explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:2530: Clinical Trials

2021-11-05T00:44:21Z

108.162.237.243:

Is this comic in reaction to some specific recent event? It seems like it might be related to vaccine trials, given the pandemic the world has been dealing with for the last 2 years... if so, it then seems to be a condemnation... am I reading too much into this?
[[User:Ericfromabeno|Ericfromabeno]] ([[User talk:Ericfromabeno|talk]]) 21:49, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
:That's exactly how I understood it as well. Maybe that wasn't Randall's intent, but it does seem to convey a skeptical tone about the untested vaccines and their related mandates? [[Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1|127.0.0.0]] 18:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
::Except the vaccines HAVE gone through clinical trials? Calling the vaccines "untested" is quite a reach, since they have actually been very well tested. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.132.228|172.68.132.228]] 18:56, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
::: They may have been through smaller, short-term trials, but we don't have any long-term effects data. Essentially, everyone who has gotten a shot is in one big trial.--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.243|108.162.237.243]] 00:44, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I would say this in relation to the mutiple treatments for Covid19 some of which have great clinical evaluation, others less so. I'll make a first draft [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 21:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
:On this website there are far too many people who think everything is about Covid19. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.219|162.158.88.219]] 06:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
::It comes to mind after a year full of iterations of the "3-step clinical trial procedure" shown in the comic. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unproven_methods_against_COVID-19

Note that a proper clinical trial does not "prove" its treatment to be effective, but it actually should do its damnedest to show that any observed (net) benefits are down to simple statistical fluke, but then fail, leaving the positive result 'proven'. And obviously extract every possible risk factor in the process. (Thalidomide fell down badly on this, many years ago, partly because of the numbers involved and the fact that susceptible mothers were often taking a cocktail of multiple 'remedies' over much of the nine months, which made the reality slow to be teased out. But the lessons learnt mean that authorising ''anything'' for pregnant women are tortuous, and testing on (non-pregnant) women in general is hampered by having to account for menstral cycles, so we end up with far too many man-tested drugs that say "not for use in pregnancy" just to keep far to the safe-side, plus still far more unknown levels of efficacy/etc in the 'generic' female body than we should have. But it's being addressed. Onward, ever onward!) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.49|162.158.159.49]] 23:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

The way I understood the title text was that the "change" was the one written in red, that is "now we have to do clinical trials". The title text's joke is thus that, because before that change clinical trials weren't part of the procedure ("standard of care"), you don't have to test the idea of testing ideas. Closely related to that "joke" is https://existentialcomics.com/comic/404 (but seriously this isn't a simple problem). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.101|108.162.229.101]] 01:21, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Shouldn't Test if it works be step 2? Have idea, see if it works, impliment? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.129.137|172.68.129.137]] 01:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
:No. Steps 1 and 2 both include elements of testing and exploration; you need to perform experiments to come up with a good idea and convince -yourselves- that it is, in fact, good, and then you likely need to perform or at least show more tests to convince others that it is, in fact a good idea. But the addition of clinical trials added a further "and then you need to double triple check that your idea actually works rather than that it seemed to work in your initial experiments" step to (try to) avoid bad side effects and false correlation.
:I'm of the opinion that it was part of the joke... since it does seem to follow the actual behavioral pattern of "do thing, promote thing, [justify thing], propagate thing"... which makes this thread of conversation both topical and meta (kudos to Randall if ''this'' result was intended)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.4|162.158.107.4]] 21:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
: I'm guessing you've never written a grant proposal. To get money to test something, you have to convince people it's worth testing. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.103|172.68.133.103]] 19:01, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Mention of "anti-worming treatments" in the explanation. This is misleading, and gives the impression that drugs can only have a single function. It's like talking about the use of "headache medicine" for preventing heart attacks. If you want to refer to a specific medicine, do so by name but make damn sure that your claims about that medicine are accurate

:Ivermectin, the drug in question, has only been approved for use by humans for parasites, and for rosacea (cause unknown, but appears to be linked to mites). It doesn't seem misleading to me to refer to it as a deworming agent when it is probably only ever prescribed as an anti-parasitic. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.132.16|172.68.132.16]] 19:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

While the awareness of clinical trials is of course more relevant because of COVID, I don't think this is intended to be topical. The title is very straightforwards-- "the invention of clinical trials" and is almost joke-less (basically just the format). The real joke is in the title text, where it's pointed out that because the "standard of care" before the invention of clinical trials was not to do clinical trials, we didn't need to go through this step to start doing them; just convince people it was a good idea. 02:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
: I think it's *extremely* topical, with the relatively recent debunking of ivermectin as (yet another) substance that has been widely claimed, distributed, and mis-used as a supposed COVID preventative/cure. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
:: If you like, it is topical by -context-, but not by content. Which is an interesting (but important) line to draw. [[User:Mneme|Mneme]] ([[User talk:Mneme|talk]]) 04:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

A recent editor pulled out my comment about how there isn't a joke, but I'd argue that that's necessary in some form. One of the reasons people go to Explain XKCD is that they're going "wait, did I miss a joke?" So explaining that as far as the community is concerned the main text is in-earnest education rathar than a missed joke does have an important purpose. [[User:Mneme|Mneme]] ([[User talk:Mneme|talk]]) 04:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

This list looks like the difference between philosophy, particularly ancient Greek and Indian philosophy (probably others, but I do not know them as well), and science. The philosophical ideas were adopted based on who was able to convince more people that they had a better idea. When the scientific revolution rolled around in the 15th and 16th century in Europe, many of these ancient ideas were actually tested and only those that really worked were retained as true. Many well known and well respected ideas that failed testing were finally abandoned. That sure sounds like the elements of this list. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 07:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The Covid-19 paragraph seems a bit misleading. Arguments advanced in favour of vaccine skepticism have mostly been not so much to do with treatments being used before clinical trials were complete, as with clinical trials being brought forward to accelerate the process, which has been misinterpreted as them being 'rushed'. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.206|162.158.154.206]] 10:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Talk:2530: Clinical Trials

2021-11-05T00:42:57Z

108.162.237.243:

Is this comic in reaction to some specific recent event? It seems like it might be related to vaccine trials, given the pandemic the world has been dealing with for the last 2 years... if so, it then seems to be a condemnation... am I reading too much into this?
[[User:Ericfromabeno|Ericfromabeno]] ([[User talk:Ericfromabeno|talk]]) 21:49, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
:That's exactly how I understood it as well. Maybe that wasn't Randall's intent, but it does seem to convey a skeptical tone about the untested vaccines and their related mandates? [[Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1|127.0.0.0]] 18:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
::Except the vaccines HAVE gone through clinical trials? Calling the vaccines "untested" is quite a reach, since they have actually been very well tested. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.132.228|172.68.132.228]] 18:56, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
::: They may have been through smaller, short-term trials, but we don't have any long-term effects data. Essentially, everyone who has gotten a shot is in one big trial.

I would say this in relation to the mutiple treatments for Covid19 some of which have great clinical evaluation, others less so. I'll make a first draft [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 21:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
:On this website there are far too many people who think everything is about Covid19. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.219|162.158.88.219]] 06:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
::It comes to mind after a year full of iterations of the "3-step clinical trial procedure" shown in the comic. See e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unproven_methods_against_COVID-19

Note that a proper clinical trial does not "prove" its treatment to be effective, but it actually should do its damnedest to show that any observed (net) benefits are down to simple statistical fluke, but then fail, leaving the positive result 'proven'. And obviously extract every possible risk factor in the process. (Thalidomide fell down badly on this, many years ago, partly because of the numbers involved and the fact that susceptible mothers were often taking a cocktail of multiple 'remedies' over much of the nine months, which made the reality slow to be teased out. But the lessons learnt mean that authorising ''anything'' for pregnant women are tortuous, and testing on (non-pregnant) women in general is hampered by having to account for menstral cycles, so we end up with far too many man-tested drugs that say "not for use in pregnancy" just to keep far to the safe-side, plus still far more unknown levels of efficacy/etc in the 'generic' female body than we should have. But it's being addressed. Onward, ever onward!) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.49|162.158.159.49]] 23:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

The way I understood the title text was that the "change" was the one written in red, that is "now we have to do clinical trials". The title text's joke is thus that, because before that change clinical trials weren't part of the procedure ("standard of care"), you don't have to test the idea of testing ideas. Closely related to that "joke" is https://existentialcomics.com/comic/404 (but seriously this isn't a simple problem). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.101|108.162.229.101]] 01:21, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Shouldn't Test if it works be step 2? Have idea, see if it works, impliment? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.129.137|172.68.129.137]] 01:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
:No. Steps 1 and 2 both include elements of testing and exploration; you need to perform experiments to come up with a good idea and convince -yourselves- that it is, in fact, good, and then you likely need to perform or at least show more tests to convince others that it is, in fact a good idea. But the addition of clinical trials added a further "and then you need to double triple check that your idea actually works rather than that it seemed to work in your initial experiments" step to (try to) avoid bad side effects and false correlation.
:I'm of the opinion that it was part of the joke... since it does seem to follow the actual behavioral pattern of "do thing, promote thing, [justify thing], propagate thing"... which makes this thread of conversation both topical and meta (kudos to Randall if ''this'' result was intended)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.4|162.158.107.4]] 21:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
: I'm guessing you've never written a grant proposal. To get money to test something, you have to convince people it's worth testing. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.133.103|172.68.133.103]] 19:01, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Mention of "anti-worming treatments" in the explanation. This is misleading, and gives the impression that drugs can only have a single function. It's like talking about the use of "headache medicine" for preventing heart attacks. If you want to refer to a specific medicine, do so by name but make damn sure that your claims about that medicine are accurate

:Ivermectin, the drug in question, has only been approved for use by humans for parasites, and for rosacea (cause unknown, but appears to be linked to mites). It doesn't seem misleading to me to refer to it as a deworming agent when it is probably only ever prescribed as an anti-parasitic. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.132.16|172.68.132.16]] 19:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

While the awareness of clinical trials is of course more relevant because of COVID, I don't think this is intended to be topical. The title is very straightforwards-- "the invention of clinical trials" and is almost joke-less (basically just the format). The real joke is in the title text, where it's pointed out that because the "standard of care" before the invention of clinical trials was not to do clinical trials, we didn't need to go through this step to start doing them; just convince people it was a good idea. 02:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
: I think it's *extremely* topical, with the relatively recent debunking of ivermectin as (yet another) substance that has been widely claimed, distributed, and mis-used as a supposed COVID preventative/cure. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 03:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
:: If you like, it is topical by -context-, but not by content. Which is an interesting (but important) line to draw. [[User:Mneme|Mneme]] ([[User talk:Mneme|talk]]) 04:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

A recent editor pulled out my comment about how there isn't a joke, but I'd argue that that's necessary in some form. One of the reasons people go to Explain XKCD is that they're going "wait, did I miss a joke?" So explaining that as far as the community is concerned the main text is in-earnest education rathar than a missed joke does have an important purpose. [[User:Mneme|Mneme]] ([[User talk:Mneme|talk]]) 04:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

This list looks like the difference between philosophy, particularly ancient Greek and Indian philosophy (probably others, but I do not know them as well), and science. The philosophical ideas were adopted based on who was able to convince more people that they had a better idea. When the scientific revolution rolled around in the 15th and 16th century in Europe, many of these ancient ideas were actually tested and only those that really worked were retained as true. Many well known and well respected ideas that failed testing were finally abandoned. That sure sounds like the elements of this list. [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 07:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The Covid-19 paragraph seems a bit misleading. Arguments advanced in favour of vaccine skepticism have mostly been not so much to do with treatments being used before clinical trials were complete, as with clinical trials being brought forward to accelerate the process, which has been misinterpreted as them being 'rushed'. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.206|162.158.154.206]] 10:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Talk:437: SUV

2016-08-16T15:19:27Z

108.162.237.243:

Im not sure this strip even needs an explanation [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 21:46, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey what's M, P and D stand for? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.187|108.162.250.187]] 17:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
:God question. The first price without a letter should be petrol/gasoline. M should be {{w|Methanol fuel|Methanol fuel}} used in some racing cars. P could be {{w|Propane|Propane}}. D must be {{w|Diesel fuel|Diesel fuel}} which is more expensive than petrol.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

:: M and P mean 89 and 91 or 92 octane. Officially, each chain has their own brand names for each grade, but they all settled on M names (Medium, Midrange, etc.) pretty quickly, and P names (Premium, Pro-Tech, etc.) beat out H names (Hi-Test) by the early 90s. So, now they can all advertise their prices with signs with M and P.

:: The D is always for diesel (and in America, there's only one kind of diesel at non-truck pumps instead of the two found in some parts of the world).

:: By the way, mid-range gas is almost entirely a scam. It sort of made sense in the 70s, when cars that needed more than 88 octane were allowed to use leader gas for a few years after cars using 87 octane. But once that exception expired, its only purpose has been idiots who think "my $50000 BMW can't possibly use the same gas as my crappy old VW, so I'd better spend a bit more". [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.69|162.158.255.69]] 04:34, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

::: Actually, higher octane gasses are less susceptible to knocking. I have an older 2004 Subaru Baja manual, and 89 octane gas actually helps the car make more efficient starts. Knocking isn't good for the engine, and it occurrs more at 87. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.24|173.245.54.24]]

P is probably Premium gasoline. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.164}}

Not sure about the last bit regarding SUV and skateboard carrying capacity. That would be like saying a scooter or bicycle is a poor choice because they can't carry mattresses. I believe the point of an electric skateboard is to transport the person, not cargo. You could feasibly rent a truck for cargo. [[User:Flewk|flewk]] ([[User talk:Flewk|talk]]) 17:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

$4 gas... that's strangely nostalgic seeing that... Not that I'd want it back, of course!--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.243|108.162.237.243]] 15:19, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

1609: Food Combinations

2016-07-22T02:47:33Z

108.162.237.243: /* Table of traditional pairings */

{{comic
| number = 1609
| date = November 27, 2015
| title = Food Combinations
| image = food_combinations.png
| titletext = If anyone tries this on you, the best reply is a deadpan "Oh yeah, that's a common potato chip flavor in Canada."
}}

==Explanation==
[http://www.rd.com/funny/21-weird-food-combinations-and-obsessions/ Unusual food combinations] are often counter-intuitive and can vary wildly by individual taste. Real-world examples of unusual food pairings, such as [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/24/dining/making-a-meal-out-of-peanut-butter-and-pickles.html pickles and peanut butter], French fries in chocolate shake, or even the comfort-food pairing of {{w|chicken and waffles}}, pair sweet, sour, or salty foods with a food or condiment from a different group. In many "normal" food pairings, though, the cross-over between sweet, savory and salty foods also exists, such as ketchup, a very sweet condiment being regularly applied to hamburgers and French fries, both savory and salty foods.

In this comic, [[Randall]] lists twelve somewhat random food items. Below these [[Megan]] delivers a line to [[Ponytail]] and [[Cueball]] where she claims that two items of food from the list above (pick any) would be a great combination. Some of these are obviously great together (and much depends on personal taste) but many combination will definitely not be enjoyed by ''most'' people living for instance in the US (where Randall is situated). Say ketchup and ice cream or hot chocolate and avocado. But no matter which two Megan chooses the response from Cueball (or anyone else) would be the same - he can see what she means with this combination.

Randall suggests, in the caption below, that by using the right tone of voice, you can put any pair of these food items together as an "actually really good" food combination, and no one will challenge you on it. This can either be because they have likely heard, or tried other unexpected combinations that are highly recommended or liked. But it could also just be because they are polite, or did not really think about what you said due to your tone of voice. Cueball's agreement could also be due to some social pressure in this situation, the same reason he will drink beer even though he does not enjoy the taste, as in [[1534: Beer]]. Or maybe they are like {{w|Joey Tribbiani|Joey}} from {{w|Friends}} who love any combination of food, as long as it is something he think is good by itself - see [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSFgDZJVYbo this clip].

The title text extends the joke by recommending countering such a bizarre proposal with an assertion that the random pairing announced is an actual potato chip flavor popular in Canada. This plays on the fact that in different countries and regions, cultural tastes can vary wildly. For instance, [http://www.buzzfeed.com/tanyachen/americans-taste-canadian-ketchup-all-dressed-chips ketchup flavored potato chips] are quite popular in Canada, but are almost never offered in US markets. {{w|Loblaws}} and {{w|Lay's}} have run potato chips flavor competition in Canada in 2013-15 with flavors such as Maple Moose, Bacon Poutine, Jalapeño Mac N' Cheese, Cowboy BBQ Beans. Similar strange combinations of potato chips are run, either temporarily or permanently, in other countries including the [http://www.bbcamerica.com/anglophenia/2013/04/british-crisps/ United Kingdom]. In addition, some parts of Canada are used as experimental markets to test new flavors of potato chips.

===Table of traditional pairings===
*There are 12 items and they can be combined in a total of 66 different ways.
**The 66 fields above the blue fields are the same as those below - of course it does not matter which order you put them in.
*As of writing this 24 of these 66 has been made green (aka being tasty) (36,4%).
**But this has much to do with individual taste.
**Since the comic is made in the US, it should mainly be combinations that are common in the US.
**Also remember that even though you personally may not like avocado or relish (etc.), all food items on on the list are something that many people enjoy eating.
**They are thus NOT disgusting!
**Do not take personal taste into account when changing the list below!

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Traditional pairings found in the list of combinations
!
! Ice Cream
! Ham
! Relish
! Pancakes
! Ketchup
! Cheese
! Eggs
! Cupcakes
! Sour Cream
! Hot Chocolate
! Avocado
! Skittles
|-
| {{w|Ice Cream}}
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
|-
| {{w|Ham}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Relish}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Pancakes}}
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
|-
| {{w|Ketchup}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Cheese}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Egg (food)|Eggs}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Cupcakes}}
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
|-
| {{w|Sour Cream}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Hot Chocolate}}
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Avocado}}
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
|-
| {{w|Skittles (confectionery)|Skittles}}
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#8CFF74;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#FF748C;"|
| style="background-color:#748cff;"|
|}

==Transcript==
:[Megan is talking with Ponytail and Cueball, who has his hand to his chin. Above them in 4x3 black boxes different kind of food is written in white text].

:{| class="wikitable"
|style="background-color:black;"| Ice cream
|style="background-color:black;"| Ham
|style="background-color:black;"| Relish
|-
|style="background-color:black;"| Pancakes
|style="background-color:black;"| Ketchup
|style="background-color:black;"| Cheese
|-
|style="background-color:black;"| Eggs
|style="background-color:black;"| Cupcakes
|style="background-color:black;"| Sour cream
|-
|style="background-color:black;"| Hot chocolate
|style="background-color:black;"| Avocado
|style="background-color:black;"| Skittles
|}

:Megan: You know what's actually really good?
:Megan: ____ and ____.
:Megan: food and food

:Cueball: Huh. I Guess I can see it.

:[Caption below the panel.]
:Fun fact: if you say "you know what's actually really good?" in the right tone of voice, you can name any two individually-good foods here and no one will challenge you one it.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Fun fact]]
[[Category:Food]]

Category talk:Incomplete explanations

2016-06-15T16:43:28Z

108.162.237.243: /* Requests */

==Main Page==
Why is the main page in this category? [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 18:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
: Because the current comic is transcluded in it, and as the most recent page, it usually contains the {{tl|incomplete}} tag. You'll notice that the main page is also included in the categories that the current comic happens to be part of. We really ought to figure out a way to avoid that... --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 15:57, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

== Incomplete explanations bolded in category pages? ==

Is this possible? I believe this could help explaining the rest of the comics faster, by directing even more attention towards them. [[User:MrGameZone|0100011101100001011011010110010101011010011011110110111001100101]] ([[User talk:MrGameZone|talk page]]) 04:25, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
:It's not actually possible to assign attributes to a link based on what category the page behind it is, although it is possible to assign custom CSS to pages in a category. Also, good lord your signature. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:06, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

== Terminator Category Incomplete? ==

Why is the terminator category listed as incomplete?[[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 18:37, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

== Change incomplete explanation every week or month? ==

I was wondering if we should change the incomplete explanation of the day maybe not every day but at least every week or month so that other explanations could get some attention, Online Communities 2 is a hard comic to write an explanation for, if it's rotated then simpler comics could get good explanations and Online Communities 2 could get rotated back in later.
21:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)~

== Number Sorting ==

What happened to the number sorting? One day they're all together under no heading, the next they're slumming it under the number initial headings. I know how it works (I changed the default sorts for 980: Money/Prices in tables and 1190: Time/Translator (again) so they were with their parent pages (again)), but why this sudden change in ordering? Anonymous 21:05, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

== Requests ==

DON'T PUT ONLINE COMMUNITIES 2 IN THE SPOTLIGHT. THE SPOTLIGHT IS FOR BAD COMIC EXPLANATIONS, NOT HUGE COMICS WHO'S EXPLANATIONS ARE GREAT BUT DON'T HAVE EVERY GRATING DETAIL! PUT THE SPOTLIGHT ON SOMETHING ELSE!

802 isn't even considered "incomplete" anymore. Could someone get it out of the spotlight? Thanks. {{unsigned}}

:Done '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

== No incomplete explanations ==
What do we do now? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.243|108.162.237.243]] 16:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk:1692: Man Page

2016-06-10T04:56:51Z

108.162.237.243:

I do not entirely understand how wikis work; however, I have attempted to add a transcript. I apologize if anything breaks. I also apologize if this is not how I should be apologizing.

[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.135|108.162.241.135]] 04:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

The Pope flag is referencing the time of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avignon_Papacy Avignon Papacy] --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.243|108.162.237.243]] 04:56, 10 June 2016 (UTC)