day than the posted $3.90 price. That said, we're grateful that Project Wonderful would take us as a publisher when no one else would, but it really feels like the difference between being accepted to community college and being accepted to an ivy league school. For a similar reason, the Google ads route was not sufficient to satisfy our needs; not a large enough proportion of our users were looking at ads, so we either needed to spam them and degrade the site, or we needed to make them refresh, which makes pages slow and causes needlessly high traffic for a lot of users. We didn't want our ads to make the site worse, because that would drive away users and defeat the purpose of us being a public resource for xkcd readers. We actually decided to go the agency route pretty early, because adsense takes a massive cut of revenues and gives us little control over what ads or advertisers actually showed, which was not okay with us. Whoah, I wrote a lot. I hope it was coherent. Maybe someday I'll collect my thoughts and write a proper summary on how and why we advertise. Also, if you have any questions about anything ad-related, you can always ask us at [[explain xkcd talk:Advertise Here]]. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

== Feynman? ==

Feynman (both in [[182: Nash|living]] and [[397: Unscientific|zombie]] form) probably deserves an entry in the [[Template:Navbox characters|character navbox]] template doesn't he? [[Special:Contributions/128.250.152.198|128.250.152.198]] 02:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:That's two comics out of 1200+. Three if you count the song. Not quite enough yet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:: If that's the criterion, then we need to get rid of [[Brown Hat]]. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
:::Potentially, we could create a very minor character category with these two, and other characters with less than 10 appearances. [[User:tplaza64]]

== Job Interview (Atomic Soup) ==

The soup is clearly being poured out of an atomic socket. This "atomic soup" is probably not a reference to the alcoholic brew favoured by Scottish tramps, but more likely to the virtual nature of the company. {{unsigned|Sulis}}
:Hey, go here [[Talk:1293: Job Interview‎]] for discussions. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

== Is there a similar, transcripted service for The Oatmeal? ==

Hi everyone - this site is a real gem, I've sent it to a friend of mine who can't read XKCD because she's blind. The transcripts on this site are a real boon!

Does anyone know if there is a similar service for The Oatmeal? I've searched and searched, but found nothing so far.

Thanks :)

Jeff

:As far as I know we are kind of unique in the web comics world. I think we get away with it because Randall publishes all his comics as Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. We liberally link back to xkcd, and we don't make a penny (The ads are just to cover server expenses, because wikis and the databases that support them get big when you're covering a body of work like xkcd). I haven't looked into the copyright Matt uses for the Oatmeal, but he seems like a cool enough guy to not kill a community transcripting effort of his comics. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 20:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

== what if 103: Vanishing Water - comics ==

Please explain the 2nd and the 4th comics from http://what-if.xkcd.com/103/

"Just tried to sail my boat over land, because I didn't learn from that kid in the Zephyr." (who's the kid from Zephyr?)

"A third time?" (maybe whales were dropped twice before in other what-ifs?) [[User:Daniel Carrero|Daniel Carrero]] ([[User talk:Daniel Carrero|talk]]) 21:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

:"A third time?" is a reference to a whale falling twice in "Hitchiker's guide to the Galaxy". Been a while, so I don't remember the details of how this fit in, but the second time it happened to the whale, he thought "Not again" or something along those lines. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

::Actually, it was the bowl of petunias that thought to itself "Oh, no, not again." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.73|108.162.216.73]] 00:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Raises the question of if we should explain jokes imbedded in What If comics. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

== Discussion usage ==

Am I being a killjoy in feeling that the discussion section should be mainly limited to discussion on improving the explanation, gathering consensus and that type of thing.
Specifically, the discussion for [[1418: Horse]] is quickly turning into every man and his dog posting a sentence in the style of the comic, which doesn't really add anything to the page other than clutter.

Personally, I'd just delete most of them, but I think I might be turning into a grumpy old bugger... --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
:The discussion is also there for just talking about the comic. Those guys aren't wildly off-topic, there's no need to clamp down on what they get to talk about. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

::Yep, I must just be grumpy and draconian! Lesson learned --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

== 2014 Christmas header ==

Since the header for the site current contains a [http://imgs.xkcd.com/store/store_default.png graphic link to the store] that promises that Randall probably won't ship you a [[:Category:Bobcats|bobcat]], it seems to me that probably ought to be preserved and explained somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.189|173.245.56.189]] 17:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

== XKCD at LanguageLog ==

Arnold Zwicky (of the well-known linguistics blog Language Log) has put together a list of linguistics-related XKCD strips, here: http://arnoldzwicky.org/the-language-of-comics/comics-lists/xkcd-cartoons/ I thought it might be appropriate for a copy of the list (maybe a category) to be created from it. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.79|199.27.133.79]] 03:48, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
:[[:Category:Language]] '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

== Bookmarklet ==

Hello there, I've created a little bookmarklet (https://ginkobox.fr/shaarli/?a77vQw) and I thought it might be useful for someone out there.

When launched, it adds the 'explain' before xkcd.com and the browser loads the explainxkcd page. I've tested it only on Firefox.

(Contact @ https://ginkobox.fr/wiki/doku.php?id=about) {{unsigned ip|‎108.162.229.100}}

== Is there a RSS feed for What If? ==

Is there a RSS feed for What If?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 11:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
:No, because we cover the comics. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

== My User Page ==

Can someone help me with [[user:17jiangz1|my user page]]? I can't seem to remove the large spaaaaaace on top.--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 07:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
: The only solution I've found is to remove the contribution scores (data6=...). Not sure what exactly is triggering this bug. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 21:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I am receiving "Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character ""." for <code><pre>{{#expr: {{formatnum:{{#cscore:17jiangz1|pages}}|R}}/{{formatnum:{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}|R}}*100 round 5 }}</pre></code>--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 05:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
:Bump?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

== What-If ==

In What-If 150, "Tatoonie Rainbow", http://what-if.xkcd.com/150/ the first image title-text says: "Vowing not to reference that video any further anywhere in this article, on principle.". What video is he talking about? [[User:5mi11er|slmiller]] ([[User talk:5mi11er|talk]]) 14:29, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

It hasn't updated for 2 weeks. why?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
:Looks like they're on hold for a few months (Until July 14th). Too bad, I enjoyed them. ([http://what-if.xkcd.com/ Look at the top of the What-If page]) --[[User:Zman9600|Zman9600]] ([[User talk:Zman9600|talk]]) 20:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
:What is so special about the date and time? Seems very specific: ''July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT.'' --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.99|141.101.98.99]] 12:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like it's set for the 40th anniversary of the Apollo-Soyuz mission launch. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.158}}

What If updates will resume on July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT. By that time {{w|New Horizons}} will have it's closest approach to {{w|Pluto}}. See here: http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:34, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

== thanks for having a working website ==

the search function on xkcd.com was taken off, and now the random function seems to be having issues, but it's nice that here both work [[Special:Contributions/188.114.97.114|188.114.97.114]] 19:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
:We do our best. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

== Ada Munroe ==

The latest [[what if?]] number 139 has a question by "Ada Munroe". Is she related to [[Randall]] in any way? --{{User:17jiangz1/signature|06:57, 09 August 2015}}

== Out of curiosity ==

I notice that whenever someone links to tvtropes.org in an explanation, someone changes the link to the matching page on allthetropes.org. I'm curious as to why that is. Is there some kind of terms of use conflict at play here that an editor should be keeping in mind? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.156|199.27.128.156]] 06:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:TVtropes does not restrict links to their site, and if this has been happening there are some time-outs that I need to be handing out. Can you point me to some of the edits where this is happening? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::The specific example I had was, um, [[1468: Worrying]]. On Jan 3rd the links went to tvtropes.org, and on March 18th they were all changed over to allthetropes.orain.org. I just found it curious, I wasn't sure what the reason for it was [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.47|162.158.255.47]] 10:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Reverted. Typically, the reason people change perfectly good links to specific, obscure links in wikis is usually self-advertising. I'll be watching that guy's edits in the future. Thanks for the heads up. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

== Sightless readers offended by the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline. ==

I'll admit, every now and again the comic is over my head. ...because I'm dumb in that particular field. However, blind users who enjoy xkcd must do so through explainxkcd. They are NOT dumb. They are *blind*. Without explainxkcd, they would have no idea what is in the comics panels.

Explainxkcd is a great site. There is no question it provides a service to the internet community.

Please see this thread (last paragraph) on Userfriendly.org. Keep in mind, the end user is sightless and explainxkcd is "viewed" through a screen reader. http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/read.cgi?id=20160207&tid=3930989 (Anonymous)

: The guy on that other site is complaining about that XKCD does not work well in a screen reader -- that is not our problem, but a problem for Randall to solve on his own site. We cannot be the catch all for everything on the internet that Randall broke [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Agreed --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I never even noticed the tagline in question. Humorous to sighted folks, sure. ...but obviously offensive to those who have no choice but to access xkcd through explainxkcd.

I'll leave it to the administrators or the community to figure something out, if anything at all. Maybe no one cares? I didn't come here to make any suggestions, only to point out how offensive those 4 words are to some users of the website. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.88}}

:Alright, put a link here in the site notice. What does everyone else think? I'm open to changing it, it's something people complain about fairly periodically and our identity isn't completely tied to the tagline, I feel. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 09:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

::Well, we definitely shouldn't change anything because that particular guy is upset. It's one thing to be offended, but he's also attacking both this site and Randal Monroe. I don't think that sort of behavior should be rewarded. I actually have a rule online where, if someone acts like a jerk to me, I will be kind, but I won't give them what they want. I think a lot of the problems with people being jerks to others is that they still get what they want, so what reason do they have to stop? If he wants us to change it, he should address us like an adult and ask us himself.

::But you claim this is a common complaint. Then I would say we need more info. My instinct would be that people don't understand that it's a joke. But then my solution would be to do what the site is designed to do and explain the joke, rather than take it down. If there's actually something about it that's offensive to an entire class of people, that's different. I am unaware of a stereotype that blind people are stupid, but I'm open to the idea that I don't know.

::I'm not particularly married to the tag line. I actually didn't even notice it was there. But I'm loathe to take it down over a misunderstanding. I can't think of a similarly humorous replacement that would not be offensive, but I can at least suggest "Because nobody knows everything." --[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 09:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I've gotten these before. There's a [[Talk:Main_Page#Header_message|slowly growing]] section in the main page discussion page and a complaint buried somewhere in my talk page and they're usually quite unhappy. I pegged it up this time round because there's special needs involved, and a good part of our intended appeal is the transcripts for the blind. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I like your reasoning, what if "It's 'cause you're dumb" was follow by "[citation needed]" and make the whole thing a link to a page explaining the header. It would be in character of the page, and xkcd. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.34|108.162.221.34]] 00:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sam
::::Great idea, Sam! That's the funniest suggestion ever [citation needed]. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.4|172.68.141.4]] 19:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

::Is he one of those people who are so self-centered and 'entitled' that just because they have a disability they assume that everyone is constantly trying to offend them, even in the most unlikeliest of cases? Does he actually believe that the tag line was written with the intention of offending blind people? This is ridiculous. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.71|141.101.106.71]] 11:04, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

"Just in case you feel dumb"? "Some comics may be funnier than they appear"?[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

How about simply removing it? At least until we find something that isn't offensive to anyone - which might be very hard to obtain. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Because you're crippled... That's worse I guess. 
But before considering the "you're dumb" tagline, one must think about the name of this wiki. It is called '''Explain''' xkcd, not read xkcd, and explaining is for dumb people, not blind people. 
Maybe one thing we can do is add a "(unless you are just here for the transcript)" subtext, with a link to the transcript section, which has the advantage of both taming offended blind readers (maybe) and provide a direct, "spoilerless" link. --[[User:GuB|GuB]] ([[User talk:GuB|talk]]) 10:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I need explainxkcd for two reasons: being visually impaired, although I can see most of the comics I often miss crucial details that I find only in the transcript; and as a non-American, I lack many cultural references (books, movies, songs, sayings...) that are given in the explanations.
I don't think either of these reasons makes me "dumb". However, I never found the tagline offensive. It was immediately obvious to me that it was meant as humor. Who could seriously think that someone is dumb just because they haven't read the specific book that Randall is parodying in a given comic? Or because they're not familiar with a specific programming language or Unix command? IMHO the tagline *is* funny precisely because very few people can actually "get" all the comics without an explanation. Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke. Adding to the lot those who can't get the comics because they're blind doesn't make the joke more offensive. It's a sad world where political correctness kills all forms of humor.

On the other hand, the tagline is not an essential part of the site and if a significant number want it removed, so be it.
Zetfr 10:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:Well not everybody's mind works the same way, and some people legitimately cannot grasp humor very easily. They may come to read the explanations precisely because they can't recognize what about a given comic is supposed to be humorous, and they likewise may not be able to tell that the tagline is just a joke. Besides, the tagline is equating a lack of knowledge with a lack of intelligence, which also makes it inaccurate and kind of kills the humor for those who stop and think about it.

:I personally agree with the above "Because nobody knows everything." approach. I would suggest something along the lines of "Because you won't always get the joke." --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 11:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:: This sounds like a bunch of dumb people coming together and suggesting that the rest of people should be more like them (joke intended) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: +1 on this. '''Keep'''. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 20:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''removal''' [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 11:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Mostly agree with Zetfr, it is a rather obvious joke, and this is a website about a webcomic which is mostly about fun, it would be different if this was some serious news portal, but it isn't, and in my humble opinion people who can't take a joke shouldn't even be here. There will always be ranters and people who get offended, we should not let them make decisions for us. I sincerely believe vast majority of people, blind or otherwise, understand it. [[User:Jaalenja|Jaalenja]] ([[User talk:Jaalenja|talk]])

:I agree with Zetfr. If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get.
:--[[User:Lou Crazy|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy|talk]]) 12:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
::I also agree with the above, and like the part of Zetfr about because you need a reader to use the page you do not need to be offended by an obvious joke --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

if i had a vote i'd say change the "because you're dumb" from text to a picture with alt text of something slightly less rude. "because you're using a screenreader," perhaps. although that would show up on mouseover. meh. whatever. --13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:and someone isn't "entitled" because they get annoyed about something that doesn't annoy you. as a sighted person i don't even look at the headers on the page. i would imagine that since the text in question is at the top of the page he has to listen to it every single time the page is refreshed. which is annoying enough if it's not insulting. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 13:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:It is bad to have the alt-text saying something differently, but since the current tagline is not offensive to non-blind people then why would it be offensive to a blind person. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' -- Blind people do not have to come to this site, they can just use xkcd.com directly and if that is not working for blind people then that is Randall's problem not ours. The tag line has been there for years while I have noticed it before and used the site and I have never been offended, if a blind person is offended maybe they should stop using the internet. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 15:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: I second that -- the tag line does not appear to offend non-blind people, it should not offend blind people either [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Voting '''KEEP''' -- the tag line is a joke, and who is to say that blind people cannot be dumb [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' as well. I don't see any reason to change it; it's not a jab at disabled people, blind or otherwise. The site is called '''explain'''xkcd, and everything here centers around explaining the comic, not being a transcription service. (If that's not the case, then maybe other things need changing too.) I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.26|108.162.216.26]] 15:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP and satisfy both sides'''. If you examine the HTML, or use [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] (free screen reader), you may notice there is a jump-to-nav div element that lets people with screen readers jump to various parts of the page. The jump-to-nav div is only a few HTML lines below the tagline. I'd recommend:
# Moving the jump-to-nav div to '''before''' the tagline
# Adding a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.
# Test it with [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] in Firefox to simulate a screen reader.
This way, screen-reader users can jump to the transcript and don't have to hear the tagline every time they visit an explainxkcd.com page.
-- [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 15:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Consider "Do you get it now?" [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.11|198.41.235.11]] 16:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''': it's reasonable and no change is warranted

I like the suggestion of '''keeping''' the current tagline, but changing it to an '''image with alttext''' saying something like "because you're using a screenreader". I also vote to move the link to the transcript to above the tagline. [[User:Rileysci|Rileysci]] ([[User talk:Rileysci|talk]]) 17:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: Great idea, but here's an even better one: '''Keep''' the tagline for visual browsers, but '''add code''' such as [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/672156/is-there-a-way-to-write-content-that-screen-readers-will-ignore <code> CSS { speak: none; } and aria-hidden="true"</code>] that prevents it from being spoken by screen readers. -- [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I get the joke and I'm not offended by it, but it seems to me that it really sticks out on this site and it doesn't seem consistent with Randall's sense of humor. Everyone on this site is very inclusive and eager to share all perspectives and points of view. I come here both to see the humor that I have the knowledge to understand and to learn more about the world the way Randall sees it. In short, I come here to be one of the lucky 10,000. In fact, I would suggest that as the tag line, "Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!". Inside joke that can link to the comic (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand) and it is welcoming. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.170|108.162.245.170]] 18:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: +1 on this. '''Change''' [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 03:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. In case it is not kept then it should be changed to something completely different. Te idea of making a title text to an image I really dislike, although I even more dislike adding anything to the existing one to either refer to people coming for the transcript or making excuses for the obvious joke. This has been a part of the page forever, I have seen it almost every time I come here. To begin with I did feel dumb sometimes, but I was never offended by it, just amused. But of course an explain page is for those who did not get the joke. And there are other pages that explains the comic. I do not know if they have a transcript? But I'm happy to know that some people must really enjoy the detailed transcripts that I usually try to provide. I had just not though about the blind perspective. I more use the transcript to make sure every one agrees on what is seen in the images of the comic. Having said all this, I must admit that the best suggestion for a change so far is the one posted above my post (about the lucky 10,000). :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote keep, for exactly the reasons explained by Zeftr above. Changing it to an image with alt text would be OK also. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 20:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change''' it because it is too easily mistaken as an insult instead of a joke. At least change it to ''Because you are stupid''.... Ah, maybe instead ''Because xkcd is far beyond common knowledge'' or ''Because hardly anyone gets everything'' or ''Because it is usually nerdly esoteric even for geeks''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.46|108.162.221.46]] 21:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change'''. I have never been a big fan of the tagline. I don't know everything, but I am certainly not dumb. Also, I echo the reference to (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand). This comic has always been about expanding knowledge, not making you feel guilty for not knowing something.

:'''Change''': I realize the "It's because you're dumb" tagline follows the sarcastic nature of Randall's humor, but there are enough people who don't get or appreciate that sort of humor and are likely to be more offended by it, special needs or no. Here's my suggestion: "For those of us who don't get it." [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 21:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

At what point is "enough" people offended? I've only seen evidence of several (https://xkcd.com/1070/) visually impaired users actually offended by the site, along with a couple people who didn't specify their visual ability. I don't know the traffic on this site, but I would expect it to be on the order of 10^4 or higher. So is this discussion about changing something that a handful of people find offensive? Or is there an actual problem of something inappropriate on the site. If this is all about a couple people finding something offensive, I imagine a few christians might take issue with (https://xkcd.com/709/). Should we start another discussion about accommodating them? Or add a disclaimer that the views expressed by Randall Munroe are his own and do not reflect those of this site? [[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
: So you vote to '''keep''' -- right? [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 04:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change'''-- make it more obviously tongue in cheek. "It's cause we're dumb" or "For those of us who need it" I agree with the point about not complying with people on the internet who can't behave like adults, however I've never found the line particularly funny. Also change the jump-to-nav, as that would just get annoying to hear it every time you open up the site. I am not recommending changing it based on the imagined offenses of others. I just think it could be funnier.[[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 06:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I like changing to "For those of us who need it"

'''Keep''' Trying to satisfy everyone is like trying to understand every comic. It probably won't happen. As an example, using the 'one of 10 000' example provided above can insult a bunch of people that are not from the States simply because the comic (and the reference to the comic for that matter) will make them feel left out. My other reasons for voting keep have all been mentioned already. People get insulted so easily, let's try not to encourage this behavior by rewarding it. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''' because I find it slightly offensive myself. If we change it, we should replace it with something that everybody would interpret as humorous, e.g. "Because we can't all be rocket scientists". [[User:Condor70|Condor70]] ([[User talk:Condor70|talk]]) 08:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Next thing we know, liberal arts majors will complain about xkcd science being offensive. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.229|141.101.91.229]] 10:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change''' or '''remove'''. Regarding the former, while I know it's supposed to be a joke, I never found it humorous myself and, unlike others that wrote before me, I don't think it relates to the humor or sarcasm used by Randall. It being offensive is not part of my motivation for my vote. I agree with some of the suggestions written up to now. Regarding the latter, I don't really think it's existence is necessary. Regardless, changing the div things is a must. [[User:GuiRitter|GuiRitter]] ([[User talk:GuiRitter|talk]]) 16:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change'''. You could keep much of the humour by changing it to something like "because ignorance '''can''' be cured". [[User:Farnz|Farnz]] ([[User talk:Farnz|talk]])

If I may vote (as a happy international user of this site, but not yet a contributor), one more vote for '''Keep''' - at least as "don't change now, because of this specific request, because of perceived offensiveness". For several reasons, which have been mentioned already:

a) I think it's funny. It also fits perfectly with the overall XKCD humor. And the same line of thinking as the book "You are now less dumb" from "YouAreNotSoSmart.com".

b) It's so obviously generic (directed at everyone reading it) I fail to understand how it can be interpreted as insult instead of irony. Even worse: I fail to understand why it should be _especially_ insulting to blind people. Having a transcript for them to use is nice, but it's merely one of the aspects this site provides (and it's not even at the top nor are there pages "transcript only", so blind are no primary audience)

c) If this site decides to actually help blind people more, how about: putting the tagline in the image (so it's not "read every time"), put the transcript at the top / provide pages with only transcripts, so that the original XKCD can be consumed prior to the explanations here (just as non-blind users would see it)

d) this request follows the current Outragism trend, so I do suspect that it's not actually blind people feeling offended, but privileged SJWs thinking about who might possibly feel offended, bringing change to the world where it's not beneficial even for those they claim to support. Comparable to PETA.

While I'm at it - THANK YOU for this site. Most XKCD I mostly understand. But due to being an international reader, some aspects of American Culture I need explainXKCD to grasp, and other aspects it's just nice to see more details, cross-references with other comics, and hidden gems.
[[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]] ([[User talk:Zefiro|talk]]) 18:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
:I'm an "international user", too, and I suppose a lot of users of this site are international users who need to be explained some xkcd jokes that would be obvious to any native English speaker living in the US. I don't have an opinion about changing the tagline or keeping it, but I would like to notice that "Because you are dumb" is the kind of joke that would need an explanation - it would be hard for me to tell if it's a joke or an insult. Therefore, an easier joke could have some advantage.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 22:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change.''' I know it's a joke, but it's not particularly funny, and can easily be mistaken for an insult. [[User:Ekedolphin|Ekedolphin]] ([[User talk:Ekedolphin|talk]]) 20:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Trlkly (and Isaac(https://xkcd.com/1448/)), more information is needed. The purpose of this site is to explain xkcd (obviously, from the name) so people come here primarily to seek knowledge or a better understanding about xkcd. As long as the explanations or the explainers don't act like white hat (https://xkcd.com/1386/), there should be no reason to take the tagline seriously.--[[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote KEEP, but I do support the idea of moving the jump-to to above the tagline. I believe that the tagline is obviously a joke, and that pleaing everyone is nigh impossible. I also strongly oppose the proposal to change it to an image with an alt-text of "because you're using a screen reader." Finally, I do not believe we should change the tagline. We should, if anything, remove it altogether. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.20|173.245.54.20]] 03:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change''' - I like 199.27.130.198's idea, "Just in case you feel dumb." [[User:Mateussf|Mateussf]] ([[User talk:Mateussf|talk]]) 04:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''', preferably to something like "The ''Anti'' Thing Explainer; Simple Stuff in Complicated Words!" Only, you know, more complicated to improve the joke. [[User:KitsunePhoenix|Amaroq (KitsunePhoenix)]] ([[User talk:KitsunePhoenix|talk]]) 05:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

What about: it's cause you need more context. I also don't like the current tagline, because dumbness would be more the inability to understand than a lack of knowledge.

'''Change''' - First thing first, as suggested, move the jump-to-nav div to before the tagline and add a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.

Then also change the tagline: it's not that good, and not that in line with the xkcd humor - it's actually ''directly opposed'' to the spirit of [[1053]]. Some better ones have already been suggested:
*"Some comics may be funnier than they appear"
*"Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!"
*"because sometimes we all need a little help"
''Or'' we could even have a bunch of good ones like that out of which one is selected at random when the page is loaded --[[User:Jules.LT|Jules.LT]] ([[User talk:Jules.LT|talk]]) 09:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I like the joke in the tag line (some of us come here because they are to stupid or to lazy to lookup all the information xkcd is joking about)
but I also find it to direct to the user. I want to add some suggestions to Jules.LT [[User:SirKitKat|sirKitKat]] ([[User talk:SirKitKat|talk]]) 10:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
* "Error loading tagline, click here to retry."
* "Because it is Monday morning."
* "Because you like explaining jokes."

I think people coming here and complaining because "dumb" appears to be aimed at insulting the blind are hilarious, because another meaning for "dumb" is "unable to speak." If people who were "dumb" in this way were complaining because we are using the other meaning of "dumb" it would be awkward, but degree of visual acuity is not open for the same misinterpretation. [[User:Swordsmith|Swordsmith]] ([[User talk:Swordsmith|talk]])

'''KEEP''' for the same reasons as [[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]]. If change is necessary, fix it so the screen reader doesnt say it aloud. (This ensures the change is propagated to those who have no other recourse for sightless XKCD enjoyment, and is not a ploy by SJWs who can't take sarcastic humor (why are they reading XKCD in the first place?) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.40|108.162.221.40]] 14:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

It is super obviously not intended seriously, because xkcd is a technical comic that nobody will understand entirely on the first pass. If it's true, then everybody is dumb. Boo hoo.

The guy in question is under the mistaken impression that Randall runs this site and maliciously hides his transcripts under the tagline. He's also very angry about a lot of things. Sighted people have to look at the tagline every time it loads too, it's at the top of the page.

I vote '''Keep''' because I hate negotiating with terrorists. If it has the effect of filtering out people who enjoy being outraged, then it's doing a service. Image search "stephen fry offensive".

I'd be fine with moving the jump-to-nav div. I'm absolutely against making it an image with a different tagline, because then we would be depriving blind people of the joke. I'm absolutely against changing it to something less offensive. I would settle for removing it entirely, or changing it to something more offensive, such as "It's 'cause you're dumb, and get offended over dumb shit."

Or, you know, make a transcribexkcd.com site. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.203|108.162.217.203]] 16:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' to one of the cool new suggestions I've seen. I've always been sad about this tagline, and while I love XKCD humor, I just don't think the tagline is funny. It makes me hesitate and sometimes decide not to share this site with others who I think would love the humor, but not the tagline. The issue keeps coming up, and this is just one more way that it irritates people and causes hassle. It's obvious to me that we should find a new tagline, or just drop it for the time being. [[User:Nealmcb|Nealmcb]] ([[User talk:Nealmcb|talk]]) 17:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' The word "dumb" used as slang for "unintelligent" or "uneducated" is offensive and many better suggestions have been proposed, which retain the wry humor without the offense. Hiding behind "it's just a joke" is beneath the standards of this site. {{unsigned ip|108.162.245.134}}
:It's not hiding behind "just a joke", it IS the joke. It's tongue-in-cheek. It's so obviously false that you have to intentionally ignore the joke and manufacture offense about something benign. I'll give you that it's not that funny. It's also not that offensive. Why are we talking about something so petty. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 21:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I feel like a blind person being insulted by the implication that being sightless somehow makes them unintelligent is a pretty far leap of logic. Not being able to see has no bearing whatsoever on your actual mental acuity. How many actual complaints have there been? One, a few, lots? I don't know, but if it was a significant number I might change my mind. As it stands, though, I think it's pretty clear in the site description that this site is meant for people who don't understand the comic due to its focus on obscure topics and use of technical jargon, being written by a former NASA robot technician with a bent for Linux. Using disabilities as an insult is something I don't condone, but in this case I think it's a case of certain individuals being overly sensitive. Thinking a word as mild as "dumb" is offensive is a bit much, especially since it's often used in contexts other than "uneducated" or "stupid" - I use it to describe myself all the time when I can't word proper-like. I think of it more as "scatter-brained". --[[User:KingStarscream|KingStarscream]] ([[User talk:KingStarscream|talk]]) 18:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' I feel like the "Because we can't all be rocket scientists" tagline suggested above is great; I always found the tagline to be a bit annoying because I often know all of a comic except a small part, and I come here for that. It's just unnecessarily confrontational and Randall himself has expressed in https://xkcd.com/1386/ and https://xkcd.com/1053/ that he doesn't agree with insulting ignorance. {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.179}}

'''Change AND Keep''' I get the original joke, but I love some of the new ones too. Randomly rotating tag line appear is my vote, BUT let's make the tag line clickable so that we can explain the tag line .... for those of us who don't get the joke! {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.10}}

'''Keep''', but change the jump-to-nav, and maybe make the tagline clickable. I like the tagline. Someone already said this, but this is explainxkcd, not readxkcd. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.63|108.162.216.63]] 19:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep''', because it's been there for so long! I remember coming here years ago and looking for the references I didn't get, and the tagline was already there. It's a legacy thing, the one thing remaining from the old website in the new fancy wiki format. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.226.204|198.41.226.204]] 20:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

For all you people being offended and claiming that the tagline is contrary to the spirit of xkcd, I give you [https://xkcd.com/386/ xkcd.com/386]. This entire argument is offensive to me, can we remove it? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 21:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' The referenced posting is obviously a troll. And xkcd has transcripts so the story of the self proclaimed blind person with diabetes does not make sense. --23:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Rather than "cuz you're dumb" which both asserts a trait and uses what might not be the best word choice, why not something like "Because you might be ignorant"? Dumb, after all, isn't remediable, though ignorance is. (Also, a consideration, "dumb" can mean "mute," so if there's something with screenreading for blindness, that could be read as assuming more than one disability? ("blind and dumb" akin to "deaf and dumb"?) // Possibly do something akin to the warning on the comic's site itself: "Because you might be a liberal arts major." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.61|108.162.221.61]] 00:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' because risk of accidental offence is never a good reason to rewrite comedy. If community wants to change suggest "Explaining Xtremely Klever Comedic Drawings"; if only to troll those who insist that the letters XKCD must stand for something (which it doesn't) [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 00:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

−
The issue seems to boil down to:

−
Is it funny?

−
Is it overly offensive?

−
And therefore:

−
Is it worth it?

−
Throwing in my opinion, however small:
+

It's amusing to me.
The joke is clear, and universal. Offence may be taken equally by anyone reading.
It fits well.
Possibly have a hidden link for those offended. A rotating tag line could include more jokes, but...
By all means move the navigation.

An explain explainxkcd page that is linked to might work, in the spirit of metahumour.

However, it may not be as serious an issue, as the tag line is easy to ignore. Just moving HTML a bit seems like a logical, cheap and easy solution, and then we can test it. Please note that this has no technical knowledge behind it, just a reading of the above.

So, my vote goes to '''keep''', and shuffle HTML or, in order, link, replace with rotating, modify, remove.
Harmless fun. Possibly have a cookie-based option to permanently hide the tag line.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.160|108.162.250.160]] 00:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, I have broken formatting in the last few edits, trying to fix it...[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.160|108.162.250.160]] 00:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: My vote is '''change''', and it's not because of blind people. Let me run you through a very common scenario for new users:
:* You have a person who generally thinks of themselves as quite smart.
:* They read the comics and find most of them extremely funny.
:* They come across a comic they just can't understand.
:* They stare at it for minutes, wondering why they just can't get the joke.
:* Pride already bruised, they eventually give up and turn to Google.
:* "Explain xkcd! That's exactly what I'm looking for!"
:* Click the link.
:* "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb"
:* Gee, what a lovely welcome. Not.

: Insulting your users the first time you meet them is '''''terrible''''' practice. You're pointing at them and laughing that they didn't understand the joke. You're kicking somebody when they're already down. OK, that is exaggeration, but when you look at the line as a new user, it's not friendly and welcoming; it doesn't encourage you to return. It's just bad UX.

: Now, we could overlook the directed insult if it was indeed funny, but it really isn't. There's nothing witty about it, nothing punny about it, no double-entendres or sly references. It's just an insult.

: Legacy is no reason to keep something that doesn't work. Just because something wasn't picked up as bad practice 5 years ago doesn't mean that it isn't bad practice. Can you imagine if Microsoft kept Clippy around for "legacy reasons"?

: It would be one thing if it were kept because there were no other options, but ''so many'' fantastic alternatives have been suggested:
:* '''It's 'cause we're dumb''' -- Changes it from an insult directed at one person to a statement with an inclusive sense of community. It saying that, hey, you may not understand all the comics, but neither do we! Let's learn together!
:* '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!''' -- Direct reference to comic which celebrates filling gaps in one's knowledge. Also, as a comic reference, most people won't get it the first time, so make it a link and use it to draw people further in to this wiki!
:* '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear''' -- Actually humorous, containing reference to a very common message we're all familiar with (objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear). Also alludes to the hidden depths to many of the comics, where additional levels of meaning are revealed the more about the subject one knows, which is what this wiki is trying to reveal.
:* '''Error loading tagline, click here to retry.''' -- Looks like the kind of joke you'd actually find in the comments. Clicking the tagline should then do something completely unrelated to reloading the tagline (I dunno, set off some cool JS magic).
:* '''Because it is Monday morning.''' -- Should only be shown on Mondays. Can easily be implemented with parser functions.
:* '''Because sometimes we all need a little help''' -- Gives an understanding tone that's comforting to new users.

: '''TL;DR''': The current tagline is unnecessarily confrontational and projects a bad welcome to new users, and there is nothing particularly clever/funny/important about the current tag line to recommend keeping it, especially with ''so many'' better suggestions on offer. Put it this way, if you were seeing "It's 'cause you're dumb" tag as a suggestion to add to this wiki today, would you choose it over the other options? No? Then make like an old meme and "Let It Go!" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.157|108.162.249.157]] 05:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: I think the above comment is a perfect example of different mindsets. I discovered this wiki in exactly the way you described. But I was not offended in anyway when seeing the tagline, which I did almost immediately. Rather, it got a little chuckle out of me along with a thought along the lines of "Haha, yeah, maybe I am dumb." If you get offended by such a tagline, it suggests to me that you are not all that certain about your own intelligence in the first place. It's a static bit of text. It was not aimed at the person reading it, it was aimed at EVERYONE reading it. EDIT-I realize this post could be seen as offensive or a personal attack, which it's not, please read the "you" not as the poster of the above mentioned comment, but as a generic for any person reading the comment. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: If I remember correctly I've heard it origonally was a pic of Blackhat saying it. Would it be possible to use that on this site. It seems like a decent solution? (I haven't read all of this so I don't know if this has been suggested sorry if it has). Like people have said no one gets all of xkcd, as a nonAmerican there is also a lot of references I don't get. Getting offenend over this does seems pretty pathetic to me. I also use this site for non explanation reasons, that is it often links together comics which is handy, and people often post cool links. But as others have pointed out this site isn't transcriptxkcd or linkxkcd it's explainxkcd, so that's what it should be meant for. Claiming i's offensive o the visually impaired seems pretty silly. All in all, maybe it could do with tweaking to make it more obvious but IMO it's a solid '''keep''' [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 11:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

::I vote '''change''', for the reasons the Halfhat above listed. I also never thought "It's 'cause you're dumb." really fit with this wiki. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.33|141.101.104.33]] 12:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I can't believe we've become such a limp-wristed baby society that we can't even have a joke like "It's 'cause you're dumb" as the tagline. Nobody would reasonably get offended at it. '''Keep.''' [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.33|108.162.221.33]] 13:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. Blind people have to realize they're not the only ones reading this site. This site was created to explain the comic, not purely to provide a transcript of the comic - that's just icing. [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

If there ever really was a single person who took the tag line seriously, then it was just telling them the truth. I vote '''keep'''. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.90|162.158.255.90]] 19:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep, or otherwise, Change'''. My opinion: It is not offensive, and I find it humourous. As I am very interested in the maths and the sciences, and I am very nerdy, I do often understand the jokes in each comic. However, sometimes I don't quite get it. This wiki is very good for that, because it collates many people's views and expertise on the comic. If the vote is overall to change, I am a fan of "Because sometimes we all need a little help." [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.29|173.245.54.29]] 21:18, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change''': I've always been a bit unsettled by it myself. Some deaf readers may be more insulted by it than blind ones. vote for "'''Cause you're #dumb''" (or perhaps another NOT symbol... so only people that don't understand are insulted... and the tagline can be linked to a page that explains why it isn't an insult) [[User:Edo|Edo]] ([[User talk:Edo|talk]]) 23:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP'''. I actually had the feeling the fellow who complained may not understand sarcasm very well. Regardless, the tagline to me is remarkably funny and one of the things I always point out to folks when I first turn them on to XKCD. I worry they will stop following XKCD if they don't understand a post, which is why I am especially glad your site exists. There are many types of humor that will be lost on folks. Myself, for example. I was just railing to my friends about how much I did not like a recent popular vine which showed a guy, kinda probably the father, scaring a very young child strapped in a cat seat, by yelling in horror as the cats convertible roof was closed. Because I did not grow up watching laugh-tracked America's Funniest (sic) Home Video segments, I am not conditioned for casual schadenfreude-driven videos. But I know that's just me. I don't want to limit free-speech merely because it is not for me. Regardless, I really just want you to '''KEEP''' it because to me it is darn funny and just the sort of humor most of the folks who enjoy XKCD appreciate. --[[User:Hugo|Hugo]] ([[User talk:Hugo|talk]]) 23:25, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I will also vote '''keep'''. While it ''might'' be considered offensive, it's really no more "offensive" than XKCD itself. Lest we forget the line at the bottom of every comic page:
:Warning: this comic occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and '''advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)'''.
I don't see how "It's 'cause you're dumb." is any worse. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 23:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

:: I don't think it's offensive, it's more childish, which may be off-putting for first time readers. Hence I vote for '''change'''. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 01:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep''', per the reasoning of, among other people, Zefiro. I like the tagline a lot and don't see much at all, if anything, that's wrong with it. Like Hugo, I feel like it's a bit of ''entirely'' appropriate humor. [[User:APerson|APerson]] ([[User talk:APerson|talk!]]) 00:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. I know it's supposed to be a joke, but it seems out of place and not particularly funny, and it could discourage potential readers. I don't have an idea for a new tagline, but plenty of good ones have been suggested here. [[User:Cheese Lord Eggplant|Cheese Lord Eggplant]] ([[User talk:Cheese Lord Eggplant|talk]]) 03:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' better sums up my vote, and I wish to explain why. I understand the views (as stated above) that it might discourage potential viewers, but I have seen enough well-put arguments that point out why it should not be removed for the arguments on the other side of the debate. However, I do understand that sightless users would get pretty pissed off at being told that they're dumb over and over. Is there perhaps a way to hide the text from programs designed to assisted the disabled? I have a couple of suggestions.

Perhaps it can instead simply be an image, and can even be done in a more stylized text that hints at the humour behind it (no, I have no specific suggestions). This image should not have the words it says in the meta-text within it. I just think it's not worth removing it over, it's kind of funny (or very funny, depending who you ask), replacement suggestions kinda make it bland, and this is a way to avoid having sightless people get told they're dumb over and over. The stylization is just a suggestion, because most alternative taglines I've heard don't sound up to par compared to it. Just anything to point out the sarcastic and purely humorous intentions.

I'd like to enforce my suggestion of having an image with no meta-text that can be read by bringing up that explainxkcd.com can hardly ''lose'' popularity if for the sensitive minority they don't have a tagline (especially if this tagline they are not aware of could be construed as offensive). 'Cause seriously, who's going to go tell a blind person "hey man the tagline for this site is insulting to you want to hear it?" so they'll just not learn of its existence and go on peacefully. So: Image, stylized to clearly express humour, with no program-interpretable meta-text for the blind to hear. I'd like this opinion to be closely considered, and I'd love to hear intelligent replies. ''For all intents and purposes,'' I vote '''Keep''', but to address the issue proactively and adaptively to get the best for both worlds.

I would like to point out one change I would definitely agree with, however. The commenter at 108.162.249.157 not far up suggests "It's 'cause we're dumb", and I would totally back that. That one change could make a world of difference for some people. --[[User:Znayx|Znayx]] ([[User talk:Znayx|talk]]) 09:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

: "It's cause we're dumb" is actually a pretty acceptable change in my opinion. I still vote keep, but wouldn't mind seeing that one. Right now the no tagline version looks lonely. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.40|108.162.221.40]] 14:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

::For the record, I would oppose a change of "It's cause we're dumb" because it's simply not as funny (the joke benefits from it sounding like it's a mock insult) and for the reasons in my main post right below this one that I see no reason to change the tagline which should not offend or be taken personally by someone who has enough sense of humour and intelligence to enjoy xkcd. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 17:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
::This brings up the point that it is indeed a mock insult, and one that everyone gets when they visit the site, those with perfect vision are insulted just as much as the blind, or white, or black, etc... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.34|108.162.221.34]] 00:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sam

I would vote '''keep''' as it is. I am mindful of offensive content, but context is key. This is a website whose primary purpose is explaining a humour-based webcomic that touches on topics that require some intelligence to really enjoy. The tagline is obviously (I hope) tongue-in-cheek. "if you need explanation of this sometimes very technical and specialized and sometimes ambiguous webcomic, you're clearly a moron". I think that most people on this site and elsewhere would consider those who enjoy xkcd (a webcomic that often concerns itself with science, history, technology, etc.) to be relatively intelligent. Just perhaps not in every particular area (as noted right at the top of this discussion). I also think it is clear that this is a wiki an thus the tagline is directed to everyone, even the people who wrote the tagline. We're all here because we're "dumb" in the sense of occasionally needing (or at least enjoying) a deeper explanation for the comics. If someone who is blind is using the site other than for its originally intended purpose, and it helps them, that's awesome. But that doesn't mean the tagline must acknowledge all possible uses of the site. Just the thesis statement of the site, which is "this site is for explaining something you might not understand". If there are blind people who use this site just to read the comic and never to need or enjoy the explanations, then I guess they are smarter than me. I do not personally believe in changing the tagline of the entire community because it doesn't apply to one small group that is using the site for a different purpose than its intentions (again, not knocking them for using the site at all, but seriously, don't walk into McDonalds and go "''I eat here because my doctor says I need more sodium, and I actually hate the food. I'm offended by your "I'm loving it" tagline. Change it!''". Or complain about Disneyland's slogan because you suffer from depression.). I would also have expected anyone who reads xkcd often enough to bother coming to this site just to do so because of their blindness would have a sense of humour and would understand the context in which the tagline was intended, and not take it personally. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 17:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
:I really agree with basically everything TheHypo writes, both here and his above comment on the reason "we're dumb" would not work at all. The idea with keeping the text but only as an image could be used, but I just do not like that we change this because someone made a ''troll complaint'' somewhere, regardless of him being blind or not; that is just one more good reason to keep it. Then again if we really wish to make it better for blind people, then by all means use an image. But keep the text in the image then! If you do enjoy xkcd then you should be able to spot the humor, and with the way Randall himself keep on mocking people on his own page, and in his comics, then why should this not fit well in with this explain page, and why should we not keep on doing what we have been doing so far? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

How about '''Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're ''dumb*''.''' (''*Or don't get the joke because it is either outside your area of expertise or in a format that isn't accessible to you'') - [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.23|141.101.70.23]] 04:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. I've always realized it was a joke, but I think we could do a bit better. How about, "Some comics may be funnier than they appear" as suggested by 199.27.130.198? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.42|173.245.54.42]] 19:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. When I first started reading this wiki and noticed the tagline, I wasn't offended, and I realized it was a joke. But it also gave me an impression that this wiki is run by immature people as this is a childish insult, used as joke. Naturally, I wasn't too keen on following thissite closely and would only visit here when there's a comic that I don't understand at all. Thankfully, after reading through multiple explanations, I no longer think that the writers are immature and as I started reading other explanations, I started coming here even for the comics that I understand. My point is, it took me couple of months to warm towards explainxkcd and most people aren't that persistent/ give the chance to prove. So we are making lot of people to alienate with the site just at the tagline, even before they get to the content. I vote for '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 01:07, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' would be my vote. Today's society puts too much emphasis on protecting people's feelings, to the point that some people have onion-paper-thin skins, too thin to operate effectively when out in public! I feel this complaint falls under this category. Such over sensitivity shouldn't seriously be catered to. Politely listened to and considered, at most. Bending to such things just encourages people to be more sensitive.

The way I see it, you CANNOT enjoy xkcd without being smarter than average, or you'd have to turn to xkcd Explain for every single comic! It cannot be fun to require being walked through every single one. Conversely, I doubt there's very many of these smart people who are smart enough to get every joke (and every nuance) without assistance. Therefore it should be clear that is is a simple tongue-in-cheek joke, you don't really mean it seriously. It should be taken in the tone that it's meant, and it offends me when people don't.

For example, right now I'm at a bar at a Valentine's Day event. As I'm hopelessly single, this day is problematic for me, especially to be in public. I COULD ask that people refrain from love stuff, from flaunting their relationship, etc., that I'm here for other reasons. But as an intelligent adult I realize this would be unreasonable, that many people, especially most here tonight, enjoy the love stuff, enjoy Valentine's Day. It is certainly not their fault I don't, not directly, and they should not be held responsible for my discomfort.

If the final vote is for Change, I like "It's because '''we're''' dumb", or "we're all dumb", be inclusive to reduce how derogatory it sounds. Remember, while sightless people might find this site useful, the primary reason for it IS because we're dumb, i.e. we need help getting the joke. - NiceGuy1[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.215|198.41.235.215]] 04:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Wait, so they think they're smarter than me? I'm offended! ;-)
Okay so I'm not. I almost voted keep because the primary raison d'être of exkcd is not for blind people. It was created specifically for people who need help understanding some of the science, math, and arcana behind the humor.
But you know what? "It's 'cause you're dumb" is not that funny. Some of the suggestions are better. So I vote "'''CHANGE'''". [[User:Saspic45|Saspic45]] ([[User talk:Saspic45|talk]]) 07:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

How about "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause we're dumb."? This has more of a feeling of inclusiveness and camaraderie to me, as in we're all equals more-or-less in the face of RM's brilliance and having a good time enjoying the material together. Came up with it about a year ago, because as it is the tagline struck me as a bit harsh, and have said it that way in my mind ever since.
Edit: Ok, I see this has been suggested, so +1 for that minor change.

'''Change.''' While I didn't notice it at first, I was pretty offput when I did. As someone who has some trouble catching sarcasm all the time, I was excited when I found this site -- it helps me with not only things outside my knowledge, but also lets me check when something ''is'' being sarcastic. And when I finally noticed that tagline, even though I knew it couldn't be directed straight at me, it still sort of felt like it. I've been called dumb nearly throughout my life for not catching sarcasm which others seem to understand immediately, and it doesn't exactly feel nice (or in the spirit of XKCD!) to have that little reminder floating there. It's not even worded to be funny, either, just sorta cold. Sarcastically saying someone is dumb for not getting sarcasm... it's a vicious loop. And when there are so many other options -- many of which have fun puns or a much more friendly feel -- why are people so attached to this one? And from what it seems, a lot of people seem attached to it purely for the purpose of being stubborn against people who don't like it. Plus, why is it such an awful thing to try to make people feel more welcome? Jeez, guys. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.11|108.162.216.11]] 21:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Change it please. I see it all the time, and it feels SO condescending. I often check out the site to get more information about a topic in the scope of a given strip, or to see if there's any subtext outside of the primary joke, and it ALWAYS feels like the site is insulting my ability to understand "simple humor". I understand that it's supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek joke, but I hate it. I think it should either be changed to one of the previous suggestions, or use a rotating set of taglines, or it should just be removed completely, because I utterly dislike the way it currently is. [[Special:Contributions/130.215.123.52|130.215.123.52]] 12:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Definitely '''change''' - I'm surprised what it was doing there in the first place - but I do not like the "we're dumb" version either. My current favorite is "Because we all need a little help", as it is equally directed at both the non-joke-understanding audience and the screenreading audience; but I definitely like "Some comics may be funnier than they appear" and, to a lesser extent, "You're one of today's lucky 10,000" (not sure, actually, whether that one would benefit from a link to the relevant comic). Incidentally, how did the previous guy manage to post four hours in the future? Or is the AM/PM to 24h conversion broken? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.81.88|141.101.81.88]] 08:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Wow, this blew up... I never found the tagline particularly funny, but I honestly can't believe so many people appear to be offended by it. If someone is dumb enough to believe it is specifically aimed at them, not realise that it is humor, and think it is actually worth getting upset about, then the tagline is perfectly justified. Should be changed to "Please click here if you are easily offended", with a link to Disney.com, (or 4chan/b/...) --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. Even smart humans need positive words. Many of the proposed alternative with only positive words suits me fine. [[User:MGitsfullofsheep|MGitsfullofsheep]] ([[User talk:MGitsfullofsheep|talk]]) 13:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''', but modify the Skip to Content tags to bypass it. It's humorous, and there's no such thing as a humorous tag line that won't offend '''someone'''. Can pretty much guarantee that if it's changed to something else, some wag will start a discussion about how that new subtitle offends them... {{unsigned|Danemcg}}

If it's not too late, I vote '''keep''', I regularly view the site for detailed information about comic topics and am always amused to read the tag line. I hope the poor fellow who tallies our votes here will mind that we're likely an unrepresentative group - if you're offended, you're likely to turn out, where a contented user (nearly myself) might just pass by. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.36|108.162.216.36]] 14:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. Anyone who's actually offended by this is way to sensitive...[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.11|108.162.216.11]] 15:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. Never found it funny. We can do better. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 16:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. It offends too many people (myself included, although more at first than now) to be kept. [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 16:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I too vote '''change''' if it's not too late. Not because it's particularly offensive but more because it's not funny or xkcd-ish enough to justify any offence it may or may not cause. I prefer some of the suggestions we've had:
* Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000! (with, of course, a link to the relevant comic)
* '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear.''' This one is my favourite and I feel it captures very well my main reason for using explainxkcd
::[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.149|141.101.106.149]] 21:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep'''. If we legitimately had a large group of blind people who were offended at this tagline, I would be in support of changing it. However, the only supposedly blind person who we know of that takes offense was obviously a belligerent individual. Do we really want to take a guy who says "I've found more intelligent, compassionate, humane, wise, sympathetic, inclusive, and infinitely funnier *dingleberries* than [Randall Munroe].*Rude gesture*" seriously? do we really want some ranting asshole somewhere to dictate what our site does or does not do? seriously? [[User:VfiftyV|VfiftyV]] ([[User talk:VfiftyV|talk]]) 00:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. I've always disliked the tagline, it's a bland and obvious "joke" that's at odds with the friendly, clever tone of both the comics and the rest of this site. Even if it's clear we don't mean it, calling every visitor to this site dumb, with no further context, just isn't setting a good example for the kind of *clever* sarcasm that Randall uses. We can do better. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.32|108.162.221.32]] 01:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' because it's clearly meant as a joke. It makes no sense to change this site over one person's "offense" that the unaffiliated xkcd site isn't blind-friendly enough.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.217|162.158.142.217]] 02:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Anyone with a sense of humor can understand that it's at least humorous. And, the primary purpose of the site ''is'' to... explain the comics, mainly to those who don't understand them. If it does get read out loud to every blind person who visits, then please, by all means, '''Change''' the layout at least to keep that from happening. But it shouldn't be removed due to half-baked complaints. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.168|108.162.245.168]] 02:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I've already voted above, but I would like to call out the sightlessness issue as a red herring. One of the premises of accessible design is that all users get the same content, although perhaps in different ways, so I think we're going in the wrong direction in proposing to change or hide the text for blind users but not for everyone else. If we're to keep it, then let us keep it for all. If we're to change it, then let us change it (to the same thing) for all. If we're to remove it, then let us remove it for all. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 04:22, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I've tallied up the votes twice and counted 36-31 the first time, and 39-32 the second time. Both times were majority keep, though there was still a strong showing for people wanting to change it. I've fixed and restored the black hat figure who was supposed to be speaking the tagline back in the old blog days, and I turned the tagline off for screen readers since the blind may only need us for the transcript, and accessibility for the blind is a big part of why we had a transcript to begin with. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
:I think this is a great compromise. And cool that it is Black Hat's line. I did not know this used to be the case. Is it correct that the font color has also been turned gray so it is not so prominent? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
::Yeah, back when this site was a blog, [https://web.archive.org/web/20130118141641/http://www.explainxkcd.com/ the tagline was Black Hat's line.] [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&action=history looking at the edit history for the tagline], it looks like we've made some vague attempts to restore black hat's face next to the tagline before, but mediawiki doesn't process markup in that area. I did a little bit of CSS magic this time round to fix it properly this time. He's a little fuzzy though, could be better. The tagline's always been gray though. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

: Just before I start, since I'm an IP user and therefore hard to identify (should probably make an account one of these days, but oh well), I just want to quickly mention that I am the same person as [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.157|108.162.249.157]] who posted on the 11 Feb.

: Now that's out of the way, I want to say that I disagree with the outcome decided for this post. While I appreciate the attempt to compromise by having it look a bit more like Black Hat is saying the line, I still think that the substance of the arguments against the current tag line are much stronger than the arguments for keeping it. The arguments for keeping it all basically boil down to "It's a joke and it's been there forever so there is no need to change and anyone who suggests otherwise should just man the f*** up." Nowhere have I seen anyone in the keep-camp argue as to why none of the alternatives are just as good or better than the current line. Pretty much, the only reason ever given to stick to the current tag line is that it's the status quo.

: On the other hand, you have many, many people pointing out that the tagline is offensive and that, even if the reader does understand it to be a joke, it's not a particularly clever one and provides a rather unwelcoming atmosphere. What many of the people in the keep-camp are ignoring is the fact that not everybody has a high level of self-confidence, and that being called dumb, even if the intention is tongue-in-cheek, just comes off as hostile and drives people away. It is also true that all tone of voice suggesting sarcasm is completely lost in text, which is why over at the [http://doctorwho.answers.wikia.com/wiki/Doctor_Who_Answers:Policies#Additional Doctor Who Answers Wiki] we specifically point this out in our policy of civility towards fellow users. This wiki is very different from that one in many ways, but I don't think it would be dumb to look at what others have noticed and learn from their mistakes, especially since that particular wording was added due to a bad misunderstanding leading from lost sarcasm. There has already been somebody here who admits they find understanding sarcasm to be difficult. Should we really be calling them dumb? Furthermore, the quote seems to directly contradict Randall's attitude towards ignorance, summed up so perfectly in [[1053: Ten Thousand]]. We should be welcoming ignorant, or "dumb", people in the hopes of enlightening them with the wisdom of the community here. Singling them out as dumb isn't going to help them.

: Finally, I fear the reason there aren't more change votes are because many of the people who were put off by the tagline simply never came back to this wiki after their first visit. I wouldn't be surprised if reader retention rates increased if you changed the tagline, and if the number of readers who convert to users also increases if the community provided a more friendly first-impression.

: Now, I know that I have raised this all before, along with many of the other people who voted for change, and it still doesn't seem to have made an impact of the people who try to insist that an insult with no wit or humour is "just a joke". I think the best way for us to prove that the tagline needs to change is to conduct a little experiment. Let's look at a list of commonly supported alternatives:

:# '''It's 'cause we're dumb'''
:# '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!'''
:# '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''
:# '''Because sometimes we all need a little help'''

: Explanations for why these taglines are better than the current have already been provided. I challenge anyone reading this post from the keep-camp to explain why "It's 'cause you're dumb" is better than each of those taglines individually, without falling back on arguments of legacy or that the people reading the line are thin-skinned wusses. If reasonable counter-arguments can be made against each of those lines in favour of the current one, then I will back down. Until then, I cannot accept that the battle of ideas has chosen the current tagline. There are just so many better alternatives that are funnier, more in-line with the xkcd spirit, and above all, are welcoming to new readers into the community instead of turning them away the moment they reach the front door. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.157|108.162.250.157]] 11:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

:: Dude, you are not getting how voting and democracy works. The people who are proposing a change, are the equivalent of lobbyist --having lots of lobbyist does not equate to "strong support". None of these lobbyist have been able to agree on a single rewording, so they are not arguing for the same cause. On the the other hand there are thousands of of visitors (voters), of those who actually voted, voted to keep and not go with the suggestions of the lobbyists. Had there on the other-hand been a majority for change, the what would the change be? At best we would have to consolidate the suggestions (candidates), and since there is no term limit on tag-lines, the existing one should be a running candidate as well, and then make an eating contest between all the possible candidates [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 19:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a stab at it. "It's 'cause you're dumb" is better than any of these because it is funnier than any of these. It's funny for the same reason that the titles of numerous books, "XXX for Dummies" are funny. In fact, if it weren't such an obvious rip-off, the tag line could be "xkcd for Dummies", which would be the same joke.

:# '''It's 'cause we're dumb''' is sort of awkward, and why would I want an explanation for something I didn't understand from a bunch of dummies, anyway? I want somebody smart to explain it to the dummy - me - who didn't get the joke.
:# '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!''' is meaningless, and therefore not funny, unless you click on it and then let Randall tell you the joke behind that punch line. I do love the sentiment now that I've seen that comic, and somehow linking to that comic as an explanation of what explainxkcd.com is all about is a great idea, but as a tag line, by itself, it just isn't funny.
:# '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear''' is sort of cute, as it relates to the warning in rear-view mirrors, but it is so actually true in the case of xkcd that it loses some of its funniness by being a serious explanation of why the explainxkcd.com site is valuable.
:# '''Because sometimes we all need a little help''' - is sweet, sympathetic, and inclusive; it's just not very funny.

By contrast, "It's 'cause you're dumb" grabbed me the first time I saw it as being relevant to why explainxkcd.com is a great site, and equally importantly, it made me laugh. Maybe it is to be expected that among the viewers of a site dedicated to explaining jokes there will be a reasonable percentage that don't get this particular joke, either. Maybe the solution is a link on that line to a page that explains the "It's 'cause you're dumb" joke in the way xkcd jokes are explained: "It's funny because you are not really dumb, you just maybe didn't get some very esoteric reference, and you'll enjoy the humor of xkcd more when that reference is explained. But, when jokes need to be explained, it is common for people to feel like they must be stupid, so we make a joke about that feeling. It's not really pointed at you in particular; after all, this is a published web-site - the folks who wrote it probably don't even know you." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.41|108.162.221.41]] 18:44, 16 February 2016‎

'''Change''', kind of. How about this: "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're <strike>dumb</strike> of average intelligence." Maybe even include a (hidden) link to [[1386: People are Stupid]]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.220.17|108.162.220.17]] 23:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

: (I landed in an edit conflict with the person above, so my comments do not take their response into account.)

: Thank you 108. You actually provided a decent rebuttal against the counterproposal, which has been lacking until this time. While I do not agree with all your points, I can actually see your point-of-view. Personally, I think that if we're going to use it as a reference to the "___ for Dummies" books, it needs to be clearer so people don't take it as an insult, but otherwise I understand your points.

: @162: As my friend, one of the greatest admins on one of the biggest non-Wikipedia wikis, says, wikis are not democracies. It is the idea with the best supporting arguments that wins, not the idea with the most votes, as many people support certain ideas for superficial reasons that are not aligned with the overall aim of improving the wiki to attract more readers/editors and improve content. Especially with such a close vote, I would put more emphasis on the quality of the arguments than the pure numbers of supports/opposes.

: Looking at the proper counter-arguments finally provided, I would shift the counter-proposal for a new tagline to tagline 3 suggested above: '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''. From above, I can see the argument against 1 being that people don't want help from dummies, 2 will probably be obscure for new users and may alienate them upon entry, and 4 is just too soppy. 3 however is funny, it's accessible, and it's actually funnier in my opinion because it actually ''does'' describe exactly what we do here. To the new user, it will at first just be a mildly amusing reference (still funnier than the current line in my opinion) but it will take on a new meaning and relevance as people use this wiki more, and the gradual realisation of relevance will make the tagline even more appropriate and amusing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.163|108.162.250.163]] 23:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I’m the lurker who suggested “Some comics are funnier than they appear.” I was bemused to see it get any traction at all, since it’s not that hysterically funny, and perhaps incomprehensible outside the US where convex car mirrors aren’t etched “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”

Wow, am I glad I didn’t create an account here when posting it!

I expected to see more spit-balling in kind, not an outpouring of orneriness from a majority of this obviously intelligent community who are apparently too stubborn to admit that there could possibly be anything wrong with greeting newcomers, “It’s ‘cause you’re dumb.” I took the starting point of the thread to be the obviousness that ANYTHING ELSE would be better than that.

I also expected the admin to deliberate a little harder, showing how he evaluated arguments and suggestions and tried to do the right thing, rather than just counting votes. Notwithstanding the facade of democracy in his benevolent dictatorship, he also doesn’t seem to have taken into account that the effect of NOT changing the tagline—-thus continuing to alienate a lot of users and potential contributors like me-—far, FAR outweighs any potential backlash from the old guard who are married to it. What are they going to do, rage-quit because they didn’t get their way? Because something on their favorite wiki got **gasp!** CHANGED?

Boo hoo, I didn’t get my way on a small thing which doesn’t really matter. At all. I only followed up here because I noticed the banner soliciting user input had changed. However, the ugly tone of this little tempest in a teapot has certainly convinced me that this community isn’t worth joining or contributing to. I reserve the right to continue lurking, but I’m sure as hell turning my AdBlock back on.[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 07:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) said "We're all idiots 99% of the time about 99% of things. It's the 1% that makes up for all the rest." Learning begins by owning your dumb. [[User:Bob Stein - VisiBone|Bob Stein - VisiBone]] ([[User talk:Bob Stein - VisiBone|talk]]) 16:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I felt offended -- but -- so what. It is true. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.169|141.101.91.169]] 21:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC) Martin

* '''Keep''' It is funny. People are not made of glass, not even dumb ones. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.172|108.162.245.172]] 23:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

: ''199 wrote:"I was bemused to see it get any traction at all, since it’s [...] perhaps incomprehensible outside the US where convex car mirrors aren’t etched “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”"''
: You don't need to worry about that. American culture has spread throughout the world so thoroughly that I assume most English speakers will understand it. I myself am an Aussie, who spent most of her childhood living in Europe, and I understood the reference perfectly. And while it might not be "hysterically funny", it is certainly more universally funny than the insult.

: Admins, please heed what 199 said in the rest of his/her message. You have yet another example in a long line of people being turned off from this wiki community because they don't like the attitude of this statement, nor the stubborn adherence to it despite so many people pointing out how wrong it is. You are aware that "It was just a joke" is a common defence bullies make, right? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.157|108.162.250.157]] 00:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

So, @Davidy22, can you add a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div, and move the jump-to-nav div to before the tagline in the HTML? Thank you! [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 08:58, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

At 12,000 words this discussion has beaten the H0/HO discussion on wikipedia... How long until we beat Star Trek Into Darkness??? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:10, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I like the humour in it. 18.February 2016 12:40 (UTC) Fabian

XKCD provides transcripts about a week after a new comic comes out, so saying that blind readers require explainxkcd is a bit of an overstatement (although to be honest the official transcripts are somewhat vague). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.217|141.101.70.217]] 19:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

: Generally most transcripts gets completed within hours of the comics being posted. More complex ones can take longer, and there is sometimes a bit of back and forth as far as layout is concerned, but the content tends to be there pretty quickly. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 09:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

"Explain xkcd: extra knowledge, see discussions." I wish I'd thought of that one a week ago. And Randall says it's not an acronym, eh? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

:Ah crap... that's actually really good. I'd have supported this had it been mentioned earlier, even though I voted to keep the current. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 02:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

== Concerning recent spam ==

In light of the recent and large amount of spam that we've been seeing, I've revoked new users of the right to create and move pages, as well as access to the write api. If your account is three days old and has 10 or more edits under it, you will still be allowed to create and move pages. This will end when the spambots decide to leave. To the person who's doing this, don't ruin this for the other people who use this site. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 19:36, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:In light of the recent burst of spam, creation of talk pages will also be shut off for new users. We will create an empty talk page for new comics in place of this feature. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
: So what will you do in three days when the spambot can create new pages again? [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 07:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
::They have to hit both criteria. The flaw there is that spambots have also demonstrated themselves to be capable of editing pages, but I'm not sure what to do for that aside from look for a better captcha. If it comes to it, I'll write my own. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:05, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
aw man. tfw another troll already beat me to the punch {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.62}}

@Davidy22: Maybe we should use something like [[MW:Extension:TitleBlacklist]] or [[MW:Manual:Combating spam#.24wgSpamRegex]]. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 14:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
:Hum. I'll take a look when I get home. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Sigh, it's getting out of hand again... --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 15:19, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Alright, I'm not sure what's happening here. This is what's in the localsettings file:

$wgGroupPermissions['user']['createtalk'] = false;
$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createtalk'] = false;

:::I don't know why this doesn't work. Probably well overdue for a mediawiki upgrade, but I have midterms and papers coming up. This timing is inconvenient. The title blacklist is for a newer mediawiki version, I'll lock and upgrade this weekend. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::For now, I'll try removing talk page creation rights from all non-admin users. I'll make the talk pages for new explanations. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Alright, I made a test account and I realised I'm very dumb. I forgot to turn off createtalk for all, so people could still make talk pages. I've also added mandatory email verification. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 23:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
::::See tagline ;-) --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 01:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::I do want to find/write a better CAPTCHA though, none of these measures I've taken stop account creation, so the spammers might try just shoving a million accounts at us. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Oooh nevermind forcing email verification turns off anonymous editing. Don't want to go that far, and it didn't stop that one spammer anyways. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

== Will verifying my email turn off the CAPTCHA ==

Pretty much what the section title says. I find the way the captcha works here kinda annoying, since I submit and then get the CAPTCHA. I'd be willing to put in my email address if it would stop the CAPTCHA, but, otherwise, I don't see any point in doing so.

If it does stop the CAPTCHA, I would suggest mentioning this in the preferences as one of the benefits of adding an email, and perhaps point it out on the page when the CAPTCHA appears.

IF not, then will I just have the CAPTCHA forever? Or will it go away once I put in enough edits? Or do I need to do something else?

[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 00:10, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

:The email address is optional, we have it set up so that users less than 3 days old with less than 10 edits will have to fill in a CAPTCHA when they edit. It's set up that way to limit and make the damage that spambots can inflict much easier to fix. You appear to have cleared the 10 edit boundery today, so you should be able to start editing CAPTCHA free now. Giving people a way to bypass the anti spam window by providing an email address is an idea though, I'll see if I can't write a plugin for that after I'm done with finals. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

== Why does Mediawiki look so "old" all of a sudden? ==

Screendhots: [http://i.imgur.com/smN1a45.png][http://i.imgur.com/qdpxhdY.png]

I've tried this in three browsers, and they all look the same. [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 12:56, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
:High traffic, high load, everything is on fire. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:28, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
:: Man ! The fire started by Randall is out of control.. It has been so long, and this is looking very ugly. Did wiki go in "printer-friendly version only" mode ? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.56|162.158.255.56]] 04:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

(H'rm - realized I posted this in the wrong place - further discussion should go [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Stylesheets not working?|here]].) [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 15:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

== Annoying ad ==

From the anti-noscript text shown when an ad is blocked by noscript: "our ads are restricted to unobtrusive images and slow animated GIFs."

Yet the ad blocked features a drawing of a woman in her underwear. I find this very obtrusive.

Also, can you get rid of the captcha needed to even view content on this site using Tor? https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/203306930-Does-CloudFlare-block-Tor- {{unsigned ip|162.158.17.66}}
:Looked through our bids, a guy who was auto approved used the privelidge to put that ad up. I cancelled the ad, if he puts it up again he's getting banned. I'll get on the tor options in cloudflare. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:41, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

== Random Question ==
Since this is the miscellaneous section, I assume I can ask a question based on anything, even if it's not XKCD or wiki-related. Am I correct? Or is there another place to do that? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:Nothing expressly forbids it, but do remember the purpose of the site. If you want to ask a question not related to xkcd or the site, there is likely another, better outlet for your question on the internet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:Ah. Okay. Just making sure. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 17:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

== "What if: Hide the Atmosphere" question ==

At the end, Randall notes one "may not want to" dig out Texas, and the guy in the illustration mentions "specifically requesting" something. As someone not from the USA, I don't know what he's referring to. Could someone please explain it? {{unsigned ip|172.68.51.28}}
:It's a reference to {{w|Don't Mess with Texas}}. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

== Blinking advert ==

There's an ad for something called Goliath Fallen that blinks occasionally. A static picture would be fine but the blinking is distracting --[[User:Figvh|Figvh]] ([[User talk:Figvh|talk]]) 04:22, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

== What is Randall Munroe's wife's name? ==
I am curious--haven't been able to find it. {{unsigned ip|162.158.62.141}}
:We accept privacy. Ask Randall himself. [[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:21, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

== 5 bucks that most of these are spambots. ==

[[File:probablyspammers.png]]

🤔

[[User:DPS2004|DPS2004'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:DPS2004|talk]]) 19:07, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
:I tried "DROP TABLE users;" but then I lost my login... ;)
:The more serious thing is that when the Captcha was broken (after 31 March) that bots were too dumb but with the new reCaptcha V2 this happens again.
:But since those users take no further actions and IPs also can edit here it doesn't seem to be a problem. Nevertheless old users with zero edits may be purged in the future.
:[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

== Header pointing to FAQ implies content that doesn't exist ==

"All explain xkcd editors should check the latest update at the Editor FAQ. We now support LaTeX..."

Strangely, the FAQ doesn't mention LaTex once.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.210.34|172.69.210.34]] 15:06, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
:You're right but the (yet last) question "How do I enter mathematical or chemical formulas?" belongs to this. The Math functionality uses LaTeX syntax and I will mention this. I thought people who know the markup <code><nowiki><math>...</math></nowiki></code> do know that it's based on LaTeX. Nevertheless reading this {{w|Help:Displaying a formula|manual}} is mandatory. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

== Unable to create own user page? ==

Hi, I'm a new user here. When I try to put info on my user page it says I don't have permission to create it. Same applies for my talk page. Please help.[[User:VannaWho|VannaWho]] ([[User talk:VannaWho|talk]]) 07:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:I've clarified the corresponding section in the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ|Editor FAQ]]. You will become a trusted user after a few more edits, but right now I've created your user and talk page. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks. I'm looking forwards to becoming an active member of the community here.[[User:VannaWho|VannaWho]] ([[User talk:VannaWho|talk]]) 13:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

== 2018 ==

This probably only means something to me, but has anyone else noted that we are approaching comic 2018 in 2018? I don't think any other comic has been posted in in the year its number represents. Maybe the sign of the apocalypse? Or like all the other signs of the apocalypse, just a random occurrence. I am interested in seeing if it is memorialized in some way. {{unsigned ip|172.69.33.239}}
:Please do not forget to sign your comments. Nevertheless the apocalypse was already here: [[998: 2012]]. And a comic with the name 2018 was published last December ([[1935: 2018]]). The comic number 2018 will probably happen on July 11 and the number 2019 will be two days later on July 13 (ohhh, it's a Friday...). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 08:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

== Random Kettle ==

Hello, so I had https://xk3d.xkcd.com/880/ open for an extended amount of time. When I came back to it today, I had a random blue kettle that was not on any other of my xkcd pages, and it would change locations every time i refreshed. (I have several screenshots, just not sure how to upload here.)

It went away when the back page button was pressed, but does anybody know what or WHY this kettle was there? {{unsigned|DeathFox4}}
:Please do not forget to sign your comments. You probably want to talk about this matter here: [[Talk:880: Headache]]. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

== Where to ask questions to find a specific comic? ==

Hello,

Someone searching for a specific comic has gotten me to try to find a place to ask the community, but haven't found any?

[https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/9uzvqv/help_me_find_the_one_where/]

kind regards,
Dodo --[[User:Dodo|Dodo]]
:Please sign your posts with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> because then we also see a timestamp of your comment. That's important because we could see that your question from reddit was solved there slightly after your post here. It's from SMBC and not xkcd. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

== Incomplete "Created by a _" Tag Jokes ==

I'm not lobbying for their return or anything, I'm just curious why they were removed. Or rather, why the incomplete tag was rewritten to discourage them. It was a good bit of comedy, and their removal makes it seem like this wiki is trying to be more serious than it really needs to be, IMO. [[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 19:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
:I'm the creator of the BOT which initially presented a new page by honestly mentioning it was NOT created by a human. Years later, people started to make that joke. Sometimes it was really funny, but you can't repeat a joke for over hundreds of times, not funny and stupid attempts to reach that first jokes. And that incomplete tag is meant to be there for mentioning what's wrong or missing, sadly most editors don't use it for this reason. Nonetheless a nice joke is still welcome there, but it should be funny and not just an urge to present a "joke." --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

== xkcd.wtf ==

Hi everyone, I've recently made this small project http://xkcd.wtf/ . It's not yet finished, but somehow Big Goog' picked it up, so I thought I'll go live. It is important to me to announce it here first, since it uses explainxkcd's API and wouldn't be possible without all of you.

Originally, this was meant to be a Uni project, but the course was cancelled and the already purchased domain sat dormant for many months. Just recently, I picked it up and made a first prototype in Perl, then I undertook the painful process of rewriting it as a buzzword-compliant Javascript Single Page Application (so my server doesn't have to proxy everything). It sometimes craps out, because xkcd's API is awful (the 'real' one doesn't have CORS, the c.xkcd.com one is often offline) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 22:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
:Nice, I know you have many skills in programming. What's the purpose of this project?
:Funny findings: The TLD isn't welcome always like here "In June 2012, Ryan Singel of Wired predicted that the .wtf domain would not be applied by anyone." and my own first investigation:
:<code>[root@localhost ~]# whois xkcd.wtf</code>
:<code>No whois server is known for this kind of object.</code>
:I'm running CentOS with no pending updates...
:Besides kidding, it works great and could be a good presentation on pages using a bad layout here. My goal is still to get this site much more mobile compliant, but there are still also issues on parts you don't use. Nonetheless let me know if you need help, hoping you will help here in the future too. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:49, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
::hi, sorry I missed your post! The purpose was to do this as a university project, but the course was cancelled after I bought the domain in anticipation of it. not wanting it to go to waste, I've implemented it in my spare time. the whois error is strange; it works on Fedora (which queries whois.donuts.co (no m)). I may come back to your offer for help (thanks) and definitely won't be leaving explainxkcd.com (my expertise lies with computer topics, and there weren't many comics about that recently. that's why I've quieted down a bit) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 17:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

== xkcd Sorting Options ==
Is there any way to sort xkcd comics by size? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.80|141.101.77.80]] 04:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
:What size? The pictures, the explanation, or what? Explanations are changed every day. So, for what purpose is this idea? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:21, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
::I can see some benefit in being able to sort explanations by size as some of the earlier comics have fairly short explanations that could be expanded, but I'm not sure this is worth the effort of setting up a sort function. I don't know why you would want to sort the images by size other than perhaps for general interest. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 10:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
:::A small sized explanation doesn't say anything about it's quality. IMHO in contrast there are many overwhelming explanations which are far too long, TL;DR... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
::::I agree. Most of the early explanations are just fine. I was just trying to guess why they were suggesting a sort function. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 14:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

== 1204: Detail has the incorrect picture ==

Not sure where to put this but just look at the title. Not sure how one changes it, but a typo was fixed and usually the newest picture is used. [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

== Regarding the alt-right trolls ==
Safe to say everything they leave is deletable, ''including'' the little "jew reverted my edits, help!" complaint they almost always leave on the discussion pages? --[[User:Youforgotthisthing|Youforgotthisthing]] ([[User talk:Youforgotthisthing|talk]]) 00:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

== Is the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline a relic of the past? ==

Yes, I'm going there, because this issue isn't going away.

I read through the entirety of the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Sightless_readers_offended_by_the_.22It.27s_.27cause_you.27re_dumb.22_tagline. Explain XKCD tagline debate from 2016], and I have to admit, I was surprised. I had not considered that there would be so many people in support of this tagline, nor that the debate had been going on this long. I was actually sure that most people were in agreement with me that it's unnecessarily insulting and demeaning. It seems that isn't the case.

The main argument from the Keep side appears to be that "it's just a joke". Here are some examples of that sentiment:

* "Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke."
* "it is a rather obvious joke"
* "If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get."
* "I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline."
* "It's not hiding behind "just a joke", it IS the joke. It's tongue-in-cheek. It's so obviously false that you have to intentionally ignore the joke and manufacture offense about something benign."
* "It's amusing to me. The joke is clear, and universal. Offence may be taken equally by anyone reading. It fits well."
* "Looks like the kind of joke you'd actually find in the comments."
* "I can't believe we've become such a limp-wristed baby society that we can't even have a joke like "It's 'cause you're dumb" as the tagline. Nobody would reasonably get offended at it."
* "If there ever really was a single person who took the tag line seriously, then it was just telling them the truth."
* "the joke benefits from it sounding like it's a mock insult"
* "I doubt there's very many of these smart people who are smart enough to get every joke (and every nuance) without assistance. Therefore it should be clear that is is a simple tongue-in-cheek joke, you don't really mean it seriously. It should be taken in the tone that it's meant, and it offends me when people don't."
* "It's 'cause you're dumb" grabbed me the first time I saw it as being relevant to why explainxkcd.com is a great site, and equally importantly, it made me laugh."

I like to think that I do understand xkcd's humor very well - even the more subtle aspects of it, like Randall's perpetual social paranoia, his sarcasm at common failings of societies and organizations, his absurdism, his childlike wonder at the things we don't know. I love it, it makes me laugh and it makes me happy.

I am not a delicate snowflake, and I believe firmly that we should not allow people to use "being offended" as a weapon of control to take away freedoms or to force their agenda on others. That kind of behavior should rightfully be challenged and resisted.

However, I am not arguing on the basis of offense. I believe that I actually have a solid, reasonable foundation for my case for change that can be accepted by all, if I can argue it effectively enough. Because you see... I never got the joke.

When I came to Explain XKCD for the first time, and saw the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline, my reaction was "Well, that isn't true, and it's a bit childish." It didn't come across as sarcasm to me; it comes across more like the kind of boorish flippancy expected of an anonymous imageboard, where being crude is the local currency. Mentally, I just couldn't fit it with what I saw as an otherwise fine mission of collaboratively explaining a very clever webcomic as a service to readers all over the world. And I didn't like it. It's not the kind of tone that I enjoy in a community.

"I don't like it" is not, of course, an argument, and would be a poor foundation from which to make my case - particularly as I am up against people who insist that the tagline ''is'' xkcd's humor and tone. So instead, I would like to argue this case: '''I think that this is what xkcd's tone ''used to be'', and that it isn't what xkcd's tone is ''now'''''.

The "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline is actually ''ten years old''. It originally appeared in a different context; it was in the header image for the Explain XKCD blog.

[[File:explain xkcd blog header image.png|center]]

The image of Black Hat insulting Cueball is subtly different to what the tagline is now, and so I think some of the nuance - that might soften the joke or make it less antagonistic - has been lost. I have a theory that this is part of the reason why people are so polarized on whether the tagline is insulting or not, because I suspect that some people are remembering this older version. However, that's away from the point.

My point is this: it is no longer 2009 and things have changed.

xkcd, and Randall himself, have changed - Randall has published more than 1500 comics in that time, as well as books dedicated to explaining science and technology in his unique, witty style. He loves knowledge and discovery and celebrates the little things that people find interesting, often standing up to defend such pursuits against those who might otherwise dismiss them. That is xkcd to me. And I submit that Explain XKCD has, in those ten years, outgrown the tagline as well, We are, I think, more encyclopedists than agitators. If most people on this wiki are like me, they find pleasure in carefully unraveling the mystery of an xkcd comic and creating a resource that's as useful as can be. The tagline serves no purpose, in that case, other than to drive away contributors.

We shouldn't be afraid to offend. But I don't think we should offend needlessly. I think we're better than that.

[[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 21:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

:I really like the old banner, and think that the tone fits well with many of the older comics. But I agree with you that most of the newer comics have a less childish tone to them, where it is not as fitting. Also having it as a tagline instead of a banner makes it less obvious to be a character-statement. It is not an important issue to me, but I agree with you. After all explainxkcd is a site, for the lucky [[Ten Thousand]] each day. [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 07:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

== Pageviews? ==

Any idea how many pageviews, on average, this wiki gets? I'm not looking for any detailed breakdown or historical stats, just a rough average for the main page each day. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.57|172.69.23.57]] 02:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

I'd be really curious to know which pages are the most viewed on this website. Which comics are the most unintelligible to people? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.201|173.245.54.201]] 23:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

== xkcd site's fine print ==

I just noticed the fine print on the xkcd site, under the comics list: "xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing."

Is there an explanation for the above? (copied from xkcd's homepage on 8/8/19)

My first thought was "Those are low requirements". Then the "on an Apple IIGS" tripped me up. (I know so little of Apple software use that I can't say that portion is incorrect.) I like the humor of the screen resolution (although I think only computers could read it) and the suggested mode.

M.Striker
(didn't realize that this was an edit and not a message; deleted my included e-mail)

:The text you mentioned is explained at [[footnote]]. I guess you are new to this wiki/project? Feel free to improve any of the sites you find (many can be found by using the search function), or to comment/discuss the pages in the discussion section. If you want to sign your comments on here or in a comment section (with or without an existing account), you can use four "~"-symbols. (Do not wory, it will not show you actual IP adress). [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 06:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

== Randall NYT excerpt from "How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems" ==

FYI, Randall has an article in Tuesday's ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/science/what-makes-a-red-sky-at-night-and-at-morning.html "What Makes a Red Sky at Night (and at Morning)"]. It's an excerpt from "How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems." [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 03:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

== More ads? ==

Is it me, or are there now a ton of extra advertisements on this site? There is one between every paragraph of explanation. At least, when viewed with a mobile browser. It's a huge distraction, so I'm going to be enabling an adblocker.

: I would also like to file a complaint. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 03:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

:: [[user:Davidy22]] If hosting expense is the problem, would it be possible to move to miraheze? [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 11:54, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

== Should we* reference xkcd.com "black lives matter" banner ==

I consume almost all my xkcd directly from explain xkcd. So i only visit xkcd.com rarely.

I had been wondering why Randall was avoiding referencing the black lives matter movement which is clearly topical.

But i note that xkcd.com has a banner featuring Cueball saying "black lives matter".

Should we do the same?

* my apologies if we already do

[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 06:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

:I'm not entirely sure if I understand the question. We list most (all?) the variants of Randall's banners on the [[:xkcd Header text]] page, and as of Tuesday (a bit late), that includes the Black Lives Matter banner. We also acknowledge it in [[2315: Eventual Consistency#Trivia]] as the first comic that ran after the banner went up. There's reason to ask if this wiki should give banners in general more prominent treatment, and question is raised on [[:Talk:xkcd Header text]].
:: this was the question. And I hadn't looked hard enough. Thank you [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 12:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

:But are you asking if ExplainXKCD should adopt its own editorial position and feature a banner? I think it's really hard for wikis to make high-level editorial decisions like that. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 06:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
:: no, not suggesting we do editorial, but glad we recognise what Randall has done. Cheers [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 12:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2020-06-11T06:05:10Z

Boatster: /* Should we* reference xkcd.com black lives matter banner */

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2020-06-11T06:01:36Z

Boatster: /* Should we* reference xkcd.com black lives matter banner */ new section

<noinclude>{{Community portal}}</noinclude>

== The Community Portal's design ==

{{tl|Community portal}} looks too Wikipedia-ish (because that's where I got it). Someone who can design things should probably fix that. It isn't protected for the time being, though it probably will be in the future (high-visibility template). --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 00:54, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

== Common mistake ==

This affects all pages that ever say "alt text" in reference to the TITLE text on xkcd images. "Alt text" is incorrect; Alt text refers to the text that is shown as an alternative when images are not displayed. Title text is what xkcd uses and is shown as a tool tip-like bubble when images are hovered over.

I would correct this myself but I saw no way to edit the main page. --[[User:Jillysky|Jillysky]] ([[User talk:Jillysky|talk]]) 14:21, 6 August 2012‎ (UTC)

:You actually don't need to edit the main page to fix it, as what's there is just a mirror (transclusion) of the actual content from the comic page, at [[Curiosity]], which is open for editing by anyone. Then again, the "alt-text" in that case is generated by a template, {{tl|comic}}, so that's where we should fix this. The template's code, however, is currently a terrible mess (sorry!), so I went ahead and took care of it. Thanks for catching that! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:Ah? So it's wrong, for instance, on http://m.xkcd.com? because of that I took it for granted that we could call it the alt-text... - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 17:38, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:: Yes. If you look at the page's html source, you'll see:
<nowiki><img
id="comic"
src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/curiosity.png"
title="As of this writing the NASA/JPL websites are still overloaded. Trying CURIOSITY-REAR-CAM_[256px_x_256px].torrent.SwEsUb.DVDRip.XviD-aXXo.jpg instead."
alt="Curiosity"></nowiki>
::(line breaks added for clarity) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 23:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:::That was my error in the template. I knew "image text" that has been commonly used by Jeff was not techically correct, but I didn't actually go back and confirm it was alt text before I included that tag in the template. That's to Waldir (I believe?) for correcting the template. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 14:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

== When the "official" transcript is wrong? ==
I did [[903: Extended Mind]]. Interestingly, the transcript on xkcd.com is missing the bottom line "When Wikipedia has a server outage, my apparent IQ drops by 30 points." I assume we want a complete transcript, rather than whatever xkcd.com says it is...? [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 04:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

:We're focusing on the actual transcript of the comic, not the xkcd.com transcript. The official transcript is usually right, but even Randall makes mistakes sometimes. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 04:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

== Milestone: half the comics explained!! ==

Hi all! I'm pleased to announce that we have just broke the 50% mark for xkcd explanations! The page that balanced the count (568 explained, 568 to go, at the time) was [[877: Beauty]], created 01:31 UTC, 21 November 2012 by [[User:Davidy22]]. Congratulations!! :D --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 03:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

:The caterer's been called! The punch will be arriving soon! Go [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]! [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 06:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

::[[File:freedom.png]] Punch is served! [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 07:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

But the Main page says 407 explanations, 731 to go! What's up with that? --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 21:00, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

== Reverse? ==

Why in the Archive why are all the thing up until "Heatmap" in Reverse? Can someone please answer? [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:Archive? Can you provide a link or screenshot? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

http://xkcd.com/archive/ [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

::Ah, that's because the comic right after that, rtl, has a right-to-left character in it that flips all the proceeding text. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, ok, i see that now. When I 1st saw that RTL I just thought that it was random letters, thankyou for explaining it for me. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

It also depends on what browser you are on because on Google Chrome it was normal. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 09:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Do you think this question was asked by one of the xkcd people? ==

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090301060752AAtYugc [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Matthew Reilly ==

I would just like to tell everyone that I asked Matthew Reilly (the author) if he is ever scared that a velociraptor is going to attack him, and he said NO! He clearly needs to start worrying about them! [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 10:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

== What can we learn section ==
First of all I love your work. I believe deeper understanding of each XKCD can make a world a better place and I thank you sincerely for starting this webpage. I wanted to ask what you think about "What can we learn?" section I've been adding to some of the pages. Thank you - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:This site is actually the work of multiple editors working slowly and steadily to fill in explanations for all the old comics. Some of the xkcd comics are incredibly deep - comic [[956]] is such a poignant comic that digs into the DRM issue on so many levels. Your reflections on many of the comics are very much warranted and you're helping us create talk pages with high-quality opening posts, which is great for future discussion on this wiki. It'd be nice if you could refrain from putting headers in talk pages, technical limitations of the wiki make long explanation pages choke when headings are in the discussion page. Other than that, keep up the good work! '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::I've put in my 2 cents to comic [[956]], and thank you for teaching me how to comment and link to other comics - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::: FYI, you can always make pseudo-headings using a horizontal rule and a bold "header", but honestly I think a simple standard opening sentence would suffice. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

:Oh, and the guy who draws xkcd is called {{w|Randall Munroe}}. So many glowing things to be said about him. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::Yes, I can't thank him enough for simplifying complex issues to funny stories, I think it's exactly what our generation needs - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:I'm in favor of a Mr. Rogers style of 'what lesson can be learned' on the talk page, but make sure your comments don't come across as sanctimonious and holier-than-thou as that can be really off-putting. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 19:06, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:: You are absolutely correct, I have not thought of that, please trust me I did not do it on purpose. Thank you Mr. Lcarsos - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 19:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you David, and I apologize that I've not made it clear that by your work, I do mean your collective work (the wiki is only as good as all the people behind it). I was trying to put the headers to allow others to find the section easier in case they start looking for it, perhaps I could make a suggestion to make it a standalone section so that others would be encouraged to contribute their own understanding of lessons they have noticed from each comic. I know the lessons I've seen, but I would love to learn from others as much as I hope they can learn from me and Mr. XKCD, thank you. - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

== DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD ==

Hello fellow editors. Do you remember the last time we were hit by a surge of automated spam? Neither do I. ConfirmEdit has really done a number on the volume of spam that we're eating - one spam account has been created since we finished configuring confirmEdit, and zero anon edits have been spam. Zero. Can you say happiness? Can you say party? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:Hehe, I'm glad! Thanks for being so relentless on the spam-fighting all this time! Maybe we should make up a new reason to make Jeff remove the /wiki/ in the URL? ;) –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 18:11, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:: Awesome news! Finally the patrolling feature will be usable: [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideanons=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by registered users] / [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideliu=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by anonymous users] :) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

== 1000th comic explanation!! ==

Hi all! It apparently went unnoticed that '''we have recently surpassed the mark of 1000 comic explanations!''' Some calculations based on [[:Category:Comics]] and [[Special:NewPages]] led me to the conclusion that the 1000th explanation was [[681: Gravity Wells]], created by [[User:AlexRNL]] just yesterday! Yay! This calls for a celebration, no? Congrats to [[Special:ContributionScores|everyone]] who made this happen! I'll edit [[Mediawiki:Sitenotice]] with a congratulatory message. Way to go, guys! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:ps - I also took the opportunity to flesh out our [[explain xkcd|about/history page]]. Please take a look and fix/add any details I might have missed. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

== Style guide ==
Is there a style guide for this wiki? --[[User:PeterMortensen|PeterMortensen]] ([[User talk:PeterMortensen|talk]]) 20:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
:Oh, sorry, I did forget to answer here. A guide on this is not easy, many individual comics do need special layouts because they have content never can match to a style guide. But I will give a try [[Help:Style Guide]].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:18, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

== Adblock ==

I've whitelisted the site in adblock, but the ads are still blocked.
Anyone know what' going on here and how I can fix it?--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 04:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
:Huh. I was wondering why our impression counts weren't rising. I thought it was just because this site had high turnover. I've changed the webpage that the word whitelisting links to, try the instructions there instead. Project wonderful is our ad provider, and they've been pretty good to us so far. Also, thanks for helping to support the site! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::Great! I don't really mid ads as long as they aren't intrusive. Works now, Hope everyone else does it as well.--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 05:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::I saw you wrote "the webpage that the word whitelisting links to" so I went to the search box and typed whitelisting. My search didn't yield anything useful: [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=whitelisting&go=Go&title=Special%3ASearch]. I don't know how to create the missing page but there oughta be a link for someone like me who searches for whitelist or whitelisting, to take them to the instructions you refer to. [[User:SaxTeacher|SaxTeacher]] ([[User talk:SaxTeacher|talk]]) 10:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
:::We already have this linked somewhere, but [https://www.projectwonderful.com/adblock.php this] is the link you want. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I normally access this site through the android app "xkcd browser". That app only links to the content part of the site and doesn't show the side bar, so the adds aren't shown either. Might be worth discussing it with the author. [[Special:Contributions/109.158.126.139|109.158.126.139]] 08:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

:We support those avenues completely, you don't need to feel bad if you use an app to browse this site. We're only really concerned when we put up ads and our impressions are less than half our page hits, because that essentially means more than half our readers aren't contributing to server costs. That's really hard to deal with. We have enough daily page hits to qualify as web publishers at very big ad agencies, but we've had to settle for relatively low rates at the smaller Project Wonderful because 60% of our users were using adblock, so the agencies rejected us because our valuable "paying" audience was too low for them to consider us. That's been the difference between us using dedicated servers to host the site and hiring a contractor to set it up, and the (admittedly somewhat decent) shared hosting plan that we have to settle for now. We can only afford the shared hosting, because the small-scale advertisers at Project Wonderful don't even pay for full days of advertising; most of the time, we make less per day than the posted $3.90 price. That said, we're grateful that Project Wonderful would take us as a publisher when no one else would, but it really feels like the difference between being accepted to community college and being accepted to an ivy league school. For a similar reason, the Google ads route was not sufficient to satisfy our needs; not a large enough proportion of our users were looking at ads, so we either needed to spam them and degrade the site, or we needed to make them refresh, which makes pages slow and causes needlessly high traffic for a lot of users. We didn't want our ads to make the site worse, because that would drive away users and defeat the purpose of us being a public resource for xkcd readers. We actually decided to go the agency route pretty early, because adsense takes a massive cut of revenues and gives us little control over what ads or advertisers actually showed, which was not okay with us. Whoah, I wrote a lot. I hope it was coherent. Maybe someday I'll collect my thoughts and write a proper summary on how and why we advertise. Also, if you have any questions about anything ad-related, you can always ask us at [[explain xkcd talk:Advertise Here]]. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

== Feynman? ==

Feynman (both in [[182: Nash|living]] and [[397: Unscientific|zombie]] form) probably deserves an entry in the [[Template:Navbox characters|character navbox]] template doesn't he? [[Special:Contributions/128.250.152.198|128.250.152.198]] 02:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:That's two comics out of 1200+. Three if you count the song. Not quite enough yet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:: If that's the criterion, then we need to get rid of [[Brown Hat]]. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
:::Potentially, we could create a very minor character category with these two, and other characters with less than 10 appearances. [[User:tplaza64]]

== Job Interview (Atomic Soup) ==

The soup is clearly being poured out of an atomic socket. This "atomic soup" is probably not a reference to the alcoholic brew favoured by Scottish tramps, but more likely to the virtual nature of the company. {{unsigned|Sulis}}
:Hey, go here [[Talk:1293: Job Interview‎]] for discussions. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

== Is there a similar, transcripted service for The Oatmeal? ==

Hi everyone - this site is a real gem, I've sent it to a friend of mine who can't read XKCD because she's blind. The transcripts on this site are a real boon!

Does anyone know if there is a similar service for The Oatmeal? I've searched and searched, but found nothing so far.

Thanks :)

Jeff

:As far as I know we are kind of unique in the web comics world. I think we get away with it because Randall publishes all his comics as Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. We liberally link back to xkcd, and we don't make a penny (The ads are just to cover server expenses, because wikis and the databases that support them get big when you're covering a body of work like xkcd). I haven't looked into the copyright Matt uses for the Oatmeal, but he seems like a cool enough guy to not kill a community transcripting effort of his comics. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 20:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

== what if 103: Vanishing Water - comics ==

Please explain the 2nd and the 4th comics from http://what-if.xkcd.com/103/

"Just tried to sail my boat over land, because I didn't learn from that kid in the Zephyr." (who's the kid from Zephyr?)

"A third time?" (maybe whales were dropped twice before in other what-ifs?) [[User:Daniel Carrero|Daniel Carrero]] ([[User talk:Daniel Carrero|talk]]) 21:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

:"A third time?" is a reference to a whale falling twice in "Hitchiker's guide to the Galaxy". Been a while, so I don't remember the details of how this fit in, but the second time it happened to the whale, he thought "Not again" or something along those lines. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

::Actually, it was the bowl of petunias that thought to itself "Oh, no, not again." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.73|108.162.216.73]] 00:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Raises the question of if we should explain jokes imbedded in What If comics. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

== Discussion usage ==

Am I being a killjoy in feeling that the discussion section should be mainly limited to discussion on improving the explanation, gathering consensus and that type of thing.
Specifically, the discussion for [[1418: Horse]] is quickly turning into every man and his dog posting a sentence in the style of the comic, which doesn't really add anything to the page other than clutter.

Personally, I'd just delete most of them, but I think I might be turning into a grumpy old bugger... --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
:The discussion is also there for just talking about the comic. Those guys aren't wildly off-topic, there's no need to clamp down on what they get to talk about. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

::Yep, I must just be grumpy and draconian! Lesson learned --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

== 2014 Christmas header ==

Since the header for the site current contains a [http://imgs.xkcd.com/store/store_default.png graphic link to the store] that promises that Randall probably won't ship you a [[:Category:Bobcats|bobcat]], it seems to me that probably ought to be preserved and explained somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.189|173.245.56.189]] 17:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

== XKCD at LanguageLog ==

Arnold Zwicky (of the well-known linguistics blog Language Log) has put together a list of linguistics-related XKCD strips, here: http://arnoldzwicky.org/the-language-of-comics/comics-lists/xkcd-cartoons/ I thought it might be appropriate for a copy of the list (maybe a category) to be created from it. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.79|199.27.133.79]] 03:48, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
:[[:Category:Language]] '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

== Bookmarklet ==

Hello there, I've created a little bookmarklet (https://ginkobox.fr/shaarli/?a77vQw) and I thought it might be useful for someone out there.

When launched, it adds the 'explain' before xkcd.com and the browser loads the explainxkcd page. I've tested it only on Firefox.

(Contact @ https://ginkobox.fr/wiki/doku.php?id=about) {{unsigned ip|‎108.162.229.100}}

== Is there a RSS feed for What If? ==

Is there a RSS feed for What If?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 11:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
:No, because we cover the comics. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

== My User Page ==

Can someone help me with [[user:17jiangz1|my user page]]? I can't seem to remove the large spaaaaaace on top.--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 07:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
: The only solution I've found is to remove the contribution scores (data6=...). Not sure what exactly is triggering this bug. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 21:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I am receiving "Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character ""." for <code><pre>{{#expr: {{formatnum:{{#cscore:17jiangz1|pages}}|R}}/{{formatnum:{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}|R}}*100 round 5 }}</pre></code>--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 05:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
:Bump?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

== What-If ==

In What-If 150, "Tatoonie Rainbow", http://what-if.xkcd.com/150/ the first image title-text says: "Vowing not to reference that video any further anywhere in this article, on principle.". What video is he talking about? [[User:5mi11er|slmiller]] ([[User talk:5mi11er|talk]]) 14:29, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

It hasn't updated for 2 weeks. why?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
:Looks like they're on hold for a few months (Until July 14th). Too bad, I enjoyed them. ([http://what-if.xkcd.com/ Look at the top of the What-If page]) --[[User:Zman9600|Zman9600]] ([[User talk:Zman9600|talk]]) 20:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
:What is so special about the date and time? Seems very specific: ''July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT.'' --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.99|141.101.98.99]] 12:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like it's set for the 40th anniversary of the Apollo-Soyuz mission launch. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.158}}

What If updates will resume on July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT. By that time {{w|New Horizons}} will have it's closest approach to {{w|Pluto}}. See here: http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:34, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

== thanks for having a working website ==

the search function on xkcd.com was taken off, and now the random function seems to be having issues, but it's nice that here both work [[Special:Contributions/188.114.97.114|188.114.97.114]] 19:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
:We do our best. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

== Ada Munroe ==

The latest [[what if?]] number 139 has a question by "Ada Munroe". Is she related to [[Randall]] in any way? --{{User:17jiangz1/signature|06:57, 09 August 2015}}

== Out of curiosity ==

I notice that whenever someone links to tvtropes.org in an explanation, someone changes the link to the matching page on allthetropes.org. I'm curious as to why that is. Is there some kind of terms of use conflict at play here that an editor should be keeping in mind? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.156|199.27.128.156]] 06:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:TVtropes does not restrict links to their site, and if this has been happening there are some time-outs that I need to be handing out. Can you point me to some of the edits where this is happening? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::The specific example I had was, um, [[1468: Worrying]]. On Jan 3rd the links went to tvtropes.org, and on March 18th they were all changed over to allthetropes.orain.org. I just found it curious, I wasn't sure what the reason for it was [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.47|162.158.255.47]] 10:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Reverted. Typically, the reason people change perfectly good links to specific, obscure links in wikis is usually self-advertising. I'll be watching that guy's edits in the future. Thanks for the heads up. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

== Sightless readers offended by the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline. ==

I'll admit, every now and again the comic is over my head. ...because I'm dumb in that particular field. However, blind users who enjoy xkcd must do so through explainxkcd. They are NOT dumb. They are *blind*. Without explainxkcd, they would have no idea what is in the comics panels.

Explainxkcd is a great site. There is no question it provides a service to the internet community.

Please see this thread (last paragraph) on Userfriendly.org. Keep in mind, the end user is sightless and explainxkcd is "viewed" through a screen reader. http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/read.cgi?id=20160207&tid=3930989 (Anonymous)

: The guy on that other site is complaining about that XKCD does not work well in a screen reader -- that is not our problem, but a problem for Randall to solve on his own site. We cannot be the catch all for everything on the internet that Randall broke [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Agreed --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I never even noticed the tagline in question. Humorous to sighted folks, sure. ...but obviously offensive to those who have no choice but to access xkcd through explainxkcd.

I'll leave it to the administrators or the community to figure something out, if anything at all. Maybe no one cares? I didn't come here to make any suggestions, only to point out how offensive those 4 words are to some users of the website. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.88}}

:Alright, put a link here in the site notice. What does everyone else think? I'm open to changing it, it's something people complain about fairly periodically and our identity isn't completely tied to the tagline, I feel. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 09:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

::Well, we definitely shouldn't change anything because that particular guy is upset. It's one thing to be offended, but he's also attacking both this site and Randal Monroe. I don't think that sort of behavior should be rewarded. I actually have a rule online where, if someone acts like a jerk to me, I will be kind, but I won't give them what they want. I think a lot of the problems with people being jerks to others is that they still get what they want, so what reason do they have to stop? If he wants us to change it, he should address us like an adult and ask us himself.

::But you claim this is a common complaint. Then I would say we need more info. My instinct would be that people don't understand that it's a joke. But then my solution would be to do what the site is designed to do and explain the joke, rather than take it down. If there's actually something about it that's offensive to an entire class of people, that's different. I am unaware of a stereotype that blind people are stupid, but I'm open to the idea that I don't know.

::I'm not particularly married to the tag line. I actually didn't even notice it was there. But I'm loathe to take it down over a misunderstanding. I can't think of a similarly humorous replacement that would not be offensive, but I can at least suggest "Because nobody knows everything." --[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 09:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I've gotten these before. There's a [[Talk:Main_Page#Header_message|slowly growing]] section in the main page discussion page and a complaint buried somewhere in my talk page and they're usually quite unhappy. I pegged it up this time round because there's special needs involved, and a good part of our intended appeal is the transcripts for the blind. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I like your reasoning, what if "It's 'cause you're dumb" was follow by "[citation needed]" and make the whole thing a link to a page explaining the header. It would be in character of the page, and xkcd. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.34|108.162.221.34]] 00:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sam
::::Great idea, Sam! That's the funniest suggestion ever [citation needed]. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.4|172.68.141.4]] 19:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

::Is he one of those people who are so self-centered and 'entitled' that just because they have a disability they assume that everyone is constantly trying to offend them, even in the most unlikeliest of cases? Does he actually believe that the tag line was written with the intention of offending blind people? This is ridiculous. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.71|141.101.106.71]] 11:04, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

"Just in case you feel dumb"? "Some comics may be funnier than they appear"?[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

How about simply removing it? At least until we find something that isn't offensive to anyone - which might be very hard to obtain. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Because you're crippled... That's worse I guess. 
But before considering the "you're dumb" tagline, one must think about the name of this wiki. It is called '''Explain''' xkcd, not read xkcd, and explaining is for dumb people, not blind people. 
Maybe one thing we can do is add a "(unless you are just here for the transcript)" subtext, with a link to the transcript section, which has the advantage of both taming offended blind readers (maybe) and provide a direct, "spoilerless" link. --[[User:GuB|GuB]] ([[User talk:GuB|talk]]) 10:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I need explainxkcd for two reasons: being visually impaired, although I can see most of the comics I often miss crucial details that I find only in the transcript; and as a non-American, I lack many cultural references (books, movies, songs, sayings...) that are given in the explanations.
I don't think either of these reasons makes me "dumb". However, I never found the tagline offensive. It was immediately obvious to me that it was meant as humor. Who could seriously think that someone is dumb just because they haven't read the specific book that Randall is parodying in a given comic? Or because they're not familiar with a specific programming language or Unix command? IMHO the tagline *is* funny precisely because very few people can actually "get" all the comics without an explanation. Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke. Adding to the lot those who can't get the comics because they're blind doesn't make the joke more offensive. It's a sad world where political correctness kills all forms of humor.

On the other hand, the tagline is not an essential part of the site and if a significant number want it removed, so be it.
Zetfr 10:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:Well not everybody's mind works the same way, and some people legitimately cannot grasp humor very easily. They may come to read the explanations precisely because they can't recognize what about a given comic is supposed to be humorous, and they likewise may not be able to tell that the tagline is just a joke. Besides, the tagline is equating a lack of knowledge with a lack of intelligence, which also makes it inaccurate and kind of kills the humor for those who stop and think about it.

:I personally agree with the above "Because nobody knows everything." approach. I would suggest something along the lines of "Because you won't always get the joke." --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 11:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:: This sounds like a bunch of dumb people coming together and suggesting that the rest of people should be more like them (joke intended) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: +1 on this. '''Keep'''. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 20:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''removal''' [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 11:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Mostly agree with Zetfr, it is a rather obvious joke, and this is a website about a webcomic which is mostly about fun, it would be different if this was some serious news portal, but it isn't, and in my humble opinion people who can't take a joke shouldn't even be here. There will always be ranters and people who get offended, we should not let them make decisions for us. I sincerely believe vast majority of people, blind or otherwise, understand it. [[User:Jaalenja|Jaalenja]] ([[User talk:Jaalenja|talk]])

:I agree with Zetfr. If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get.
:--[[User:Lou Crazy|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy|talk]]) 12:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
::I also agree with the above, and like the part of Zetfr about because you need a reader to use the page you do not need to be offended by an obvious joke --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

if i had a vote i'd say change the "because you're dumb" from text to a picture with alt text of something slightly less rude. "because you're using a screenreader," perhaps. although that would show up on mouseover. meh. whatever. --13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:and someone isn't "entitled" because they get annoyed about something that doesn't annoy you. as a sighted person i don't even look at the headers on the page. i would imagine that since the text in question is at the top of the page he has to listen to it every single time the page is refreshed. which is annoying enough if it's not insulting. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 13:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:It is bad to have the alt-text saying something differently, but since the current tagline is not offensive to non-blind people then why would it be offensive to a blind person. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' -- Blind people do not have to come to this site, they can just use xkcd.com directly and if that is not working for blind people then that is Randall's problem not ours. The tag line has been there for years while I have noticed it before and used the site and I have never been offended, if a blind person is offended maybe they should stop using the internet. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 15:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: I second that -- the tag line does not appear to offend non-blind people, it should not offend blind people either [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Voting '''KEEP''' -- the tag line is a joke, and who is to say that blind people cannot be dumb [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' as well. I don't see any reason to change it; it's not a jab at disabled people, blind or otherwise. The site is called '''explain'''xkcd, and everything here centers around explaining the comic, not being a transcription service. (If that's not the case, then maybe other things need changing too.) I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.26|108.162.216.26]] 15:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP and satisfy both sides'''. If you examine the HTML, or use [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] (free screen reader), you may notice there is a jump-to-nav div element that lets people with screen readers jump to various parts of the page. The jump-to-nav div is only a few HTML lines below the tagline. I'd recommend:
# Moving the jump-to-nav div to '''before''' the tagline
# Adding a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.
# Test it with [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] in Firefox to simulate a screen reader.
This way, screen-reader users can jump to the transcript and don't have to hear the tagline every time they visit an explainxkcd.com page.
-- [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 15:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Consider "Do you get it now?" [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.11|198.41.235.11]] 16:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''': it's reasonable and no change is warranted

I like the suggestion of '''keeping''' the current tagline, but changing it to an '''image with alttext''' saying something like "because you're using a screenreader". I also vote to move the link to the transcript to above the tagline. [[User:Rileysci|Rileysci]] ([[User talk:Rileysci|talk]]) 17:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: Great idea, but here's an even better one: '''Keep''' the tagline for visual browsers, but '''add code''' such as [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/672156/is-there-a-way-to-write-content-that-screen-readers-will-ignore <code> CSS { speak: none; } and aria-hidden="true"</code>] that prevents it from being spoken by screen readers. -- [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I get the joke and I'm not offended by it, but it seems to me that it really sticks out on this site and it doesn't seem consistent with Randall's sense of humor. Everyone on this site is very inclusive and eager to share all perspectives and points of view. I come here both to see the humor that I have the knowledge to understand and to learn more about the world the way Randall sees it. In short, I come here to be one of the lucky 10,000. In fact, I would suggest that as the tag line, "Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!". Inside joke that can link to the comic (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand) and it is welcoming. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.170|108.162.245.170]] 18:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: +1 on this. '''Change''' [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 03:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. In case it is not kept then it should be changed to something completely different. Te idea of making a title text to an image I really dislike, although I even more dislike adding anything to the existing one to either refer to people coming for the transcript or making excuses for the obvious joke. This has been a part of the page forever, I have seen it almost every time I come here. To begin with I did feel dumb sometimes, but I was never offended by it, just amused. But of course an explain page is for those who did not get the joke. And there are other pages that explains the comic. I do not know if they have a transcript? But I'm happy to know that some people must really enjoy the detailed transcripts that I usually try to provide. I had just not though about the blind perspective. I more use the transcript to make sure every one agrees on what is seen in the images of the comic. Having said all this, I must admit that the best suggestion for a change so far is the one posted above my post (about the lucky 10,000). :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote keep, for exactly the reasons explained by Zeftr above. Changing it to an image with alt text would be OK also. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 20:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change''' it because it is too easily mistaken as an insult instead of a joke. At least change it to ''Because you are stupid''.... Ah, maybe instead ''Because xkcd is far beyond common knowledge'' or ''Because hardly anyone gets everything'' or ''Because it is usually nerdly esoteric even for geeks''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.46|108.162.221.46]] 21:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change'''. I have never been a big fan of the tagline. I don't know everything, but I am certainly not dumb. Also, I echo the reference to (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand). This comic has always been about expanding knowledge, not making you feel guilty for not knowing something.

:'''Change''': I realize the "It's because you're dumb" tagline follows the sarcastic nature of Randall's humor, but there are enough people who don't get or appreciate that sort of humor and are likely to be more offended by it, special needs or no. Here's my suggestion: "For those of us who don't get it." [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 21:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

At what point is "enough" people offended? I've only seen evidence of several (https://xkcd.com/1070/) visually impaired users actually offended by the site, along with a couple people who didn't specify their visual ability. I don't know the traffic on this site, but I would expect it to be on the order of 10^4 or higher. So is this discussion about changing something that a handful of people find offensive? Or is there an actual problem of something inappropriate on the site. If this is all about a couple people finding something offensive, I imagine a few christians might take issue with (https://xkcd.com/709/). Should we start another discussion about accommodating them? Or add a disclaimer that the views expressed by Randall Munroe are his own and do not reflect those of this site? [[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
: So you vote to '''keep''' -- right? [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 04:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change'''-- make it more obviously tongue in cheek. "It's cause we're dumb" or "For those of us who need it" I agree with the point about not complying with people on the internet who can't behave like adults, however I've never found the line particularly funny. Also change the jump-to-nav, as that would just get annoying to hear it every time you open up the site. I am not recommending changing it based on the imagined offenses of others. I just think it could be funnier.[[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 06:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I like changing to "For those of us who need it"

'''Keep''' Trying to satisfy everyone is like trying to understand every comic. It probably won't happen. As an example, using the 'one of 10 000' example provided above can insult a bunch of people that are not from the States simply because the comic (and the reference to the comic for that matter) will make them feel left out. My other reasons for voting keep have all been mentioned already. People get insulted so easily, let's try not to encourage this behavior by rewarding it. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''' because I find it slightly offensive myself. If we change it, we should replace it with something that everybody would interpret as humorous, e.g. "Because we can't all be rocket scientists". [[User:Condor70|Condor70]] ([[User talk:Condor70|talk]]) 08:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Next thing we know, liberal arts majors will complain about xkcd science being offensive. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.229|141.101.91.229]] 10:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change''' or '''remove'''. Regarding the former, while I know it's supposed to be a joke, I never found it humorous myself and, unlike others that wrote before me, I don't think it relates to the humor or sarcasm used by Randall. It being offensive is not part of my motivation for my vote. I agree with some of the suggestions written up to now. Regarding the latter, I don't really think it's existence is necessary. Regardless, changing the div things is a must. [[User:GuiRitter|GuiRitter]] ([[User talk:GuiRitter|talk]]) 16:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change'''. You could keep much of the humour by changing it to something like "because ignorance '''can''' be cured". [[User:Farnz|Farnz]] ([[User talk:Farnz|talk]])

If I may vote (as a happy international user of this site, but not yet a contributor), one more vote for '''Keep''' - at least as "don't change now, because of this specific request, because of perceived offensiveness". For several reasons, which have been mentioned already:

a) I think it's funny. It also fits perfectly with the overall XKCD humor. And the same line of thinking as the book "You are now less dumb" from "YouAreNotSoSmart.com".

b) It's so obviously generic (directed at everyone reading it) I fail to understand how it can be interpreted as insult instead of irony. Even worse: I fail to understand why it should be _especially_ insulting to blind people. Having a transcript for them to use is nice, but it's merely one of the aspects this site provides (and it's not even at the top nor are there pages "transcript only", so blind are no primary audience)

c) If this site decides to actually help blind people more, how about: putting the tagline in the image (so it's not "read every time"), put the transcript at the top / provide pages with only transcripts, so that the original XKCD can be consumed prior to the explanations here (just as non-blind users would see it)

d) this request follows the current Outragism trend, so I do suspect that it's not actually blind people feeling offended, but privileged SJWs thinking about who might possibly feel offended, bringing change to the world where it's not beneficial even for those they claim to support. Comparable to PETA.

While I'm at it - THANK YOU for this site. Most XKCD I mostly understand. But due to being an international reader, some aspects of American Culture I need explainXKCD to grasp, and other aspects it's just nice to see more details, cross-references with other comics, and hidden gems.
[[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]] ([[User talk:Zefiro|talk]]) 18:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
:I'm an "international user", too, and I suppose a lot of users of this site are international users who need to be explained some xkcd jokes that would be obvious to any native English speaker living in the US. I don't have an opinion about changing the tagline or keeping it, but I would like to notice that "Because you are dumb" is the kind of joke that would need an explanation - it would be hard for me to tell if it's a joke or an insult. Therefore, an easier joke could have some advantage.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 22:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change.''' I know it's a joke, but it's not particularly funny, and can easily be mistaken for an insult. [[User:Ekedolphin|Ekedolphin]] ([[User talk:Ekedolphin|talk]]) 20:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Trlkly (and Isaac(https://xkcd.com/1448/)), more information is needed. The purpose of this site is to explain xkcd (obviously, from the name) so people come here primarily to seek knowledge or a better understanding about xkcd. As long as the explanations or the explainers don't act like white hat (https://xkcd.com/1386/), there should be no reason to take the tagline seriously.--[[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote KEEP, but I do support the idea of moving the jump-to to above the tagline. I believe that the tagline is obviously a joke, and that pleaing everyone is nigh impossible. I also strongly oppose the proposal to change it to an image with an alt-text of "because you're using a screen reader." Finally, I do not believe we should change the tagline. We should, if anything, remove it altogether. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.20|173.245.54.20]] 03:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change''' - I like 199.27.130.198's idea, "Just in case you feel dumb." [[User:Mateussf|Mateussf]] ([[User talk:Mateussf|talk]]) 04:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''', preferably to something like "The ''Anti'' Thing Explainer; Simple Stuff in Complicated Words!" Only, you know, more complicated to improve the joke. [[User:KitsunePhoenix|Amaroq (KitsunePhoenix)]] ([[User talk:KitsunePhoenix|talk]]) 05:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

What about: it's cause you need more context. I also don't like the current tagline, because dumbness would be more the inability to understand than a lack of knowledge.

'''Change''' - First thing first, as suggested, move the jump-to-nav div to before the tagline and add a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.

Then also change the tagline: it's not that good, and not that in line with the xkcd humor - it's actually ''directly opposed'' to the spirit of [[1053]]. Some better ones have already been suggested:
*"Some comics may be funnier than they appear"
*"Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!"
*"because sometimes we all need a little help"
''Or'' we could even have a bunch of good ones like that out of which one is selected at random when the page is loaded --[[User:Jules.LT|Jules.LT]] ([[User talk:Jules.LT|talk]]) 09:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I like the joke in the tag line (some of us come here because they are to stupid or to lazy to lookup all the information xkcd is joking about)
but I also find it to direct to the user. I want to add some suggestions to Jules.LT [[User:SirKitKat|sirKitKat]] ([[User talk:SirKitKat|talk]]) 10:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
* "Error loading tagline, click here to retry."
* "Because it is Monday morning."
* "Because you like explaining jokes."

I think people coming here and complaining because "dumb" appears to be aimed at insulting the blind are hilarious, because another meaning for "dumb" is "unable to speak." If people who were "dumb" in this way were complaining because we are using the other meaning of "dumb" it would be awkward, but degree of visual acuity is not open for the same misinterpretation. [[User:Swordsmith|Swordsmith]] ([[User talk:Swordsmith|talk]])

'''KEEP''' for the same reasons as [[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]]. If change is necessary, fix it so the screen reader doesnt say it aloud. (This ensures the change is propagated to those who have no other recourse for sightless XKCD enjoyment, and is not a ploy by SJWs who can't take sarcastic humor (why are they reading XKCD in the first place?) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.40|108.162.221.40]] 14:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

It is super obviously not intended seriously, because xkcd is a technical comic that nobody will understand entirely on the first pass. If it's true, then everybody is dumb. Boo hoo.

The guy in question is under the mistaken impression that Randall runs this site and maliciously hides his transcripts under the tagline. He's also very angry about a lot of things. Sighted people have to look at the tagline every time it loads too, it's at the top of the page.

I vote '''Keep''' because I hate negotiating with terrorists. If it has the effect of filtering out people who enjoy being outraged, then it's doing a service. Image search "stephen fry offensive".

I'd be fine with moving the jump-to-nav div. I'm absolutely against making it an image with a different tagline, because then we would be depriving blind people of the joke. I'm absolutely against changing it to something less offensive. I would settle for removing it entirely, or changing it to something more offensive, such as "It's 'cause you're dumb, and get offended over dumb shit."

Or, you know, make a transcribexkcd.com site. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.203|108.162.217.203]] 16:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' to one of the cool new suggestions I've seen. I've always been sad about this tagline, and while I love XKCD humor, I just don't think the tagline is funny. It makes me hesitate and sometimes decide not to share this site with others who I think would love the humor, but not the tagline. The issue keeps coming up, and this is just one more way that it irritates people and causes hassle. It's obvious to me that we should find a new tagline, or just drop it for the time being. [[User:Nealmcb|Nealmcb]] ([[User talk:Nealmcb|talk]]) 17:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' The word "dumb" used as slang for "unintelligent" or "uneducated" is offensive and many better suggestions have been proposed, which retain the wry humor without the offense. Hiding behind "it's just a joke" is beneath the standards of this site. {{unsigned ip|108.162.245.134}}
:It's not hiding behind "just a joke", it IS the joke. It's tongue-in-cheek. It's so obviously false that you have to intentionally ignore the joke and manufacture offense about something benign. I'll give you that it's not that funny. It's also not that offensive. Why are we talking about something so petty. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 21:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I feel like a blind person being insulted by the implication that being sightless somehow makes them unintelligent is a pretty far leap of logic. Not being able to see has no bearing whatsoever on your actual mental acuity. How many actual complaints have there been? One, a few, lots? I don't know, but if it was a significant number I might change my mind. As it stands, though, I think it's pretty clear in the site description that this site is meant for people who don't understand the comic due to its focus on obscure topics and use of technical jargon, being written by a former NASA robot technician with a bent for Linux. Using disabilities as an insult is something I don't condone, but in this case I think it's a case of certain individuals being overly sensitive. Thinking a word as mild as "dumb" is offensive is a bit much, especially since it's often used in contexts other than "uneducated" or "stupid" - I use it to describe myself all the time when I can't word proper-like. I think of it more as "scatter-brained". --[[User:KingStarscream|KingStarscream]] ([[User talk:KingStarscream|talk]]) 18:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' I feel like the "Because we can't all be rocket scientists" tagline suggested above is great; I always found the tagline to be a bit annoying because I often know all of a comic except a small part, and I come here for that. It's just unnecessarily confrontational and Randall himself has expressed in https://xkcd.com/1386/ and https://xkcd.com/1053/ that he doesn't agree with insulting ignorance. {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.179}}

'''Change AND Keep''' I get the original joke, but I love some of the new ones too. Randomly rotating tag line appear is my vote, BUT let's make the tag line clickable so that we can explain the tag line .... for those of us who don't get the joke! {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.10}}

'''Keep''', but change the jump-to-nav, and maybe make the tagline clickable. I like the tagline. Someone already said this, but this is explainxkcd, not readxkcd. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.63|108.162.216.63]] 19:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep''', because it's been there for so long! I remember coming here years ago and looking for the references I didn't get, and the tagline was already there. It's a legacy thing, the one thing remaining from the old website in the new fancy wiki format. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.226.204|198.41.226.204]] 20:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

For all you people being offended and claiming that the tagline is contrary to the spirit of xkcd, I give you [https://xkcd.com/386/ xkcd.com/386]. This entire argument is offensive to me, can we remove it? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 21:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' The referenced posting is obviously a troll. And xkcd has transcripts so the story of the self proclaimed blind person with diabetes does not make sense. --23:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Rather than "cuz you're dumb" which both asserts a trait and uses what might not be the best word choice, why not something like "Because you might be ignorant"? Dumb, after all, isn't remediable, though ignorance is. (Also, a consideration, "dumb" can mean "mute," so if there's something with screenreading for blindness, that could be read as assuming more than one disability? ("blind and dumb" akin to "deaf and dumb"?) // Possibly do something akin to the warning on the comic's site itself: "Because you might be a liberal arts major." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.61|108.162.221.61]] 00:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' because risk of accidental offence is never a good reason to rewrite comedy. If community wants to change suggest "Explaining Xtremely Klever Comedic Drawings"; if only to troll those who insist that the letters XKCD must stand for something (which it doesn't) [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 00:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

−
The issue seems to boil down to:

−
Is it funny?

−
Is it overly offensive?

−
And therefore:

−
Is it worth it?

−
Throwing in my opinion, however small:
+

It's amusing to me.
The joke is clear, and universal. Offence may be taken equally by anyone reading.
It fits well.
Possibly have a hidden link for those offended. A rotating tag line could include more jokes, but...
By all means move the navigation.

An explain explainxkcd page that is linked to might work, in the spirit of metahumour.

However, it may not be as serious an issue, as the tag line is easy to ignore. Just moving HTML a bit seems like a logical, cheap and easy solution, and then we can test it. Please note that this has no technical knowledge behind it, just a reading of the above.

So, my vote goes to '''keep''', and shuffle HTML or, in order, link, replace with rotating, modify, remove.
Harmless fun. Possibly have a cookie-based option to permanently hide the tag line.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.160|108.162.250.160]] 00:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, I have broken formatting in the last few edits, trying to fix it...[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.160|108.162.250.160]] 00:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: My vote is '''change''', and it's not because of blind people. Let me run you through a very common scenario for new users:
:* You have a person who generally thinks of themselves as quite smart.
:* They read the comics and find most of them extremely funny.
:* They come across a comic they just can't understand.
:* They stare at it for minutes, wondering why they just can't get the joke.
:* Pride already bruised, they eventually give up and turn to Google.
:* "Explain xkcd! That's exactly what I'm looking for!"
:* Click the link.
:* "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb"
:* Gee, what a lovely welcome. Not.

: Insulting your users the first time you meet them is '''''terrible''''' practice. You're pointing at them and laughing that they didn't understand the joke. You're kicking somebody when they're already down. OK, that is exaggeration, but when you look at the line as a new user, it's not friendly and welcoming; it doesn't encourage you to return. It's just bad UX.

: Now, we could overlook the directed insult if it was indeed funny, but it really isn't. There's nothing witty about it, nothing punny about it, no double-entendres or sly references. It's just an insult.

: Legacy is no reason to keep something that doesn't work. Just because something wasn't picked up as bad practice 5 years ago doesn't mean that it isn't bad practice. Can you imagine if Microsoft kept Clippy around for "legacy reasons"?

: It would be one thing if it were kept because there were no other options, but ''so many'' fantastic alternatives have been suggested:
:* '''It's 'cause we're dumb''' -- Changes it from an insult directed at one person to a statement with an inclusive sense of community. It saying that, hey, you may not understand all the comics, but neither do we! Let's learn together!
:* '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!''' -- Direct reference to comic which celebrates filling gaps in one's knowledge. Also, as a comic reference, most people won't get it the first time, so make it a link and use it to draw people further in to this wiki!
:* '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear''' -- Actually humorous, containing reference to a very common message we're all familiar with (objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear). Also alludes to the hidden depths to many of the comics, where additional levels of meaning are revealed the more about the subject one knows, which is what this wiki is trying to reveal.
:* '''Error loading tagline, click here to retry.''' -- Looks like the kind of joke you'd actually find in the comments. Clicking the tagline should then do something completely unrelated to reloading the tagline (I dunno, set off some cool JS magic).
:* '''Because it is Monday morning.''' -- Should only be shown on Mondays. Can easily be implemented with parser functions.
:* '''Because sometimes we all need a little help''' -- Gives an understanding tone that's comforting to new users.

: '''TL;DR''': The current tagline is unnecessarily confrontational and projects a bad welcome to new users, and there is nothing particularly clever/funny/important about the current tag line to recommend keeping it, especially with ''so many'' better suggestions on offer. Put it this way, if you were seeing "It's 'cause you're dumb" tag as a suggestion to add to this wiki today, would you choose it over the other options? No? Then make like an old meme and "Let It Go!" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.157|108.162.249.157]] 05:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: I think the above comment is a perfect example of different mindsets. I discovered this wiki in exactly the way you described. But I was not offended in anyway when seeing the tagline, which I did almost immediately. Rather, it got a little chuckle out of me along with a thought along the lines of "Haha, yeah, maybe I am dumb." If you get offended by such a tagline, it suggests to me that you are not all that certain about your own intelligence in the first place. It's a static bit of text. It was not aimed at the person reading it, it was aimed at EVERYONE reading it. EDIT-I realize this post could be seen as offensive or a personal attack, which it's not, please read the "you" not as the poster of the above mentioned comment, but as a generic for any person reading the comment. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: If I remember correctly I've heard it origonally was a pic of Blackhat saying it. Would it be possible to use that on this site. It seems like a decent solution? (I haven't read all of this so I don't know if this has been suggested sorry if it has). Like people have said no one gets all of xkcd, as a nonAmerican there is also a lot of references I don't get. Getting offenend over this does seems pretty pathetic to me. I also use this site for non explanation reasons, that is it often links together comics which is handy, and people often post cool links. But as others have pointed out this site isn't transcriptxkcd or linkxkcd it's explainxkcd, so that's what it should be meant for. Claiming i's offensive o the visually impaired seems pretty silly. All in all, maybe it could do with tweaking to make it more obvious but IMO it's a solid '''keep''' [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 11:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

::I vote '''change''', for the reasons the Halfhat above listed. I also never thought "It's 'cause you're dumb." really fit with this wiki. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.33|141.101.104.33]] 12:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I can't believe we've become such a limp-wristed baby society that we can't even have a joke like "It's 'cause you're dumb" as the tagline. Nobody would reasonably get offended at it. '''Keep.''' [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.33|108.162.221.33]] 13:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. Blind people have to realize they're not the only ones reading this site. This site was created to explain the comic, not purely to provide a transcript of the comic - that's just icing. [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

If there ever really was a single person who took the tag line seriously, then it was just telling them the truth. I vote '''keep'''. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.90|162.158.255.90]] 19:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep, or otherwise, Change'''. My opinion: It is not offensive, and I find it humourous. As I am very interested in the maths and the sciences, and I am very nerdy, I do often understand the jokes in each comic. However, sometimes I don't quite get it. This wiki is very good for that, because it collates many people's views and expertise on the comic. If the vote is overall to change, I am a fan of "Because sometimes we all need a little help." [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.29|173.245.54.29]] 21:18, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change''': I've always been a bit unsettled by it myself. Some deaf readers may be more insulted by it than blind ones. vote for "'''Cause you're #dumb''" (or perhaps another NOT symbol... so only people that don't understand are insulted... and the tagline can be linked to a page that explains why it isn't an insult) [[User:Edo|Edo]] ([[User talk:Edo|talk]]) 23:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP'''. I actually had the feeling the fellow who complained may not understand sarcasm very well. Regardless, the tagline to me is remarkably funny and one of the things I always point out to folks when I first turn them on to XKCD. I worry they will stop following XKCD if they don't understand a post, which is why I am especially glad your site exists. There are many types of humor that will be lost on folks. Myself, for example. I was just railing to my friends about how much I did not like a recent popular vine which showed a guy, kinda probably the father, scaring a very young child strapped in a cat seat, by yelling in horror as the cats convertible roof was closed. Because I did not grow up watching laugh-tracked America's Funniest (sic) Home Video segments, I am not conditioned for casual schadenfreude-driven videos. But I know that's just me. I don't want to limit free-speech merely because it is not for me. Regardless, I really just want you to '''KEEP''' it because to me it is darn funny and just the sort of humor most of the folks who enjoy XKCD appreciate. --[[User:Hugo|Hugo]] ([[User talk:Hugo|talk]]) 23:25, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I will also vote '''keep'''. While it ''might'' be considered offensive, it's really no more "offensive" than XKCD itself. Lest we forget the line at the bottom of every comic page:
:Warning: this comic occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and '''advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)'''.
I don't see how "It's 'cause you're dumb." is any worse. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 23:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

:: I don't think it's offensive, it's more childish, which may be off-putting for first time readers. Hence I vote for '''change'''. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 01:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep''', per the reasoning of, among other people, Zefiro. I like the tagline a lot and don't see much at all, if anything, that's wrong with it. Like Hugo, I feel like it's a bit of ''entirely'' appropriate humor. [[User:APerson|APerson]] ([[User talk:APerson|talk!]]) 00:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. I know it's supposed to be a joke, but it seems out of place and not particularly funny, and it could discourage potential readers. I don't have an idea for a new tagline, but plenty of good ones have been suggested here. [[User:Cheese Lord Eggplant|Cheese Lord Eggplant]] ([[User talk:Cheese Lord Eggplant|talk]]) 03:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' better sums up my vote, and I wish to explain why. I understand the views (as stated above) that it might discourage potential viewers, but I have seen enough well-put arguments that point out why it should not be removed for the arguments on the other side of the debate. However, I do understand that sightless users would get pretty pissed off at being told that they're dumb over and over. Is there perhaps a way to hide the text from programs designed to assisted the disabled? I have a couple of suggestions.

Perhaps it can instead simply be an image, and can even be done in a more stylized text that hints at the humour behind it (no, I have no specific suggestions). This image should not have the words it says in the meta-text within it. I just think it's not worth removing it over, it's kind of funny (or very funny, depending who you ask), replacement suggestions kinda make it bland, and this is a way to avoid having sightless people get told they're dumb over and over. The stylization is just a suggestion, because most alternative taglines I've heard don't sound up to par compared to it. Just anything to point out the sarcastic and purely humorous intentions.

I'd like to enforce my suggestion of having an image with no meta-text that can be read by bringing up that explainxkcd.com can hardly ''lose'' popularity if for the sensitive minority they don't have a tagline (especially if this tagline they are not aware of could be construed as offensive). 'Cause seriously, who's going to go tell a blind person "hey man the tagline for this site is insulting to you want to hear it?" so they'll just not learn of its existence and go on peacefully. So: Image, stylized to clearly express humour, with no program-interpretable meta-text for the blind to hear. I'd like this opinion to be closely considered, and I'd love to hear intelligent replies. ''For all intents and purposes,'' I vote '''Keep''', but to address the issue proactively and adaptively to get the best for both worlds.

I would like to point out one change I would definitely agree with, however. The commenter at 108.162.249.157 not far up suggests "It's 'cause we're dumb", and I would totally back that. That one change could make a world of difference for some people. --[[User:Znayx|Znayx]] ([[User talk:Znayx|talk]]) 09:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

: "It's cause we're dumb" is actually a pretty acceptable change in my opinion. I still vote keep, but wouldn't mind seeing that one. Right now the no tagline version looks lonely. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.40|108.162.221.40]] 14:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

::For the record, I would oppose a change of "It's cause we're dumb" because it's simply not as funny (the joke benefits from it sounding like it's a mock insult) and for the reasons in my main post right below this one that I see no reason to change the tagline which should not offend or be taken personally by someone who has enough sense of humour and intelligence to enjoy xkcd. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 17:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
::This brings up the point that it is indeed a mock insult, and one that everyone gets when they visit the site, those with perfect vision are insulted just as much as the blind, or white, or black, etc... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.34|108.162.221.34]] 00:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sam

I would vote '''keep''' as it is. I am mindful of offensive content, but context is key. This is a website whose primary purpose is explaining a humour-based webcomic that touches on topics that require some intelligence to really enjoy. The tagline is obviously (I hope) tongue-in-cheek. "if you need explanation of this sometimes very technical and specialized and sometimes ambiguous webcomic, you're clearly a moron". I think that most people on this site and elsewhere would consider those who enjoy xkcd (a webcomic that often concerns itself with science, history, technology, etc.) to be relatively intelligent. Just perhaps not in every particular area (as noted right at the top of this discussion). I also think it is clear that this is a wiki an thus the tagline is directed to everyone, even the people who wrote the tagline. We're all here because we're "dumb" in the sense of occasionally needing (or at least enjoying) a deeper explanation for the comics. If someone who is blind is using the site other than for its originally intended purpose, and it helps them, that's awesome. But that doesn't mean the tagline must acknowledge all possible uses of the site. Just the thesis statement of the site, which is "this site is for explaining something you might not understand". If there are blind people who use this site just to read the comic and never to need or enjoy the explanations, then I guess they are smarter than me. I do not personally believe in changing the tagline of the entire community because it doesn't apply to one small group that is using the site for a different purpose than its intentions (again, not knocking them for using the site at all, but seriously, don't walk into McDonalds and go "''I eat here because my doctor says I need more sodium, and I actually hate the food. I'm offended by your "I'm loving it" tagline. Change it!''". Or complain about Disneyland's slogan because you suffer from depression.). I would also have expected anyone who reads xkcd often enough to bother coming to this site just to do so because of their blindness would have a sense of humour and would understand the context in which the tagline was intended, and not take it personally. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 17:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
:I really agree with basically everything TheHypo writes, both here and his above comment on the reason "we're dumb" would not work at all. The idea with keeping the text but only as an image could be used, but I just do not like that we change this because someone made a ''troll complaint'' somewhere, regardless of him being blind or not; that is just one more good reason to keep it. Then again if we really wish to make it better for blind people, then by all means use an image. But keep the text in the image then! If you do enjoy xkcd then you should be able to spot the humor, and with the way Randall himself keep on mocking people on his own page, and in his comics, then why should this not fit well in with this explain page, and why should we not keep on doing what we have been doing so far? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

How about '''Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're ''dumb*''.''' (''*Or don't get the joke because it is either outside your area of expertise or in a format that isn't accessible to you'') - [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.23|141.101.70.23]] 04:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. I've always realized it was a joke, but I think we could do a bit better. How about, "Some comics may be funnier than they appear" as suggested by 199.27.130.198? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.42|173.245.54.42]] 19:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. When I first started reading this wiki and noticed the tagline, I wasn't offended, and I realized it was a joke. But it also gave me an impression that this wiki is run by immature people as this is a childish insult, used as joke. Naturally, I wasn't too keen on following thissite closely and would only visit here when there's a comic that I don't understand at all. Thankfully, after reading through multiple explanations, I no longer think that the writers are immature and as I started reading other explanations, I started coming here even for the comics that I understand. My point is, it took me couple of months to warm towards explainxkcd and most people aren't that persistent/ give the chance to prove. So we are making lot of people to alienate with the site just at the tagline, even before they get to the content. I vote for '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 01:07, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' would be my vote. Today's society puts too much emphasis on protecting people's feelings, to the point that some people have onion-paper-thin skins, too thin to operate effectively when out in public! I feel this complaint falls under this category. Such over sensitivity shouldn't seriously be catered to. Politely listened to and considered, at most. Bending to such things just encourages people to be more sensitive.

The way I see it, you CANNOT enjoy xkcd without being smarter than average, or you'd have to turn to xkcd Explain for every single comic! It cannot be fun to require being walked through every single one. Conversely, I doubt there's very many of these smart people who are smart enough to get every joke (and every nuance) without assistance. Therefore it should be clear that is is a simple tongue-in-cheek joke, you don't really mean it seriously. It should be taken in the tone that it's meant, and it offends me when people don't.

For example, right now I'm at a bar at a Valentine's Day event. As I'm hopelessly single, this day is problematic for me, especially to be in public. I COULD ask that people refrain from love stuff, from flaunting their relationship, etc., that I'm here for other reasons. But as an intelligent adult I realize this would be unreasonable, that many people, especially most here tonight, enjoy the love stuff, enjoy Valentine's Day. It is certainly not their fault I don't, not directly, and they should not be held responsible for my discomfort.

If the final vote is for Change, I like "It's because '''we're''' dumb", or "we're all dumb", be inclusive to reduce how derogatory it sounds. Remember, while sightless people might find this site useful, the primary reason for it IS because we're dumb, i.e. we need help getting the joke. - NiceGuy1[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.215|198.41.235.215]] 04:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Wait, so they think they're smarter than me? I'm offended! ;-)
Okay so I'm not. I almost voted keep because the primary raison d'être of exkcd is not for blind people. It was created specifically for people who need help understanding some of the science, math, and arcana behind the humor.
But you know what? "It's 'cause you're dumb" is not that funny. Some of the suggestions are better. So I vote "'''CHANGE'''". [[User:Saspic45|Saspic45]] ([[User talk:Saspic45|talk]]) 07:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

How about "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause we're dumb."? This has more of a feeling of inclusiveness and camaraderie to me, as in we're all equals more-or-less in the face of RM's brilliance and having a good time enjoying the material together. Came up with it about a year ago, because as it is the tagline struck me as a bit harsh, and have said it that way in my mind ever since.
Edit: Ok, I see this has been suggested, so +1 for that minor change.

'''Change.''' While I didn't notice it at first, I was pretty offput when I did. As someone who has some trouble catching sarcasm all the time, I was excited when I found this site -- it helps me with not only things outside my knowledge, but also lets me check when something ''is'' being sarcastic. And when I finally noticed that tagline, even though I knew it couldn't be directed straight at me, it still sort of felt like it. I've been called dumb nearly throughout my life for not catching sarcasm which others seem to understand immediately, and it doesn't exactly feel nice (or in the spirit of XKCD!) to have that little reminder floating there. It's not even worded to be funny, either, just sorta cold. Sarcastically saying someone is dumb for not getting sarcasm... it's a vicious loop. And when there are so many other options -- many of which have fun puns or a much more friendly feel -- why are people so attached to this one? And from what it seems, a lot of people seem attached to it purely for the purpose of being stubborn against people who don't like it. Plus, why is it such an awful thing to try to make people feel more welcome? Jeez, guys. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.11|108.162.216.11]] 21:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Change it please. I see it all the time, and it feels SO condescending. I often check out the site to get more information about a topic in the scope of a given strip, or to see if there's any subtext outside of the primary joke, and it ALWAYS feels like the site is insulting my ability to understand "simple humor". I understand that it's supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek joke, but I hate it. I think it should either be changed to one of the previous suggestions, or use a rotating set of taglines, or it should just be removed completely, because I utterly dislike the way it currently is. [[Special:Contributions/130.215.123.52|130.215.123.52]] 12:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Definitely '''change''' - I'm surprised what it was doing there in the first place - but I do not like the "we're dumb" version either. My current favorite is "Because we all need a little help", as it is equally directed at both the non-joke-understanding audience and the screenreading audience; but I definitely like "Some comics may be funnier than they appear" and, to a lesser extent, "You're one of today's lucky 10,000" (not sure, actually, whether that one would benefit from a link to the relevant comic). Incidentally, how did the previous guy manage to post four hours in the future? Or is the AM/PM to 24h conversion broken? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.81.88|141.101.81.88]] 08:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Wow, this blew up... I never found the tagline particularly funny, but I honestly can't believe so many people appear to be offended by it. If someone is dumb enough to believe it is specifically aimed at them, not realise that it is humor, and think it is actually worth getting upset about, then the tagline is perfectly justified. Should be changed to "Please click here if you are easily offended", with a link to Disney.com, (or 4chan/b/...) --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. Even smart humans need positive words. Many of the proposed alternative with only positive words suits me fine. [[User:MGitsfullofsheep|MGitsfullofsheep]] ([[User talk:MGitsfullofsheep|talk]]) 13:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''', but modify the Skip to Content tags to bypass it. It's humorous, and there's no such thing as a humorous tag line that won't offend '''someone'''. Can pretty much guarantee that if it's changed to something else, some wag will start a discussion about how that new subtitle offends them... {{unsigned|Danemcg}}

If it's not too late, I vote '''keep''', I regularly view the site for detailed information about comic topics and am always amused to read the tag line. I hope the poor fellow who tallies our votes here will mind that we're likely an unrepresentative group - if you're offended, you're likely to turn out, where a contented user (nearly myself) might just pass by. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.36|108.162.216.36]] 14:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. Anyone who's actually offended by this is way to sensitive...[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.11|108.162.216.11]] 15:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. Never found it funny. We can do better. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 16:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. It offends too many people (myself included, although more at first than now) to be kept. [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 16:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I too vote '''change''' if it's not too late. Not because it's particularly offensive but more because it's not funny or xkcd-ish enough to justify any offence it may or may not cause. I prefer some of the suggestions we've had:
* Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000! (with, of course, a link to the relevant comic)
* '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear.''' This one is my favourite and I feel it captures very well my main reason for using explainxkcd
::[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.149|141.101.106.149]] 21:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep'''. If we legitimately had a large group of blind people who were offended at this tagline, I would be in support of changing it. However, the only supposedly blind person who we know of that takes offense was obviously a belligerent individual. Do we really want to take a guy who says "I've found more intelligent, compassionate, humane, wise, sympathetic, inclusive, and infinitely funnier *dingleberries* than [Randall Munroe].*Rude gesture*" seriously? do we really want some ranting asshole somewhere to dictate what our site does or does not do? seriously? [[User:VfiftyV|VfiftyV]] ([[User talk:VfiftyV|talk]]) 00:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. I've always disliked the tagline, it's a bland and obvious "joke" that's at odds with the friendly, clever tone of both the comics and the rest of this site. Even if it's clear we don't mean it, calling every visitor to this site dumb, with no further context, just isn't setting a good example for the kind of *clever* sarcasm that Randall uses. We can do better. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.32|108.162.221.32]] 01:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' because it's clearly meant as a joke. It makes no sense to change this site over one person's "offense" that the unaffiliated xkcd site isn't blind-friendly enough.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.217|162.158.142.217]] 02:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Anyone with a sense of humor can understand that it's at least humorous. And, the primary purpose of the site ''is'' to... explain the comics, mainly to those who don't understand them. If it does get read out loud to every blind person who visits, then please, by all means, '''Change''' the layout at least to keep that from happening. But it shouldn't be removed due to half-baked complaints. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.168|108.162.245.168]] 02:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I've already voted above, but I would like to call out the sightlessness issue as a red herring. One of the premises of accessible design is that all users get the same content, although perhaps in different ways, so I think we're going in the wrong direction in proposing to change or hide the text for blind users but not for everyone else. If we're to keep it, then let us keep it for all. If we're to change it, then let us change it (to the same thing) for all. If we're to remove it, then let us remove it for all. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 04:22, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I've tallied up the votes twice and counted 36-31 the first time, and 39-32 the second time. Both times were majority keep, though there was still a strong showing for people wanting to change it. I've fixed and restored the black hat figure who was supposed to be speaking the tagline back in the old blog days, and I turned the tagline off for screen readers since the blind may only need us for the transcript, and accessibility for the blind is a big part of why we had a transcript to begin with. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
:I think this is a great compromise. And cool that it is Black Hat's line. I did not know this used to be the case. Is it correct that the font color has also been turned gray so it is not so prominent? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
::Yeah, back when this site was a blog, [https://web.archive.org/web/20130118141641/http://www.explainxkcd.com/ the tagline was Black Hat's line.] [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&action=history looking at the edit history for the tagline], it looks like we've made some vague attempts to restore black hat's face next to the tagline before, but mediawiki doesn't process markup in that area. I did a little bit of CSS magic this time round to fix it properly this time. He's a little fuzzy though, could be better. The tagline's always been gray though. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

: Just before I start, since I'm an IP user and therefore hard to identify (should probably make an account one of these days, but oh well), I just want to quickly mention that I am the same person as [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.157|108.162.249.157]] who posted on the 11 Feb.

: Now that's out of the way, I want to say that I disagree with the outcome decided for this post. While I appreciate the attempt to compromise by having it look a bit more like Black Hat is saying the line, I still think that the substance of the arguments against the current tag line are much stronger than the arguments for keeping it. The arguments for keeping it all basically boil down to "It's a joke and it's been there forever so there is no need to change and anyone who suggests otherwise should just man the f*** up." Nowhere have I seen anyone in the keep-camp argue as to why none of the alternatives are just as good or better than the current line. Pretty much, the only reason ever given to stick to the current tag line is that it's the status quo.

: On the other hand, you have many, many people pointing out that the tagline is offensive and that, even if the reader does understand it to be a joke, it's not a particularly clever one and provides a rather unwelcoming atmosphere. What many of the people in the keep-camp are ignoring is the fact that not everybody has a high level of self-confidence, and that being called dumb, even if the intention is tongue-in-cheek, just comes off as hostile and drives people away. It is also true that all tone of voice suggesting sarcasm is completely lost in text, which is why over at the [http://doctorwho.answers.wikia.com/wiki/Doctor_Who_Answers:Policies#Additional Doctor Who Answers Wiki] we specifically point this out in our policy of civility towards fellow users. This wiki is very different from that one in many ways, but I don't think it would be dumb to look at what others have noticed and learn from their mistakes, especially since that particular wording was added due to a bad misunderstanding leading from lost sarcasm. There has already been somebody here who admits they find understanding sarcasm to be difficult. Should we really be calling them dumb? Furthermore, the quote seems to directly contradict Randall's attitude towards ignorance, summed up so perfectly in [[1053: Ten Thousand]]. We should be welcoming ignorant, or "dumb", people in the hopes of enlightening them with the wisdom of the community here. Singling them out as dumb isn't going to help them.

: Finally, I fear the reason there aren't more change votes are because many of the people who were put off by the tagline simply never came back to this wiki after their first visit. I wouldn't be surprised if reader retention rates increased if you changed the tagline, and if the number of readers who convert to users also increases if the community provided a more friendly first-impression.

: Now, I know that I have raised this all before, along with many of the other people who voted for change, and it still doesn't seem to have made an impact of the people who try to insist that an insult with no wit or humour is "just a joke". I think the best way for us to prove that the tagline needs to change is to conduct a little experiment. Let's look at a list of commonly supported alternatives:

:# '''It's 'cause we're dumb'''
:# '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!'''
:# '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''
:# '''Because sometimes we all need a little help'''

: Explanations for why these taglines are better than the current have already been provided. I challenge anyone reading this post from the keep-camp to explain why "It's 'cause you're dumb" is better than each of those taglines individually, without falling back on arguments of legacy or that the people reading the line are thin-skinned wusses. If reasonable counter-arguments can be made against each of those lines in favour of the current one, then I will back down. Until then, I cannot accept that the battle of ideas has chosen the current tagline. There are just so many better alternatives that are funnier, more in-line with the xkcd spirit, and above all, are welcoming to new readers into the community instead of turning them away the moment they reach the front door. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.157|108.162.250.157]] 11:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

:: Dude, you are not getting how voting and democracy works. The people who are proposing a change, are the equivalent of lobbyist --having lots of lobbyist does not equate to "strong support". None of these lobbyist have been able to agree on a single rewording, so they are not arguing for the same cause. On the the other hand there are thousands of of visitors (voters), of those who actually voted, voted to keep and not go with the suggestions of the lobbyists. Had there on the other-hand been a majority for change, the what would the change be? At best we would have to consolidate the suggestions (candidates), and since there is no term limit on tag-lines, the existing one should be a running candidate as well, and then make an eating contest between all the possible candidates [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 19:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a stab at it. "It's 'cause you're dumb" is better than any of these because it is funnier than any of these. It's funny for the same reason that the titles of numerous books, "XXX for Dummies" are funny. In fact, if it weren't such an obvious rip-off, the tag line could be "xkcd for Dummies", which would be the same joke.

:# '''It's 'cause we're dumb''' is sort of awkward, and why would I want an explanation for something I didn't understand from a bunch of dummies, anyway? I want somebody smart to explain it to the dummy - me - who didn't get the joke.
:# '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!''' is meaningless, and therefore not funny, unless you click on it and then let Randall tell you the joke behind that punch line. I do love the sentiment now that I've seen that comic, and somehow linking to that comic as an explanation of what explainxkcd.com is all about is a great idea, but as a tag line, by itself, it just isn't funny.
:# '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear''' is sort of cute, as it relates to the warning in rear-view mirrors, but it is so actually true in the case of xkcd that it loses some of its funniness by being a serious explanation of why the explainxkcd.com site is valuable.
:# '''Because sometimes we all need a little help''' - is sweet, sympathetic, and inclusive; it's just not very funny.

By contrast, "It's 'cause you're dumb" grabbed me the first time I saw it as being relevant to why explainxkcd.com is a great site, and equally importantly, it made me laugh. Maybe it is to be expected that among the viewers of a site dedicated to explaining jokes there will be a reasonable percentage that don't get this particular joke, either. Maybe the solution is a link on that line to a page that explains the "It's 'cause you're dumb" joke in the way xkcd jokes are explained: "It's funny because you are not really dumb, you just maybe didn't get some very esoteric reference, and you'll enjoy the humor of xkcd more when that reference is explained. But, when jokes need to be explained, it is common for people to feel like they must be stupid, so we make a joke about that feeling. It's not really pointed at you in particular; after all, this is a published web-site - the folks who wrote it probably don't even know you." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.41|108.162.221.41]] 18:44, 16 February 2016‎

'''Change''', kind of. How about this: "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're <strike>dumb</strike> of average intelligence." Maybe even include a (hidden) link to [[1386: People are Stupid]]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.220.17|108.162.220.17]] 23:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

: (I landed in an edit conflict with the person above, so my comments do not take their response into account.)

: Thank you 108. You actually provided a decent rebuttal against the counterproposal, which has been lacking until this time. While I do not agree with all your points, I can actually see your point-of-view. Personally, I think that if we're going to use it as a reference to the "___ for Dummies" books, it needs to be clearer so people don't take it as an insult, but otherwise I understand your points.

: @162: As my friend, one of the greatest admins on one of the biggest non-Wikipedia wikis, says, wikis are not democracies. It is the idea with the best supporting arguments that wins, not the idea with the most votes, as many people support certain ideas for superficial reasons that are not aligned with the overall aim of improving the wiki to attract more readers/editors and improve content. Especially with such a close vote, I would put more emphasis on the quality of the arguments than the pure numbers of supports/opposes.

: Looking at the proper counter-arguments finally provided, I would shift the counter-proposal for a new tagline to tagline 3 suggested above: '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''. From above, I can see the argument against 1 being that people don't want help from dummies, 2 will probably be obscure for new users and may alienate them upon entry, and 4 is just too soppy. 3 however is funny, it's accessible, and it's actually funnier in my opinion because it actually ''does'' describe exactly what we do here. To the new user, it will at first just be a mildly amusing reference (still funnier than the current line in my opinion) but it will take on a new meaning and relevance as people use this wiki more, and the gradual realisation of relevance will make the tagline even more appropriate and amusing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.163|108.162.250.163]] 23:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I’m the lurker who suggested “Some comics are funnier than they appear.” I was bemused to see it get any traction at all, since it’s not that hysterically funny, and perhaps incomprehensible outside the US where convex car mirrors aren’t etched “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”

Wow, am I glad I didn’t create an account here when posting it!

I expected to see more spit-balling in kind, not an outpouring of orneriness from a majority of this obviously intelligent community who are apparently too stubborn to admit that there could possibly be anything wrong with greeting newcomers, “It’s ‘cause you’re dumb.” I took the starting point of the thread to be the obviousness that ANYTHING ELSE would be better than that.

I also expected the admin to deliberate a little harder, showing how he evaluated arguments and suggestions and tried to do the right thing, rather than just counting votes. Notwithstanding the facade of democracy in his benevolent dictatorship, he also doesn’t seem to have taken into account that the effect of NOT changing the tagline—-thus continuing to alienate a lot of users and potential contributors like me-—far, FAR outweighs any potential backlash from the old guard who are married to it. What are they going to do, rage-quit because they didn’t get their way? Because something on their favorite wiki got **gasp!** CHANGED?

Boo hoo, I didn’t get my way on a small thing which doesn’t really matter. At all. I only followed up here because I noticed the banner soliciting user input had changed. However, the ugly tone of this little tempest in a teapot has certainly convinced me that this community isn’t worth joining or contributing to. I reserve the right to continue lurking, but I’m sure as hell turning my AdBlock back on.[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 07:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) said "We're all idiots 99% of the time about 99% of things. It's the 1% that makes up for all the rest." Learning begins by owning your dumb. [[User:Bob Stein - VisiBone|Bob Stein - VisiBone]] ([[User talk:Bob Stein - VisiBone|talk]]) 16:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I felt offended -- but -- so what. It is true. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.169|141.101.91.169]] 21:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC) Martin

* '''Keep''' It is funny. People are not made of glass, not even dumb ones. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.172|108.162.245.172]] 23:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

: ''199 wrote:"I was bemused to see it get any traction at all, since it’s [...] perhaps incomprehensible outside the US where convex car mirrors aren’t etched “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”"''
: You don't need to worry about that. American culture has spread throughout the world so thoroughly that I assume most English speakers will understand it. I myself am an Aussie, who spent most of her childhood living in Europe, and I understood the reference perfectly. And while it might not be "hysterically funny", it is certainly more universally funny than the insult.

: Admins, please heed what 199 said in the rest of his/her message. You have yet another example in a long line of people being turned off from this wiki community because they don't like the attitude of this statement, nor the stubborn adherence to it despite so many people pointing out how wrong it is. You are aware that "It was just a joke" is a common defence bullies make, right? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.157|108.162.250.157]] 00:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

So, @Davidy22, can you add a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div, and move the jump-to-nav div to before the tagline in the HTML? Thank you! [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 08:58, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

At 12,000 words this discussion has beaten the H0/HO discussion on wikipedia... How long until we beat Star Trek Into Darkness??? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:10, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I like the humour in it. 18.February 2016 12:40 (UTC) Fabian

XKCD provides transcripts about a week after a new comic comes out, so saying that blind readers require explainxkcd is a bit of an overstatement (although to be honest the official transcripts are somewhat vague). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.217|141.101.70.217]] 19:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

: Generally most transcripts gets completed within hours of the comics being posted. More complex ones can take longer, and there is sometimes a bit of back and forth as far as layout is concerned, but the content tends to be there pretty quickly. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 09:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

"Explain xkcd: extra knowledge, see discussions." I wish I'd thought of that one a week ago. And Randall says it's not an acronym, eh? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

:Ah crap... that's actually really good. I'd have supported this had it been mentioned earlier, even though I voted to keep the current. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 02:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

== Concerning recent spam ==

In light of the recent and large amount of spam that we've been seeing, I've revoked new users of the right to create and move pages, as well as access to the write api. If your account is three days old and has 10 or more edits under it, you will still be allowed to create and move pages. This will end when the spambots decide to leave. To the person who's doing this, don't ruin this for the other people who use this site. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 19:36, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:In light of the recent burst of spam, creation of talk pages will also be shut off for new users. We will create an empty talk page for new comics in place of this feature. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
: So what will you do in three days when the spambot can create new pages again? [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 07:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
::They have to hit both criteria. The flaw there is that spambots have also demonstrated themselves to be capable of editing pages, but I'm not sure what to do for that aside from look for a better captcha. If it comes to it, I'll write my own. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:05, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
aw man. tfw another troll already beat me to the punch {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.62}}

@Davidy22: Maybe we should use something like [[MW:Extension:TitleBlacklist]] or [[MW:Manual:Combating spam#.24wgSpamRegex]]. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 14:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
:Hum. I'll take a look when I get home. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Sigh, it's getting out of hand again... --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 15:19, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Alright, I'm not sure what's happening here. This is what's in the localsettings file:

$wgGroupPermissions['user']['createtalk'] = false;
$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createtalk'] = false;

:::I don't know why this doesn't work. Probably well overdue for a mediawiki upgrade, but I have midterms and papers coming up. This timing is inconvenient. The title blacklist is for a newer mediawiki version, I'll lock and upgrade this weekend. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::For now, I'll try removing talk page creation rights from all non-admin users. I'll make the talk pages for new explanations. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Alright, I made a test account and I realised I'm very dumb. I forgot to turn off createtalk for all, so people could still make talk pages. I've also added mandatory email verification. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 23:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
::::See tagline ;-) --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 01:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::I do want to find/write a better CAPTCHA though, none of these measures I've taken stop account creation, so the spammers might try just shoving a million accounts at us. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Oooh nevermind forcing email verification turns off anonymous editing. Don't want to go that far, and it didn't stop that one spammer anyways. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

== Will verifying my email turn off the CAPTCHA ==

Pretty much what the section title says. I find the way the captcha works here kinda annoying, since I submit and then get the CAPTCHA. I'd be willing to put in my email address if it would stop the CAPTCHA, but, otherwise, I don't see any point in doing so.

If it does stop the CAPTCHA, I would suggest mentioning this in the preferences as one of the benefits of adding an email, and perhaps point it out on the page when the CAPTCHA appears.

IF not, then will I just have the CAPTCHA forever? Or will it go away once I put in enough edits? Or do I need to do something else?

[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 00:10, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

:The email address is optional, we have it set up so that users less than 3 days old with less than 10 edits will have to fill in a CAPTCHA when they edit. It's set up that way to limit and make the damage that spambots can inflict much easier to fix. You appear to have cleared the 10 edit boundery today, so you should be able to start editing CAPTCHA free now. Giving people a way to bypass the anti spam window by providing an email address is an idea though, I'll see if I can't write a plugin for that after I'm done with finals. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

== Why does Mediawiki look so "old" all of a sudden? ==

Screendhots: [http://i.imgur.com/smN1a45.png][http://i.imgur.com/qdpxhdY.png]

I've tried this in three browsers, and they all look the same. [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 12:56, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
:High traffic, high load, everything is on fire. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:28, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
:: Man ! The fire started by Randall is out of control.. It has been so long, and this is looking very ugly. Did wiki go in "printer-friendly version only" mode ? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.56|162.158.255.56]] 04:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

(H'rm - realized I posted this in the wrong place - further discussion should go [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Stylesheets not working?|here]].) [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 15:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

== Annoying ad ==

From the anti-noscript text shown when an ad is blocked by noscript: "our ads are restricted to unobtrusive images and slow animated GIFs."

Yet the ad blocked features a drawing of a woman in her underwear. I find this very obtrusive.

Also, can you get rid of the captcha needed to even view content on this site using Tor? https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/203306930-Does-CloudFlare-block-Tor- {{unsigned ip|162.158.17.66}}
:Looked through our bids, a guy who was auto approved used the privelidge to put that ad up. I cancelled the ad, if he puts it up again he's getting banned. I'll get on the tor options in cloudflare. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:41, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

== Random Question ==
Since this is the miscellaneous section, I assume I can ask a question based on anything, even if it's not XKCD or wiki-related. Am I correct? Or is there another place to do that? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:Nothing expressly forbids it, but do remember the purpose of the site. If you want to ask a question not related to xkcd or the site, there is likely another, better outlet for your question on the internet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:Ah. Okay. Just making sure. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 17:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

== "What if: Hide the Atmosphere" question ==

At the end, Randall notes one "may not want to" dig out Texas, and the guy in the illustration mentions "specifically requesting" something. As someone not from the USA, I don't know what he's referring to. Could someone please explain it? {{unsigned ip|172.68.51.28}}
:It's a reference to {{w|Don't Mess with Texas}}. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

== Blinking advert ==

There's an ad for something called Goliath Fallen that blinks occasionally. A static picture would be fine but the blinking is distracting --[[User:Figvh|Figvh]] ([[User talk:Figvh|talk]]) 04:22, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

== What is Randall Munroe's wife's name? ==
I am curious--haven't been able to find it. {{unsigned ip|162.158.62.141}}
:We accept privacy. Ask Randall himself. [[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:21, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

== 5 bucks that most of these are spambots. ==

[[File:probablyspammers.png]]

🤔

[[User:DPS2004|DPS2004'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:DPS2004|talk]]) 19:07, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
:I tried "DROP TABLE users;" but then I lost my login... ;)
:The more serious thing is that when the Captcha was broken (after 31 March) that bots were too dumb but with the new reCaptcha V2 this happens again.
:But since those users take no further actions and IPs also can edit here it doesn't seem to be a problem. Nevertheless old users with zero edits may be purged in the future.
:[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

== Header pointing to FAQ implies content that doesn't exist ==

"All explain xkcd editors should check the latest update at the Editor FAQ. We now support LaTeX..."

Strangely, the FAQ doesn't mention LaTex once.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.210.34|172.69.210.34]] 15:06, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
:You're right but the (yet last) question "How do I enter mathematical or chemical formulas?" belongs to this. The Math functionality uses LaTeX syntax and I will mention this. I thought people who know the markup <code><nowiki><math>...</math></nowiki></code> do know that it's based on LaTeX. Nevertheless reading this {{w|Help:Displaying a formula|manual}} is mandatory. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

== Unable to create own user page? ==

Hi, I'm a new user here. When I try to put info on my user page it says I don't have permission to create it. Same applies for my talk page. Please help.[[User:VannaWho|VannaWho]] ([[User talk:VannaWho|talk]]) 07:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:I've clarified the corresponding section in the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ|Editor FAQ]]. You will become a trusted user after a few more edits, but right now I've created your user and talk page. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks. I'm looking forwards to becoming an active member of the community here.[[User:VannaWho|VannaWho]] ([[User talk:VannaWho|talk]]) 13:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

== 2018 ==

This probably only means something to me, but has anyone else noted that we are approaching comic 2018 in 2018? I don't think any other comic has been posted in in the year its number represents. Maybe the sign of the apocalypse? Or like all the other signs of the apocalypse, just a random occurrence. I am interested in seeing if it is memorialized in some way. {{unsigned ip|172.69.33.239}}
:Please do not forget to sign your comments. Nevertheless the apocalypse was already here: [[998: 2012]]. And a comic with the name 2018 was published last December ([[1935: 2018]]). The comic number 2018 will probably happen on July 11 and the number 2019 will be two days later on July 13 (ohhh, it's a Friday...). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 08:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

== Random Kettle ==

Hello, so I had https://xk3d.xkcd.com/880/ open for an extended amount of time. When I came back to it today, I had a random blue kettle that was not on any other of my xkcd pages, and it would change locations every time i refreshed. (I have several screenshots, just not sure how to upload here.)

It went away when the back page button was pressed, but does anybody know what or WHY this kettle was there? {{unsigned|DeathFox4}}
:Please do not forget to sign your comments. You probably want to talk about this matter here: [[Talk:880: Headache]]. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

== Where to ask questions to find a specific comic? ==

Hello,

Someone searching for a specific comic has gotten me to try to find a place to ask the community, but haven't found any?

[https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/9uzvqv/help_me_find_the_one_where/]

kind regards,
Dodo --[[User:Dodo|Dodo]]
:Please sign your posts with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> because then we also see a timestamp of your comment. That's important because we could see that your question from reddit was solved there slightly after your post here. It's from SMBC and not xkcd. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

== Incomplete "Created by a _" Tag Jokes ==

I'm not lobbying for their return or anything, I'm just curious why they were removed. Or rather, why the incomplete tag was rewritten to discourage them. It was a good bit of comedy, and their removal makes it seem like this wiki is trying to be more serious than it really needs to be, IMO. [[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 19:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
:I'm the creator of the BOT which initially presented a new page by honestly mentioning it was NOT created by a human. Years later, people started to make that joke. Sometimes it was really funny, but you can't repeat a joke for over hundreds of times, not funny and stupid attempts to reach that first jokes. And that incomplete tag is meant to be there for mentioning what's wrong or missing, sadly most editors don't use it for this reason. Nonetheless a nice joke is still welcome there, but it should be funny and not just an urge to present a "joke." --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

== xkcd.wtf ==

Hi everyone, I've recently made this small project http://xkcd.wtf/ . It's not yet finished, but somehow Big Goog' picked it up, so I thought I'll go live. It is important to me to announce it here first, since it uses explainxkcd's API and wouldn't be possible without all of you.

Originally, this was meant to be a Uni project, but the course was cancelled and the already purchased domain sat dormant for many months. Just recently, I picked it up and made a first prototype in Perl, then I undertook the painful process of rewriting it as a buzzword-compliant Javascript Single Page Application (so my server doesn't have to proxy everything). It sometimes craps out, because xkcd's API is awful (the 'real' one doesn't have CORS, the c.xkcd.com one is often offline) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 22:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
:Nice, I know you have many skills in programming. What's the purpose of this project?
:Funny findings: The TLD isn't welcome always like here "In June 2012, Ryan Singel of Wired predicted that the .wtf domain would not be applied by anyone." and my own first investigation:
:<code>[root@localhost ~]# whois xkcd.wtf</code>
:<code>No whois server is known for this kind of object.</code>
:I'm running CentOS with no pending updates...
:Besides kidding, it works great and could be a good presentation on pages using a bad layout here. My goal is still to get this site much more mobile compliant, but there are still also issues on parts you don't use. Nonetheless let me know if you need help, hoping you will help here in the future too. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:49, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
::hi, sorry I missed your post! The purpose was to do this as a university project, but the course was cancelled after I bought the domain in anticipation of it. not wanting it to go to waste, I've implemented it in my spare time. the whois error is strange; it works on Fedora (which queries whois.donuts.co (no m)). I may come back to your offer for help (thanks) and definitely won't be leaving explainxkcd.com (my expertise lies with computer topics, and there weren't many comics about that recently. that's why I've quieted down a bit) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 17:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

== xkcd Sorting Options ==
Is there any way to sort xkcd comics by size? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.80|141.101.77.80]] 04:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
:What size? The pictures, the explanation, or what? Explanations are changed every day. So, for what purpose is this idea? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:21, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
::I can see some benefit in being able to sort explanations by size as some of the earlier comics have fairly short explanations that could be expanded, but I'm not sure this is worth the effort of setting up a sort function. I don't know why you would want to sort the images by size other than perhaps for general interest. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 10:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
:::A small sized explanation doesn't say anything about it's quality. IMHO in contrast there are many overwhelming explanations which are far too long, TL;DR... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
::::I agree. Most of the early explanations are just fine. I was just trying to guess why they were suggesting a sort function. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 14:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

== 1204: Detail has the incorrect picture ==

Not sure where to put this but just look at the title. Not sure how one changes it, but a typo was fixed and usually the newest picture is used. [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

== Regarding the alt-right trolls ==
Safe to say everything they leave is deletable, ''including'' the little "jew reverted my edits, help!" complaint they almost always leave on the discussion pages? --[[User:Youforgotthisthing|Youforgotthisthing]] ([[User talk:Youforgotthisthing|talk]]) 00:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

== Is the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline a relic of the past? ==

Yes, I'm going there, because this issue isn't going away.

I read through the entirety of the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Sightless_readers_offended_by_the_.22It.27s_.27cause_you.27re_dumb.22_tagline. Explain XKCD tagline debate from 2016], and I have to admit, I was surprised. I had not considered that there would be so many people in support of this tagline, nor that the debate had been going on this long. I was actually sure that most people were in agreement with me that it's unnecessarily insulting and demeaning. It seems that isn't the case.

The main argument from the Keep side appears to be that "it's just a joke". Here are some examples of that sentiment:

* "Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke."
* "it is a rather obvious joke"
* "If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get."
* "I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline."
* "It's not hiding behind "just a joke", it IS the joke. It's tongue-in-cheek. It's so obviously false that you have to intentionally ignore the joke and manufacture offense about something benign."
* "It's amusing to me. The joke is clear, and universal. Offence may be taken equally by anyone reading. It fits well."
* "Looks like the kind of joke you'd actually find in the comments."
* "I can't believe we've become such a limp-wristed baby society that we can't even have a joke like "It's 'cause you're dumb" as the tagline. Nobody would reasonably get offended at it."
* "If there ever really was a single person who took the tag line seriously, then it was just telling them the truth."
* "the joke benefits from it sounding like it's a mock insult"
* "I doubt there's very many of these smart people who are smart enough to get every joke (and every nuance) without assistance. Therefore it should be clear that is is a simple tongue-in-cheek joke, you don't really mean it seriously. It should be taken in the tone that it's meant, and it offends me when people don't."
* "It's 'cause you're dumb" grabbed me the first time I saw it as being relevant to why explainxkcd.com is a great site, and equally importantly, it made me laugh."

I like to think that I do understand xkcd's humor very well - even the more subtle aspects of it, like Randall's perpetual social paranoia, his sarcasm at common failings of societies and organizations, his absurdism, his childlike wonder at the things we don't know. I love it, it makes me laugh and it makes me happy.

I am not a delicate snowflake, and I believe firmly that we should not allow people to use "being offended" as a weapon of control to take away freedoms or to force their agenda on others. That kind of behavior should rightfully be challenged and resisted.

However, I am not arguing on the basis of offense. I believe that I actually have a solid, reasonable foundation for my case for change that can be accepted by all, if I can argue it effectively enough. Because you see... I never got the joke.

When I came to Explain XKCD for the first time, and saw the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline, my reaction was "Well, that isn't true, and it's a bit childish." It didn't come across as sarcasm to me; it comes across more like the kind of boorish flippancy expected of an anonymous imageboard, where being crude is the local currency. Mentally, I just couldn't fit it with what I saw as an otherwise fine mission of collaboratively explaining a very clever webcomic as a service to readers all over the world. And I didn't like it. It's not the kind of tone that I enjoy in a community.

"I don't like it" is not, of course, an argument, and would be a poor foundation from which to make my case - particularly as I am up against people who insist that the tagline ''is'' xkcd's humor and tone. So instead, I would like to argue this case: '''I think that this is what xkcd's tone ''used to be'', and that it isn't what xkcd's tone is ''now'''''.

The "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline is actually ''ten years old''. It originally appeared in a different context; it was in the header image for the Explain XKCD blog.

[[File:explain xkcd blog header image.png|center]]

The image of Black Hat insulting Cueball is subtly different to what the tagline is now, and so I think some of the nuance - that might soften the joke or make it less antagonistic - has been lost. I have a theory that this is part of the reason why people are so polarized on whether the tagline is insulting or not, because I suspect that some people are remembering this older version. However, that's away from the point.

My point is this: it is no longer 2009 and things have changed.

xkcd, and Randall himself, have changed - Randall has published more than 1500 comics in that time, as well as books dedicated to explaining science and technology in his unique, witty style. He loves knowledge and discovery and celebrates the little things that people find interesting, often standing up to defend such pursuits against those who might otherwise dismiss them. That is xkcd to me. And I submit that Explain XKCD has, in those ten years, outgrown the tagline as well, We are, I think, more encyclopedists than agitators. If most people on this wiki are like me, they find pleasure in carefully unraveling the mystery of an xkcd comic and creating a resource that's as useful as can be. The tagline serves no purpose, in that case, other than to drive away contributors.

We shouldn't be afraid to offend. But I don't think we should offend needlessly. I think we're better than that.

[[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 21:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

:I really like the old banner, and think that the tone fits well with many of the older comics. But I agree with you that most of the newer comics have a less childish tone to them, where it is not as fitting. Also having it as a tagline instead of a banner makes it less obvious to be a character-statement. It is not an important issue to me, but I agree with you. After all explainxkcd is a site, for the lucky [[Ten Thousand]] each day. [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 07:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

== Pageviews? ==

Any idea how many pageviews, on average, this wiki gets? I'm not looking for any detailed breakdown or historical stats, just a rough average for the main page each day. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.57|172.69.23.57]] 02:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

I'd be really curious to know which pages are the most viewed on this website. Which comics are the most unintelligible to people? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.201|173.245.54.201]] 23:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

== xkcd site's fine print ==

I just noticed the fine print on the xkcd site, under the comics list: "xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing."

Is there an explanation for the above? (copied from xkcd's homepage on 8/8/19)

My first thought was "Those are low requirements". Then the "on an Apple IIGS" tripped me up. (I know so little of Apple software use that I can't say that portion is incorrect.) I like the humor of the screen resolution (although I think only computers could read it) and the suggested mode.

M.Striker
(didn't realize that this was an edit and not a message; deleted my included e-mail)

:The text you mentioned is explained at [[footnote]]. I guess you are new to this wiki/project? Feel free to improve any of the sites you find (many can be found by using the search function), or to comment/discuss the pages in the discussion section. If you want to sign your comments on here or in a comment section (with or without an existing account), you can use four "~"-symbols. (Do not wory, it will not show you actual IP adress). [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 06:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

== Randall NYT excerpt from "How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems" ==

FYI, Randall has an article in Tuesday's ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/science/what-makes-a-red-sky-at-night-and-at-morning.html "What Makes a Red Sky at Night (and at Morning)"]. It's an excerpt from "How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems." [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 03:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

== More ads? ==

Is it me, or are there now a ton of extra advertisements on this site? There is one between every paragraph of explanation. At least, when viewed with a mobile browser. It's a huge distraction, so I'm going to be enabling an adblocker.

: I would also like to file a complaint. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 03:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

:: [[user:Davidy22]] If hosting expense is the problem, would it be possible to move to miraheze? [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 11:54, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

== Should we* reference xkcd.com black lives matter banner ==

I consume almost all my xkcd directly from explain xkcd. So i only visit xkcd.com rarely.

I had been wondering why Randall was avoiding referencing the black lives matter movement which is clearly topical.

But i note that xkcd.com has a banner featuring Cueball saying "black lives matter".

Should we do the same?

* my apologies if we already do

[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 06:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2282: Coronavirus Worries

2020-03-19T13:43:40Z

Boatster: Toilet paper humour

Props to Randall for not mentioning toilet paper ONCE [[Special:Contributions/172.69.34.88|172.69.34.88]] 21:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
:He couldn't. There aren't any more toilet paper jokes left! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.52|162.158.159.52]] 11:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
::I heard there are plenty of toilet paper jokes, but people are hoarding them ...[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

The transcript states that the axis lines do not have arrows on them. It should describe the arrows on labels, i.e. More common with arrow pointing to the right. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 23:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

My initial take on the More Healthy axis reflected on the person doing the worrying, that is some worries would be more or less common depending on the health of the person. The explanation interprets More Healthy to refer to the worry itself, that is some worries are intrinsically more healthy than others. I am at a loss to determine which of these interpretations more closely fits the worries that are listed. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 23:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
::While there are some data points that could fit the "health of the worrier" interpretation (eg a sick person would worry more about how they got a cough, while a healthy person might not even have a cough), I think all of them can fit the "health of the worry" and some of them explicitly do not fit the former. For example a sick person is not less likely to worry that "random people in a news story" are reacting wrong compared to "your government"; and a healthy person is more likely to worry that a lack of rest/hydration will cause them to *get* the virus yet that dot is both low on the "healthy" axis and higher on the "commonality" axis than general concern about rest/hydration. Finally if it was how common the worry was depending on the health of the person then I would expect lines or curves rather than points, since that would better show whether a healthy person is more or less likely to have a worry than a sick person; as it stands they indicate a single value per worry, suggesting that each worry has a definite commonality and health value rather than a dependent relationship.

"with at least eight in a row" -- this is getting hecka tiresome. Surely he can think of _something_ other than the flu 2.0.
Wouldn't it be interesting if your dismissive "flu 2.0" led you be infected by the Coronavirus....[[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.136|162.158.214.136]] 01:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
For most people in not-at-risk groupings (meaning not elderly, infants, or immuno-compromised), it really isn't that big of a hit to their health. The risk is not that a young/middle-aged person gets sick, the risk is that they spread it to someone who is in an at-risk segment. Nevertheless, people die all the time from the regular flu, and not in trivial numbers. This isn't that much different. More people are going to be hurt much worse from losing their jobs (hospitality, entertainment, service ... and the industries that support them), incomes, and probably homes than would have been from this. {{unsigned ip|162.158.74.45}}
:The thing is: Covid-19 is currently not a big health risk for most people, because there are strong measures to fight it. Without of those measures it would me much more people affected. Also if you look at Italy: Most people dying there are elderly. Because they do not get sufficient treatment. Why? Because they give the lung machines to younger people instead. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Talk:2256: Bad Map Projection: South America

2020-01-18T21:30:05Z

Boatster: Explaining my 2x SAs = new guinea logic

I overlaid this map on all the projections in https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/977:_Map_Projections to show the difference. Is that something this wiki wants? [[User:EmuSam|EmuSam]] ([[User talk:EmuSam|talk]]) 05:54, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:I don't know about the rest of the wiki, but I certainly do! --[[User:T0]] ([[User talk:T0|talk]]) 10:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:Heck yeah that's awesome! [[Special:Contributions/108.162.210.222|108.162.210.222]] 13:48, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
: I'm gonna venture out on a limb here in my toe-shoes and say that those of us reading the comments on the explain-XKCD wiki will geek our Azimov socks off over that. [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 13:59, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
: Huwah, want? I clicked the link above with high hopes :x How did you not upload it yet :D [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.110|162.158.155.110]] 15:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:yes, please! [[User:WhiteDragon|WhiteDragon]] ([[User talk:WhiteDragon|talk]]) 22:05, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:What amuses me: Since you have the first comment, the wiki doesn't know how to show your picture on my iPad's Safari, so the bottom lines up with your comment and extends UP into the explanation, overlaid by the links for adding a comment etc. LOL! And I agree, totally fitting to include here. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 08:08, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

How many different kinds of transformation have been applied to South America? I can see resize, rotation, and skew (shear). Can't see any reflections or anything that looks obviously non linear. Anyone care enough to check? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.119.83|162.158.119.83]] 08:02, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:Not an expert on the terminologies used, especially in English. Does what has been done to the south America that is where Australia should be qualify as resize? It is not maintaining the aspect ratios, and is much "shorter" in the direction that used to be north-south (the way chile is "long") (and is now east west) and much wider in the other one. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:17, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

My God. It's full of South Americas [[User:Cosumel|Cosumel]] ([[User talk:Cosumel|talk]]) 20:30, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: 358 is country code for finland, which is completely missing in the projection. {{unsigned ip|162.158.238.216| 08:11, 17 January 2020}}
:Finland is part of Europe and Asia continent, which is now South America. It is thus not more missing thatn any country not in South America. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:43, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Something something a Brazilian South Americas how many is that [[User:Cellocgw|Cellocgw]] ([[User talk:Cellocgw|talk]]) 12:19, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

It's also similar to [[1653: United States Map]], isn't it? [[User:Nedlum|Nedlum]] ([[User talk:Nedlum|talk]]) 15:47, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:No it is not similar but it is somewhat related. But there is all the states that are moved around, not one state that makes up all of USA. But take Collorado and make it small enough and you can build anything with that square state. :-) I think this one is closer related: [[1500: Upside-Down Map]]. But I have added both to the explanation for reference. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:38, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

I wonder what projection the South America is pulled from. I also wonder whether that projection has the rest of the world laid out similar to this arraignment, or if they are the same projection used for layout as for the shape. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.176|162.158.146.176]] 17:39, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Wait a minute. If Tierra del Fuego is replaced by the whole of South America, does this include a tiny Tierra? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.205|162.158.111.205]] 20:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:Yes, there is clearly a small bend in the "tip" of the SA replacing Tierra. --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 20:56, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
::So many layers :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 23:38, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
:"{{w|The Last Battle|Further <s>up</s>''south'' and further in!}}" [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.221|141.101.99.221]] 17:05, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

Reckon the twoislands west of sulawesi are actually representing the two separate countries that make up the island of New Guinea ... there are indonesian islands between sulawesi and irian jaya but they are relatively small. Plu irian jaya kind of looks like SA [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 21:30, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

2256: Bad Map Projection: South America

2020-01-18T21:25:44Z

Boatster: Updated last two dot poins (combined into one)

{{comic
| number = 2256
| date = January 17, 2020
| title = Bad Map Projection: South America
| image = bad_map_projection_south_america.png
| titletext = The projection does a good job preserving both distance and azimuth, at the cost of really exaggerating how many South Americas there are.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a OOPS! ALL SOUTHAMERICABERRIES CEREAL BOX. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

[[File:BadMapProjectionComparison.png|thumb|right|The difference between projections.]]

This comic shows a {{w|Map projection|map projection}} in which every continent and large island has just been replaced with a differently scaled and rotated version of the continent of {{w|South America}}. This is the third comic in the series of [[:Category:Bad Map Projections|Bad Map Projections]].

The comic is likely in reference to the bad map designs in which continents like Africa and South America have been swapped, or where someone will jokingly replace Greenland with South America.

The caption of the comic is a reference to the {{w|Cap'n Crunch}} cereal type that became a meme, ''Oops! All Berries''.

Interestingly on the original South America, the archipelago or main island (hard to tell) of {{w|Tierra del Fuego}} is replaced with a small South America, while all other South Americas, including the one replacing the Tierra del Fuego, include it in their shape.

The title text claims that the map projection does a good job preserving distance and azimuth, the joke being that the distance and azimuth being preserved for the non-South America continents are those of South America and not the original continent. Note that while this is true for most of the larger landmasses, many of the smaller South Americas are distorted more significantly (such as the South Americas that replace New Zealand).

From roughly left to right and top to bottom, the South Americas replace:

*North America
*3 SAs for the Canadian Arctic Archipelago (possibly Victoria Island, Ellesmere Island, and Baffin Island)
*Greenland // Denmark? Danish Realm?
*Iceland
*Ireland
*Great Britain, UK
*Eurasia
*Newfoundland, Canada
*2 SAs for Hokkaido and Honshu, Japan
*Africa
*Taiwan
*Cuba
*Hispaniola (Dominican Republic and Haiti)
*Puerto Rico, US
*Jamaica
*Sri Lanka
*5 SAa for Luzon, Mindanao, and three others (possibly Negros Island, Samar, and Palawan), Philippines
*Sumatra, Indonesia
*Borneo (Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei)
*Sulawesi, Indonesia
*2 SAs for Irian Jaya (Indonesia) and Papua New Guinea (both part of the island of New Guinea)
*Java, Indonesia
*Madagascar
*Australia
*Tasmania, Australia
*2 SAs for South Island and North Island, New Zealand
*Isla Grande de Tierra del Fuego, Argentina and Chile

These are the 28 largest non-Antarctic land masses, plus 8 more islands.

See also related comics with map changes in comics [[1500: Upside-Down Map]] and [[1653: United States Map]].

==Transcript==
:[A map of the world, but every landmass has been replaced with South America, rotated and resized to roughly match the real landmasses they represent. South America is correct, except that the islands at the bottom of the continent also have been switch to a small South America.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Bad Map Projection #358: Oops, all South Americas!

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Maps]]
[[Category:Bad Map Projections]]

Talk:2233: Aurora Meaning

2019-12-02T10:32:36Z

Boatster: Adding info re aurora viewability from, and climate of, southern Australia

Hey guys. As you can tell by the edit logs, I'm removing a spam comment that was made in bad faith. I'm new here so please let me know what the actual procedure is for, ya know, spam deletion and logging.
Have an outstanding day, --[[User:OtterlyAmazin|OtterlyAmazin]] ([[User talk:OtterlyAmazin|talk]]) 03:46, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
:Great you removed [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk%3A2233%3A_Aurora_Meaning&type=revision&diff=183613&oldid=183612 this text]. I guess if this account keeps doing such things it should be banned. Sadly we seem to have lost all contact to any admin of the page...? So I'm not sure how we could do anything. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:01, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Nobody talks about the visible shadow of the two lower texts? You can clearly see a layer of grey letters, not identical to the topmost layer, benath. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.52|172.68.141.52]] 05:57, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
:I have no idea what you are talking about. I see no shadows on neither xkcd or the image uploaded here? Maybe it is your device that is making the shadows... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:01, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
::On the words Satelite and Exciting in the southern hemisphere it is most visible (but also on others) that there are greyish letters right next to the black ones, kinda like shadows. Maybe Randall copy pasted and changed it. Similar things of remains of erased parts have been visible before. (If someone thinks it is important, I can try to look it up, but I am not exactly sure where it was) --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
::: You're right. It's most visible on the right side of the loop in the 'S' at the end of 'Satellites' in the southern hemisphere, but you can also see it on the lower tip of 'C' and the upper tip of 'G' in 'Exciting'. However, I downloaded the image and used an image editor to up the contrast, and it turns out the grey letters are the exact same as the black ones, just in slightly different places and shapes. Presumably Randal didn't like his first attempt at lettering the comic and erased it and rewrote it. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.126.136|162.158.126.136]] 05:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

That is known as "mustard". This term originated in the OTT, of course[[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.191|172.69.63.191]] 16:34, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
:What does this comment even mean? I have no idea what "OTT" means and what the term "mustard" refers to in either the comic or any previous comments! Can the OP or anyone else shed some light on it? [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 17:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
::The OTT (short for the One True Thread) is the unofficial nickname for the xkcd fora thread for Time (also known over there as the One True Comic (OTT for short). Mustard arose when some mistakes in colouration were made during Time's run that appeared as outlines is a faintly mustard-like colour. Hope that's of any help. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.118|162.158.150.118]] 15:41, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Do we have any indication how much energy we're talking to see the aurora at the equator? or how that would physically work? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.38|162.158.159.38]] 08:17, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

There has been an equatorial aurora exactly once in human history. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starfish_Prime Starfish Prime] was an orbital nuclear detonation that, among other things, disabled multiple satellites and created a temporary artificial aurora 16° north. That is also likely what the sub-tropical band is referring to. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.150.88|162.158.150.88]] 09:12, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

What should "Subpolar latitudes" include for the southern hemisphere? Southern Africa? Southern Australia? Since I'm in the northern hemisphere, I don't know what's appropriate for the other half of the world. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 22:46, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
:Most of the subpolar latitudes of the southern hemisphere are ocean. Southern Australia is still subtropical. The southernmost parts of Chile and Argentina (Terra del Fuego) would qualify.
::umm, it is actually possible to see the aurora australis from the southern parts of Australia. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-14/aurora-australia-watching-and-photographing-the-southern-lights/11197868 and the southern parts of Australia, whilst capable of getting very warm in summer, are definitely not subtropical[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 10:32, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

== Saturn's out of place H3+ Aurorae and Ring Decay ==

Wondering if this might have been inspired by James O’Donoghue discovery of decay of Saturn's rings.
“I thought it could be some new band of aurora which had never been seen before or something entirely new. Those were the two options now, and both were amazing.”
Read more: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/saturns-rings-are-slowly-disappearing-180972856/#dL7Me0SVImIcFSRq.99

Talk:2230: Versus Bracket

2019-11-19T13:05:22Z

Boatster:

Because I didn't know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic:_Ecks_vs._Sever - "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever is a 2002 action thriller film directed by Wych Kaosayananda (under the pseudonym of "Kaos"). The film stars Antonio Banderas and Lucy Liu as opposing secret agents who team up to fight a common enemy. It is an international co-production between Canada, Germany and the United States.
The film has been called one of the worst ever made. At the box office, it made $19.9 million on a $70 million budget. With a total of 117 reviews, the highest for a film with a 0% score, Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever is the worst reviewed film in the history of Rotten Tomatoes." [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Re: King Kong vs Godzilla - the winner? WikiP notes: "After an underwater battle (off-screen) only Kong resurfaces from the water, and he begins to swim back towards his island home. There is no sign of Godzilla, but the JSDF speculates that it is possible that it survived." We never see another K.K. movie (from Japan, anyway) and plenty more Godzilla so maybe K.K. is just swimming home with his tail between his legs ... er, metaphorically speaking. Godzilla could just be taking a well deserved post-fight nap! Long live Godzilla!! [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Some of these matchups have relatively clear outcomes, e.g. Ford beat Ferrari (at least in the movie), and presumably we can say Kramer won Kramer v. Kramer (well, everybody lost, but...). That in mind, if we fill out the bracket with such nominal wins that lead to matchups, (Kramer v. Ford), do we learn anything interesting? And what does the resulting bracket look like? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 18:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
* Kramer vs. Ford
* Larry Flynt vs. Joe
* King Kong vs. Jason
* ? vs. Predator
* ? vs. Marge
* ? vs. Asterix
* Batman vs. Scott Pilgrim
* ? vs. Plants
(Also, the [https://twitter.com/xkcdbracket @xkcdbracket] twitter account is running a version of the tournament starting 2019-11-19.) [[User:Yomikoma|Yomikoma]] ([[User talk:Yomikoma|talk]]) 22:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC) edited twitter handle/link [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

:I was hoping for a visual presentation of what we know, something like this:
[[File:versus bracket 2x known.png|600px]]
 
[[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 09:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
::Thats a good idea. However an image like that is not as easily editable as the wiki itself. Therfore we should first discuss all the winners. As mentioned in this discussion page, all Joe vs volcano, Freddy vs Jason and King Kong vs. Godzilla are debatable in their outcome. (I myself have no strong feelings on either, since I didn't follow any of the 3 franchises. In fact I am only sure about Asterix, Marge and the plants. For all other setups I rely on this wiki. Nevertheless they should be discussed before something static as an image is added.) --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Should a table of all the match-ups and their sources be made? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.246.28|162.158.246.28]] 19:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Should this be referencing the other time (or times?) Randall made a silly brackets where all first-round matchups are based on actual oppositions in a particular theme? I'm thinking of [https://xkcd.com/2037/|2037: Supreme Court Bracket]. Also I kinda wonder what happens when the winners of these two brackets clash. [[Special:Contributions/91.164.113.87|91.164.113.87]] 19:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Added this to the Tournament Bracket category for just that reason. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.145|172.69.63.145]]

I stole the description directly from [[2037|Supreme Court Bracket]], is that okay? [[User:Duraludon|Duraludon]] ([[User talk:Duraludon|talk]]) 20:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

The winner of Freddy vs. Jason is unclear. Freddy's head is severed but he then winks and you hear his laughter implying it is another trick. That is a reoccurring thing with Freddy.

I was excited to see the winner of the bracket. Scott Pilgrim vs Kramer? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.28|172.68.34.28]] 21:09, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Joe does not defeat the volcano. Joe is supposed to throw himself into the volcano as a sacrifice, thus stopping the volcano from accomplishing it's presumed goal of destroying the island. But Joe is blown out of the volcano (and out of any applicable laws of physics) and the volcano does destroy the island. So, clearly, the volcano was victorious. Joe survived the encounter, but did not accomplish the stated goal of the match-up. Give the bracket to the volcano. --[[User:Suttkus|Suttkus]] ([[User talk:Suttkus|talk]]) 02:46, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

They have a fight, Triangle wins. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.22|172.69.55.22]] 09:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
YAAY TMBG!

What about Kirk vs Picard?? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.82|162.158.214.82]] 12:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Does this explanation set a record for most spoilers on an explainxkcd page? ... and should we add a spoiler alert?[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2230: Versus Bracket

2019-11-19T13:04:00Z

Boatster:

Because I didn't know: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic:_Ecks_vs._Sever - "Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever is a 2002 action thriller film directed by Wych Kaosayananda (under the pseudonym of "Kaos"). The film stars Antonio Banderas and Lucy Liu as opposing secret agents who team up to fight a common enemy. It is an international co-production between Canada, Germany and the United States.
The film has been called one of the worst ever made. At the box office, it made $19.9 million on a $70 million budget. With a total of 117 reviews, the highest for a film with a 0% score, Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever is the worst reviewed film in the history of Rotten Tomatoes." [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Re: King Kong vs Godzilla - the winner? WikiP notes: "After an underwater battle (off-screen) only Kong resurfaces from the water, and he begins to swim back towards his island home. There is no sign of Godzilla, but the JSDF speculates that it is possible that it survived." We never see another K.K. movie (from Japan, anyway) and plenty more Godzilla so maybe K.K. is just swimming home with his tail between his legs ... er, metaphorically speaking. Godzilla could just be taking a well deserved post-fight nap! Long live Godzilla!! [[User:Afbach|Afbach]] ([[User talk:Afbach|talk]])

Some of these matchups have relatively clear outcomes, e.g. Ford beat Ferrari (at least in the movie), and presumably we can say Kramer won Kramer v. Kramer (well, everybody lost, but...). That in mind, if we fill out the bracket with such nominal wins that lead to matchups, (Kramer v. Ford), do we learn anything interesting? And what does the resulting bracket look like? [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 18:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
* Kramer vs. Ford
* Larry Flynt vs. Joe
* King Kong vs. Jason
* ? vs. Predator
* ? vs. Marge
* ? vs. Asterix
* Batman vs. Scott Pilgrim
* ? vs. Plants
(Also, the [https://twitter.com/xkcdbracket @xkcdbracket] twitter account is running a version of the tournament starting 2019-11-19.) [[User:Yomikoma|Yomikoma]] ([[User talk:Yomikoma|talk]]) 22:03, 18 November 2019 (UTC) edited twitter handle/link [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

:I was hoping for a visual presentation of what we know, something like this:
[[File:versus bracket 2x known.png|600px]]
 
[[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 09:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
::Thats a good idea. However an image like that is not as easily editable as the wiki itself. Therfore we should first discuss all the winners. As mentioned in this discussion page, all Joe vs volcano, Freddy vs Jason and King Kong vs. Godzilla are debatable in their outcome. (I myself have no strong feelings on either, since I didn't follow any of the 3 franchises. In fact I am only sure about Asterix, Marge and the plants. For all other setups I rely on this wiki. Nevertheless they should be discussed before something static as an image is added.) --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 10:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Should a table of all the match-ups and their sources be made? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.246.28|162.158.246.28]] 19:16, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Should this be referencing the other time (or times?) Randall made a silly brackets where all first-round matchups are based on actual oppositions in a particular theme? I'm thinking of [https://xkcd.com/2037/|2037: Supreme Court Bracket]. Also I kinda wonder what happens when the winners of these two brackets clash. [[Special:Contributions/91.164.113.87|91.164.113.87]] 19:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Added this to the Tournament Bracket category for just that reason. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.145|172.69.63.145]]

I stole the description directly from [[2037|Supreme Court Bracket]], is that okay? [[User:Duraludon|Duraludon]] ([[User talk:Duraludon|talk]]) 20:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

The winner of Freddy vs. Jason is unclear. Freddy's head is severed but he then winks and you hear his laughter implying it is another trick. That is a reoccurring thing with Freddy.

I was excited to see the winner of the bracket. Scott Pilgrim vs Kramer? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.28|172.68.34.28]] 21:09, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Joe does not defeat the volcano. Joe is supposed to throw himself into the volcano as a sacrifice, thus stopping the volcano from accomplishing it's presumed goal of destroying the island. But Joe is blown out of the volcano (and out of any applicable laws of physics) and the volcano does destroy the island. So, clearly, the volcano was victorious. Joe survived the encounter, but did not accomplish the stated goal of the match-up. Give the bracket to the volcano. --[[User:Suttkus|Suttkus]] ([[User talk:Suttkus|talk]]) 02:46, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

They have a fight, Triangle wins. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.22|172.69.55.22]] 09:57, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
YAAY TMBG!

What about Kirk vs Picard?? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.82|162.158.214.82]] 12:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Does this explanation set a record for most spoilers on an explainxkcd page ... and should we add a spolier alert?[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2228: Machine Learning Captcha

2019-11-14T04:50:45Z

Boatster:

Seems remarkably similar to [https://xkcd.com/1897/ this comic]. Is he running out of ideas? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.166|162.158.146.166]] 00:33, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
: I don't see much connection, other than them both being about CAPTCHAs.--[[User:GoldNinja|GoldNinja]] ([[User talk:GoldNinja|talk]]) 00:54, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
: agree GoldNinja the first is about captchas getting freework done, the second is about that work having potentially malicious consequences [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 04:50, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

A note: [[2227]] isn't connecting to [[2228]] via the Next button; has this happened before? --[[User:Account|Account]] ([[User talk:Account|talk]]) 01:20, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
:Fixed now.--[[User:Account|Account]] ([[User talk:Account|talk]]) 02:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Why is this comic listed as a Thursday comic? Isn't it Wednesday in Boston?--[[User:Account|Account]] ([[User talk:Account|talk]]) 02:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
:Yes. I don't know what time the comic was uploaded, but right now it is 10:34 PM Wednesday in Boston. I changed the date of the comic to today instead of tomorrow. [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 03:34, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

I think the upper right picture looks like a cave, but maybe too angular to be natural; maybe a bomb shelter or something like that where those pesky humans might actually try to hide? [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 03:40, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
:I was thinking a bomb shelter or bunker as well [[Special:Contributions/108.162.212.173|108.162.212.173]] 03:44, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
:That sounds about right; just made it official on the transcript. --[[User:Account|Account]] ([[User talk:Account|talk]]) 04:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2212: Cell Phone Functions

2019-10-07T08:46:34Z

Boatster:

I know of someone who DID build a taser into a phone... (but that's all it is now, was no space for the phone's electronics anymore) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.54.39|172.69.54.39]] 08:05, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

It seems a bit peculiar that one of the move "obvious" devices a cellphone can replace is missing: the watch. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 08:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: That's because no one sane would do that ;) Some may use a Smart Watch instead of a classic watch but except of the case when you were used to pocket watches anyways a replacement of a wacth by a phone would be a downgrade usability wise. /edit: That being said: My personal "Now" bar is at the first quarter (more or less at the web browser's bar end) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

:: I realize it's unlikely you're being entirely serious here, but the same argument applies to almost all of the devices listed in this comic. So…no, that's not the reason for its omission. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 08:33, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
: there was a brief period between ubiquitous cell/mobile phone use and the advent of the smartwatch where experts predicted the demise of the watch other than as a piece of jewellery [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 08:46, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2155: Swimming

2019-05-30T05:26:20Z

Boatster: Deep water IS better for swimming

The title text reminds me of https://xkcd.com/1115/
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.13|108.162.242.13]] 17:22, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

I never fully enjoyed swimming in lakes & oceans for this same reason. Getting nipped by a snapping turtle, pinched by crawfish & crabs, & nudge-tested by snakes probably pushed my experiences in a negative direction as well. Chlorine & urine content don't make swimming pools nearly unpleasant enough to feel ickier than most open water I've been in. As someone who grew up in a hot climate, I ''love'' swimming, but I like to be able to see what's in the water around me. The deeper & murkier the water is, the more uneasy I feel venturing into it.
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 17:49, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
:In most open water, there is no chlorine, but there is definitely some urine and blood and probably also fish sperm. It SHOULD be more diluted, though ... -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 22:15, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
::I find it ridiculous that some people are grossed by the supposedly urine (or, God forbid, sperm) contaminated swimming pools yet fine to drink water coming from open reservoirs containing (highly diluted!) duck poop, fish stuff, slimes and molds etc. Some even have spilled millions of gallons of perfectly fine water after some guy peed in it, even if it was wide open to any flying source of poo ([http://time.com/66459/portland-reservoir-pee/]) -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 08:27, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
: haha. I live in Australia. I love swimming at the beach. But my rule is, as much as possible, always swim with someone bigger, slower and further out. The first two are not as easy as they used to be!![[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
: also " nudge-tested by snakes" W.T.A.F!!![[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:45, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I am confused. The explanation says there is a person as you scroll down, but I don't see any people below the surface. Is it talking about the jellyfish?--[[Special:Contributions/172.69.42.28|172.69.42.28]] 19:57, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
: not any more [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:43, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

This panel is approximately 4.047 times as tall as it is wide. [[User:Moosenonny10|Moosenonny10]] ([[User talk:Moosenonny10|talk]]) 00:19, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't agree it's an '''entirely''' irrational fear -- it's much easier to rescue a drowned person from the lake/ocean bottom if the water is shallow. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.182.16|172.68.182.16]] 07:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
:It is still irrational – if someone's drowned at the bottom it isn't rescue anymore, just potentially recovering a dead body. Completely irrelevant for the unfortunate swimmer, unless she is worried about her family's emotions and the amount of (not entirely rational) public expense – all these expert divers, rescue units time, police work etc. cost a lot. -- [[User:Malgond|Malgond]] ([[User talk:Malgond|talk]]) 08:19, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
: disagree. My sister rescued an unconscious kid from the bottom of a 3m deep pool. Rescuscitated him. Full recovery. Not common but it happens.[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 13:36, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
:I believe that very deep waters are occasionally (and more frequently than shallow ones) dangerous due to cold undercurrents, so I support "not entirely irrational fear".[[User:Jkrstrt|Jkrstrt]] ([[User talk:Jkrstrt|talk]]) 08:59, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
:Furthermore, on the topic of the specific fear in the comic, it's perfectly rational to be afraid of the ground you are relying on for support to suddenly and precipitously drop orders of magnitude deeper. Presumably the issue is not the irrationality of the fear but the language used - that is, "swimming" should be "wading" since their "feet touch bottom". Someone wading who was incapable of swimming would be rightfully afraid of suddenly being dropped into open sea, as they'd have limited ability to make it back to safety. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.142.22|172.69.142.22]] 18:16, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
Back when I was teaching beginning swimming for adults, I would tell them that the deep end of the pool was better for swimming because there was more water under them to support them. Some of them found that the idea inspired confidence . . . others, not so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.100|162.158.214.100]] 17:22, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
: My wife is learning to swim at the moment (she's 50, never too old to learn!) and has this specific issue about being able to touch the bottom. She was told by her instructor about the deep end being "better for swimming" and definitely falls into the "not so much" category you mention![[User:Daemonik|Daemonik]] ([[User talk:Daemonik|talk]]) 14:38, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
: there is a way in which this is correct, and not trivially. Deeper pools cause less reflected turbulence to impede the swimmer so are marginally faster. Most international competition is now held in pools of uniform depth of, i think, at least 3 metres [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 05:26, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

What is the Lemmings reference mentioned in the explanation? [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 12:18, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
:Thank you, herobrine. My question exactly! [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 16:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
::I would guess it is to the {{w|Lemmings (video game)}}, I put in wikilink assuming that that is what is meant. Not sure though. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.102|162.158.106.102]] 18:05, 29 May 2019 (UTC)I thought this was a global warming reference at first glance. it works pretty well as one. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.28|162.158.214.28]] 03:19, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Talk:2155: Swimming

2019-05-28T13:45:02Z

Boatster:

Talk:2155: Swimming

2019-05-28T13:43:15Z

Boatster:

2155: Swimming

2019-05-28T13:41:48Z

Boatster: Corrected typo 'mentiones'

{{comic
| number = 2155
| date = May 27, 2019
| title = Swimming
| before = [[#Explanation|↓ Skip to explanation ↓]]
| image = swimming.png
| titletext = "You don't know how high above you the sky goes, but you're not freaking out about that." "Well, NOW I am!"
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a CONTINENTAL SHELF. Please mention here why this explanation isn't complete. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
This comic is about an irrational fear about the depth of water beneath oneself. Whenever you don't explicitly know how deep the water is, and cannot see the bottom, there is nothing preventing the sea/lake/riverbed from being exceptionally far away. This phenomenon is actually quite common with many bodies of water having a relatively shallow shelf extending a short ways out from land. These typically end with little to no warning, giving rise to the fear that is depicted here.

It is an '''irrational''' fear because if one is swimming, the depth of the water underneath is not important to safety. If one is wading, presumably one would feel the bottom drop away.

Here, [[Megan]] and [[Cueball]] are in in the ocean, with Cueball treading water and Megan standing on the seabed, with another girl in the water and another Cueball watching from the beach. Megan mentions that she can still touch bottom, thus thinking it is safe. In front of her however the seabed drops off steeply, becoming nearly vertical. Fish and jellyfish are in the water below, while at the bottom of the frame, but not the sea floor, a small ledge holds an octopus and a beach umbrella.

===Related comics===
*In [[731: Desert Island]] a similar vision of not knowing what is beneath the surface is depicted.
*Randall provided the depths of various bodies of water without mentioning any specific fears in [[1040: Lakes and Oceans]].
*The title text may be a reference to [[1115: Sky]], where [[Megan]] similarly starts freaking out about the depth of the sky.
*[[what if%3F]] #103 covers what would happen if all the bodies of water vanished. It refers to the sharp drop-off of the continental shelf, and divides boats into two categories: those over the shelf that crash within a few seconds, and those past the shelf that take up to a minute to reach bottom.

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

:[The single panel comic is around 4 times higher than it is wide (317×1284 pixels). Cueball is watching from the beach while Megan with another character is standing neck deep in water near an extreme drop off (continental shelf?) and another Cueball is swimming further. This part of the comic is at the very top, and the characters are drawn much smaller than usual.]

:Megan: It's OK, I can still touch bottom here.

:[As the tall image is scrolled down, there are some deep water fish, a jellyfish, and an octopus, a bottom ledge with a beach umbrella on it, and another drop off.]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I love swimming, but occasionally I realize I don't know how deep the water under me is and it freaks me out.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Large drawings‏‎]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]

Talk:2155: Swimming

2019-05-28T13:40:25Z

Boatster: Comment re swimming fears

Talk:2155: Swimming

2019-05-28T13:36:53Z

Boatster: Support not entirely irrational