explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:1622: Henge

2015-12-28T17:21:50Z

198.41.235.101:

This "catch the sun in the butterfly net" subplot reminds me of novel by Polish author Kornel Makuszyński (and a children's films based on it) "{{w|The Two Who Stole the Moon}}" --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 08:43, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I had to laugh at this part of the explanation, and then remove it: "(In reality, the fact that the net is not melting or burning proves that the sun is nowhere near the net.)" Because in this comic they obviously catch the sun ion a net, as they later (after the catch) has put it on sale on Craiglist as per the title text. But the reason I laughed was that the only problem the writer of this sentence saw was that the sun would be too hot. What about it's size and gravity, if we are talking about the real sun... So yes if it where the real sun it would be a long way away to look this small (150 million km as usual, 8 light minutes). But in this comic it is between the trees and it is very small and cool. Only strange thing is that [[Beret Guy]] is not involved as his [[:Category:Strange powers of Beret Guy|powers]] would explain this comic. But then again he would never do it for profit. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:23, 28 December 2015 (UTC) I disagree, there's no indication that this scheme actually worked. The Craigslist posting could just as easily have been written in advance, and the Title text could be the next line spoken, before the capture either succeeds or fails. [[User:Swordsmith|Swordsmith]] ([[User talk:Swordsmith|talk]]) 16:48, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

The "sun exposure" explanation is wrong. It's not about how it holds up under sunlight, it's about how much sunlight it gets. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 17:21, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1604: Snakes

2015-11-16T19:58:07Z

198.41.235.101:

i don't know how to add the omega sign for the units of the resistor in the transcript. i'll leave that to someone more skilled than myself [[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 05:26, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Just copy-and-paste! -N00b {{unsigned ip|108.162.214.77}}

Or find the 'omega' symbol in Windows Character Map. [[User:RAGBRAIvet|RAGBRAIvet]] ([[User talk:RAGBRAIvet|talk]]) 08:37, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

To be exact, a 24Ω resistor would be red, yellow, black; 240Ω would be red, yellow, brown, and so on, along a well-defined sequence. Red, yellow on its own would be missing the final "scaling" colour. [[User:Gearoid|Gearóid]] ([[User talk:Gearoid|talk]]) 08:54, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
:We don't need the scaling colour here, the snake is scaly enough as is. [[User:Matega|Matega]] ([[User talk:Matega|talk]]) 18:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_color_code， a "black red black red black" resistor shoud be 2kΩ, not 24Ω ... -- Oicebot [[Special:Contributions/162.158.252.119|162.158.252.119]] 09:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

The fourth band on a resister is usually the multiplier (the value gets multiplied by 10 to a power according to the colour); it's the fifth that indicates tolerance [[User:sbutler87|sbutler87]]
:The resisteors that I have at hand are coloured the way I remember, Three bands of 'spectrum' colours (including black at zero, brown for 1, leading through the spectrum red to violet until grey at 8 and white at 9), the first two are literal, the third the power of magnitude to adjust up, and a fourth band (metalic silver/gold, to aid identification of the direction to read) as tolerance.
:I know there's variations, and zero ohm (or effectively so) links are a single black band, but that's all I've ever needed to know, in my time. (When I don't put something across mulimeter probes, just to make sure...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.152.221|162.158.152.221]] 11:57, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
::The last band is tolerance, and there can be as many bands before that as the manufacturer needs. It's always the last band, no matter how many come before. [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 18:18, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

FWIW: raw image: [[File:snake-pixelated.png]] and with added math: [[File:snake-interpolated.png]]. - [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 12:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Does this mean a 200ohm snake is safe? (Red black yellow) [[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 14:51, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
:That would be 20*10^4 ohm = 240.000 ohm if I get it right? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 15:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
::Red black yellow would be 200000 ohms, or 200kΩ (200 kilohms). Red-black is 20, and yellow is basically adding 4 zeroes to that. [[User:SuperSupermario24|<span style="color: #c21aff;">Just some random derp</span>]] 17:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
:::Ups, I put in the 4 from the comic, 20*10^4 ohm = 200.000 (not 240.000 as I wrote at first). Thanks for correcting ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:48, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Do they still use color bands? Do they still teach them to technicians? Should parts of this explanation be rewritten in the past tense mentioning that Randal is getting old? I though the bands were relegated to the dead languages section, right next to linear B, once surface mounted components came along. I certainly haven't used them since around 1990, and would not expect my younger technicians to understand them.
--[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 19:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1603: Flashlights

2015-11-13T17:11:43Z

198.41.235.101:

it is missimg reference to another comic where randall makes a joke about flashlight and fleshlight. The comic had a star wars setting with death vader and luke skywalker. https://xkcd.com/1397/ --anonymous [[Special:Contributions/162.158.153.41|162.158.153.41]] 15:08, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Is that it? I swear there must be more to the joke than this explanation implies. It just describes what's going on in the comic. [[User:Enchantedsleeper|Enchantedsleeper]] ([[User talk:Enchantedsleeper|talk]]) 10:29, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

-- Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. [[User:Pete|Pete]] ([[User talk:Pete|talk]]) 11:19, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

"A typo", uh? Sure, sure, of course it was only a typo, Randall ;) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.57|108.162.221.57]] 10:38, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:I also think the type was that he searched on flashlight instead and found the flashlight enthusiast page from that ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I think it's unfair to assume lack of detail in the explanation, the fact that research was obviously done on the meaning of fleshlight an it's association to the comic, is more than I would have original got from the comic by itself. However if you perceive additional meaning please share, the thing I love about 'This' website is for the ability for others to add their interpretations. --[[User:Igwarrender|Igwarrender]] ([[User talk:Igwarrender|talk]]) 10:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Quote:
<blockquote>When Cueball refers to classic Flashlights(torches) as dim and finnicky, this gives reason to assume that the flashlight he is holding is going to be ridiculously overengineered.</blockquote>
I disagree. In the generation of Randall (and me), the flashlights most of us had as kids really did suck and were dim and finnicky. That's not an exaggeration which, as is implied in the explanation, is used to prepare the joke. It's more of an explanation on why he is interested in modern flashlights in the first place. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.225|162.158.91.225]] 10:58, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: AND they almost always had at least half flat batteries. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.239.32|198.41.239.32]] 11:41, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It's funny how "the explanation" has a need to point out that there were no prior knowledge about fleshlights. (according to Wikipedia) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.180.197|162.158.180.197]] 12:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

I never leave for work without my trusty '''Lumapower EDC-LM31''' with its '''Cree XML(U2) LED''' and its '''3.7 volt size 14500 Lithium Ion cell.''' But I'm not a flashlight geek! Besides, 420 lumens is no where near enough power to set trees on fire. (Personally, I think this comic is an example of Rule 34. Randall was originally thinking about Fleshlights, typo'd into flashlights, and discovered a sort of geeky torch porn sort of thing out there. Also, the flashlight I describe is real, but has nothing on the stuff you'll see in Candlepower Forums.) [[User:Co149|Co149]] ([[User talk:Co149|talk]]) 12:52, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
:The 100,000 lumen lamps (X-LED MRK72 or is that MKR72?) have to be water-cooled! That's plenty hot enough for me.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 14:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
::There are videos of flashlights that set things on fire, without lensens etc. One of them is [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhdKnMlJ4H4 this] video of an ''Magic Scorpion'' flashlight, a halogen variant. But I've also seen video's of (custom-built) LED flashlight that set things to smolder. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.111|141.101.104.111]] 14:56, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
: It's not lumen that sets things on fire, it's lux. All you need is a good focus. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 17:11, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It feels to me that "their highest-end models are ALSO capable of setting trees on fire." is some advertisement where the tree is a metaphore for one's organ. as such it is clear that "They're impossible to use without severe burns". which makes it really twisted that "some [people] swear it's worth it"

I think the burning trees joke comes from this [[http://www.wickedlasers.com/torch "...even fry and egg"]] thing. --[[User:Arturojain|Arturo Jain]] ([[User talk:Arturojain|talk]]) 14:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1596: Launch Status Check

2015-10-28T20:29:37Z

198.41.235.101:

Looks like a Falcon Heavy to me. :) So I guess the bird is some kind of falcon. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.147|162.158.34.147]] 08:21, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
:Could it be related to this? [http://spaceflightnow.com/2015/07/21/first-flight-of-falcon-heavy-delayed-again First flight of Falcon Heavy delayed again.] [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.121|108.162.229.121]] 10:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, during rocket launches they use visual inspection to ensure nothing is close to the launch vehicle. I don't know if large birds are an issue for a rocket, but I can well imagine they are. In classical XKCD fashion the characters totally go overboard on that tangent. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.160|162.158.91.160]] 08:26, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

:Rockets generally produces lot of noise and hot gasses. I doubt any bird is stupid enough to stay around THAT. Also, there is no air intake on rockets - it's hitting the air intake of motors which is dangerous to aircraft. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 14:17, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
::Birds have damaged aircraft windscreens. I believe the bipod ramp that brought down Columbia was smaller than a large bird. It's not at all clear that a bird will be able to take evasive action. Rockets accelerate hard, and a birds normal collision avoidance is to dive, which doesn't help when a rocket is headed straight up.

Unrelated: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/shuttle/behindscenes/roadkill_prt.htm --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 20:29, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It could be a reference to "The Martian" where a bird flies into view on the Live Feed as they are about to launch the supply probe. It later fails when it tries to go sideways. [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 10:35, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
:Reference and coincidence are not synonyms. '''reference:''' a thing you say or write that mentions somebody/something else [http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/reference_1]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 15:19, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

I changed the transcript a little - it's clear from the comic that there are at least four people involved, as opposed to a back-and-forth between two people.[[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.29|173.245.53.29]] 17:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Ah... the person who discretely (and/or discreetly!) added the link the Atlas V, regarding the rocket profile, I think you've nailed it. Looks very much more like the New Horizons launch stack than any of the alternatives I've so far reviewed. (I checked Atlas V, when looking around, but must have missed the half-height double-booster-set/large-shroud picture further down that page. For better comparison: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NewHorizons_Rocket_Bly.jpg ) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.75.185|141.101.75.185]] 18:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1594: Human Subjects

2015-10-24T20:35:05Z

198.41.235.101: /* World Polio Day Comic */ new section

The responses in panels 1, 3, and 4 show that Megan is trying to downplay the issues despite better knowledge. This is probably done to surprise the reader of the dialogue for better dramatic effect. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.159|162.158.91.159]] 05:59, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

In the second panel, Megan makes a good point which Ponytail misses. If the control group had a high incidence of arson, while the experimental group did not (and assuming that proper protocols were followed in assigning subjects to groups), there is a possibility that the drug has the side-effect of suppressing the urge for arson [[User:Sysin|Sysin]] ([[User talk:Sysin|talk]]) 06:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
: Where is the point? "People where arrested for arson" - "Side effects" - "They where in the control group". That's not really a point for the side-effect of surpressing the urge for arson, is it? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.114.217|162.158.114.217]] 09:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
::If only people from the control group have been arrested, it is or could be. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.213|162.158.91.213]] 10:58, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
:::In this case both the control and the test group must be full of arsonists and the question is why did Ponytail let them lose to commit arson in the first place. May bye a double-blind test?[[User:Jkotek|Jkotek]] ([[User talk:Jkotek|talk]]) 13:29, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Maybe both groups were arsonists and the thing helps prevent the person from getting arrested somehow. [[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 14:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

did [[Danish]] cut her hair? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.8|108.162.216.8]] 11:22, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

also, the title text could allude to the fact that sociopaths (or successful ones at least) tend to be really adept at getting other people to write off or engage in their behaviours. that is, the IRB, despite the apparent awfulness of the actions of the subjects, on meeting them thought they were pretty cool and people should lay off. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.8|108.162.216.8]] 11:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Are those "citation needed" of any use? There is already a link to Wikipedia for sociopathy. Also, the invoked reasons ("Is an arsonist defined as a sociopath?", "Is a masochist the same as a sociopath?", "Is there an agreed upon definition of 'truly sociopathic behaviour', and is this it?") are not sound to me. Sociopathy is defined as "antisocial behavior", so are arson and sadism. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.66.23|141.101.66.23]] 11:32, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

: I elected to simply remove references to sociopathy. I think the comic uses the phrase "awful" people, and I don't think it is necessary to instill the article with controversy by defining the people as sociopaths or any other term. Simply describing their traits and noting that it is unusual and why should be sufficient. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.31|108.162.216.31]] 14:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I realize that this area is for discussing the subject of the comic, but of all the comic strips out there this is the last one I would ever expect to include the "word" ''snuck''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.26|108.162.216.26]] 13:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
:This area is mainly for discussing the improvement of the article. Unlike Wikipedia, here we also can discuss the subject of the comic. I addressed your comment, because I never had heard the word (no scare quotes) ''snuck'', but immediatly knew it was an alternate past tense of ''sneak''. I added this: ''Snuck'' is a dialectal past tense of ''sneak''.[http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g08.html]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.17|108.162.221.17]] 13:37, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

::With respect, I don't think the word "snuck" is uncommon or in any way unique to this comic. I don't think there is any valid need to include a line defining a common verb. If people don't know what the word "snuck" is, dictionary websites are aplenty, but let's not turn this site into one of those ones where every word is a link to a definition. Unless it's jargon or technical or a proper noun that needs explanation, I don't think definitions or links are really needed. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.31|108.162.216.31]] 14:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
:: Why use a dictionary when Conan can do it for you? :-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmoHSczX8pU {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.84}}

This comic could be referencing the growing realization that that the subjects of almost all psychology studies are not representative of the world population at large and of the great variety of humans found in the world. The subjects in psychology experiments are usually psychology students or other undergraduate students. Thus the subjects of these experiments are WIERD (Western Educated Industrialized Rich Democratic), these subjects are not close to worldwide normal. See this [//www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/psychology-studies-biased-toward-we-10-08-07/ Scientific American article] for more information. Thus this biases the results of psychology experiments in systematic ways, just as having a bunch of sociopaths as subjects would also systematically effect the results. --[[User:Benjamin|Benjamin]] ([[User talk:Benjamin|talk]]) 15:07, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Might this comic be related to the increased effect of placebo in medical studies? The "awful people" explanation is one of the ones mentioned in the article: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-34572482 [[Special:Contributions/141.101.79.49|141.101.79.49]]

:: Not really [[Special:Contributions/162.158.252.197|162.158.252.197]] 04:16, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Does antisocial behavior really invalidate non-neuro/psychological drug trials? I don't think personality would change the progression and nature of other diseases. --[[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.137|199.27.128.137]] 09:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

== World Polio Day Comic ==

At the top of xkcd.com is a link to Bill Gate's blog http://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/XKCD-Marks-the-Spot which currently contains one of Mr. Munroe's strips. Is this an appropriate subject for this wiki? and if so how?--[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 20:35, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1592: Overthinking

2015-10-19T15:55:49Z

198.41.235.101: /* DOI's */

First Panel:
DOI: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000221
Title:
Statement of the Third International Exercise-Associated Hyponatremia Consensus Development Conference, Carlsbad, California, 2015. Tamara HB, Mitchell HR, Sandra FG et al.
Link:
journals.lww.com/cjsportsmed/Fulltext/2015/07000/Statement_of_the_Third_International.2.aspx

Second Panel:
DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyv191
Title:
Associations of sitting behaviours with all-cause mortality over a 16-year follow-up: the Whitehall II study. Richard MP, Emmanuel S., Annie RB et al.
Link:
ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/10/09/ije.dyv191

Third Panel:
DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.09.046
Natural Sleep and Its Seasonal Variations in Three Pre-industrial Societies. G. Yetish, H. Kaplan, B. Wood et al.
Link:
cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2815%2901157-4

Full Text links: goo.gl/kc8cSs
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.206|162.158.34.206]] 13:17, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

== DOI's ==

Doh, after I added the links and noticed they were off by a panel I went to add a blurb in the comic description likely at the same time someone else did so in the references section I had just created. :P lol [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 13:38, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Linking "Digital Object Identifier" to www.doi.org is not helpful. Even their FAQ doesn't tell you what a DOI is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier will be more informative to most people, assuming wikipedia is correct.

== Shifted DOI ==

The Image provided here does not match with the one given at [http://xkcd.com/1592/]. At xkcd.com the DOIs are shifted to match the corresponding text. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.92.167|162.158.92.167]] 14:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
:Indeed you are correct. It would appear that Randall didn't intend to confuse us this way. ;) Problem is the comic panel on this page is auto-grabbed by a bot. Someone with more experience than me is going to have to look into this. Once the panel is updated, we can update the DOI link references. [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1587: Food Rule

2015-10-09T19:47:40Z

198.41.235.101:

But some fish don't have faces. Or have some really ambiguous faces. What constitutes as a "face" anyway, from an overall standpoint? A set of eyes eyes, a mouth, and a nose, with the nose generically at or below eye level, and the mouth below the nose? (also do I need to include my name after the tildes or does it add it automatically?) [[User:International Space Station|International Space Station]] ([[User talk:International Space Station|talk]]) 04:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC) ISS
: You type the four tildes and nothing else. The server software modifies your post before logging it, replacing your four tildes by your username and date/time. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.49.94|173.245.49.94]] 10:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
::Reckon the nose rule cant be sustained, dolphins and whales have faces and their 'nose' is well above eye level.[[User:Plm-qaz snr|Plm-qaz snr]] ([[User talk:Plm-qaz snr|talk]]) 05:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Randall does not care if anything he eats have a face. He just wish to know if it does or not before he eats it. The plants that he eats do not have faces for sure, but he eats those. The reason he does not eat Squids or Oysters has nothing to do with faces. It is the invertebrate = missing skeleton - that is the reason as explained in the title text. The caption below the comic is an extra rule that has nothing to do with the things mentioned above, which he does not have to google! Have corrected explanation accordingly. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
::::No way! The items in the list are classified according to whether their facefulness of facelessness is known without googling (things clearly with or without face are OK, things unclearly with or without face are not OK). The title text is the extra, unrelated rule, having nothing to do with the list. Explanation should be re-corrected again (not doing that myself as I guess some more arguing is due before doing). [[Special:Contributions/173.245.49.94|173.245.49.94]] 11:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
::::OK, modified it so that they are alternative explanations now. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.49.94|173.245.49.94]] 11:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:::::I disagree with some part of this improved explanation. Because there can be no doubt (without using goole) that an oyster has no face. So the rule about faces do not apply for Oysters! I will correct.--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
::::::How can you say what somebody else must obviously know without using google? From reading the comic, it seems like Randal is unsure whether or not an oyster has a face. From previous comics with a similar format, the printed caption is directly related to the comic, then the title text is an alternate caption that could also work with the comic. Both rules fit the list of allowed food. [[User:Phipoli|Phipoli]] ([[User talk:Phipoli|talk]]) 17:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

:::::::I completely agree. It briefly crossed my mind that a shrimp might have some kind of a face- it's entirely plausible that Randall needs to Google the face-ness of all three items. Really, it's the only conclusion that makes sense considering that this is how he set up the comic. Somebody should change the explanation back. [[User:Bbruzzo|Bbruzzo]] ([[User talk:Bbruzzo|talk]]) 15:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

the most famous and vocal proponent of the "no food with a face" rule is sir paul mccartney. to which one wag replied that anyone would follow that rule if they'd done as much LSD as he had. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.34|141.101.98.34]] 12:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

It should be noted that the three forbidden foods can be classified as {{w|shellfish}}, which is typically banned in Jewish dietary law (and also generally banned in certain schools of Islamic jurisprudence). [[User:Rawmustard|Rawmustard]] ([[User talk:Rawmustard|talk]]) 12:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:I will include this in the explanation. But then pork is OK on this list, which it definitely is not for the Jews. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:Is a squid a shellfish? I don't think it has a shell. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
::According to the list here: {{w|Shellfish#Nutritional_Values}} all kinds of Cephalopod molluscs, i.e. squid, cuttlefish and octopus are shellfish. So they are indeed shellfish. They do have some inner shells. You can find part of these petrified on beaches all over the world. I had a lot of those when I was kid. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Oysters arguably have a 'mouth' (maw/jaw/etc), with plenty of opportunity for pareidolia or at least marginal (head-only) anthropomorphising, depending on shell markings/adornments or perhaps the psychological willingness of the observer to read the rest of the face in the fleshy creature ''within'' the 'mouth'. Hence a need to actually check, to be sure? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159|141.101.98.159]] 14:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:I would disagree that a mouth would constitute a face. When looking at Wikipedia's page for face, it is only about humans, although it does mention that other animals could have faces. Guess it could be discussed if any animal that cannot make facial expressions (like humans and monkey) have a face at all. But yes I have seen by using Google that people do ask if squid and oysters have faces. But maybe that is just like Randall an attempt to make a joke on the vegetarians with this catch fraise of not eating anything with a face. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

More shrimp for me [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 14:14, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

The current explanation is very rambly. Also, it shouldn't presume what Randall knows or doesn't about shrimp, oysters, and squid and therefore shouldn't presume about what he needs to google. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.129.119|199.27.129.119]] 14:49, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:I do think he knows how they look. He is quite knowledgeable. Of course he may not know if other people think they have a face, and thus he could Google that. But the same could be said for a fish (and there are very many different types of fish with strange "faces" or no face). And I could easily argue that a cow cannot make any facial expressions and thus it does not have a face. And then Randall cold be confused and thus stop eating beef steak... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't think this has anything to do with whether an item actually has a face or not. I think that is a red herring brought on by the fact that the comic caption sounds very ''similar'' to the rule about not eating anything with a face. Randall's list of approved food items clearly are in the "face" and "no face" category alike. Thus we can conclude that Randall is ok with eating things that have a face, eating things without a face, eating things considered non-Kosher, eating carnivorous, eating vegetables, eating fruits, etc... In fact, we derive from this list that Randall has a very large array of food that is considered ok to eat. Thus his caption makes sense only when paired with the title text. Essentially, Randall doesn't eat food that creeps him out. Notice the caption states, "if I have to Google to figure out" which leads me to believe he considers that food to be other-worldly or creepy. This coincides with the title text about being creeped out by the specter of such a being.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 15:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
:The explanation says quite clearly what you wrote in the first lines. I agree with it of course as I have been part of writing just that already... --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
::Except that your comment to me is almost a day after my comment to the board. At the time of my comment the explanation was haphazard and rambling and was different than when you saw it. Reading the explanation today I still think it is missing the point. Too much focus on Randall contemplating what makes a face. I think it comes down to food that is recognizable. Just my opinion.--[[User:R0hrshach|R0hrshach]] ([[User talk:R0hrshach|talk]]) 16:17, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I think the currently explanation misses the point entirely. Two common 'food rules' are "Don't eat anything with a face" and "Don't eat anything you have to Google" (which would rule out, for example, pork and azodicarbonamide, respectively). The comic is funny because it mixes the two, which is ridiculous. The title-text is funny because it does this again with two more food rules ("Don't eat anything you would have to fight" and "Don't eat anything with a skeleton"). [[User:Jtg007|Jtg007]] ([[User talk:Jtg007|talk]]) 19:20, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
: You should update it, I agree. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
: Thanks! You explanation makes so much more sense.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.66.23|141.101.66.23]] 11:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
:Yes that is actually much better. Please update. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

This current explanation is really incoherent and rambly, and it goes off on so many irrelevant tangents that just confuse it even further (Why is the stuff about kosher even up there?). The many grammar and spelling errors, as well as the Danish Google link, suggests this explanation was written by someone who's not very familiar with English. Recommend that this article be overhauled and rewritten, preferably by a native English speaker.<br>Also, the title text may be a reference to the [https://www.reddit.com/r/ledootgeneration spooky skeleton] Internet meme. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.176|173.245.54.176]] 00:35, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
:Please feel free to correct my spelling errors etc. That is why this is a wiki. If you write stuff like that you will scare away people who is not native English. Maybe this is your intention? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

The standard plural in English of octopus is octopuses. However, the word octopus comes from Greek and the Greek plural form octopodes is still occasionally used. The plural form octopi, formed according to rules for some Latin plurals, is incorrect because the word is Greek, not Latin. Just sayin'. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.39.207|162.158.39.207]] 08:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

I vote YES to the overhauling and rewriting. However, (1) I'm not a native English speaker and (2) I think we should agree first on what should and what shouldn't be there, to avoid repeating the situation. Here's my checklist:
* This has nothing to do with Kosher, that should be completely removed.
* Oysters may require googling to check whether they have anything face-like.
* Google links shouldn't be here, Danish or otherwise.
* I didn't know about the "nothing requiring Google", "nothing you have to fight" and "nothing with a skeleton" rules; if these are indeed common, they really are relevant and the comic should be described simply as a mashup of these. Also, references to webpages describing these would be nice (NOT google searches).
* While I strongly support the idea that the item list is about the caption rule and has nothing to do with the title text rule, it is clear that other people strongly support the exact opposite, so both should be given as alternative explanations.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.49.94|173.245.49.94]] 08:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
: I fully agree. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.66.23|141.101.66.23]] 11:14, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
: I also agree. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

For those of you who want to do a rewrite, here's one more topic: Randall should not be the subject of the actions. He's the author of the comic, yet the comic should be seen as entirely fictional. So the discussion is not about whether "Randall would google this or that" but "One would google this or that" -- it's not specifically about what Randall would do but what would someone do if they followed these rules, it should be turned into a more anonymous/generic subject. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 16:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
:I have to disagree. Generally on this page it is expected that he talks about him self when he makes a rule or talk about a hobby. Maybe it is not how he behaves in real life, but then again it is a comic. But he tells it as if it is his rule not a generic rule. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:19, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Although this won't end up being of Randall's best comics by far, I do like the diversity of the comments from you guys above on the discussion page. There's been some nice different opinions expressed above, all converging towards a potentially better summary, nice work! Sometimes I feel like he's doing his comics just to confuse the various explain-xkcd sites & fan base. [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]])

Because he used the word "spooky" I have to believe that he is referencing spooky scary skeletons/skeleton trumpet/mr skeltal etc --[[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.89|199.27.133.89]] 03:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I believe that a "vegetarian" diet excludes all animal products, and "vegan" refers to people who also avoid every animal derived product, such as leather on belts or shoes or purses. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.103.217|141.101.103.217]] 12:18, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
:Definitions seem to change across time and between people (hence the need for terms such as "ovo-vegetarian" to better explain "Yes, I do still eat eggs!") but the trend I'm most familiar with is that (plain, unqualified) "vegetarians" just do not ''eat meat'', whilst "vegans" avoid all products of animals (whether derived by slaughter or obtained non-fatally) for both eating and (where avoidable) other uses like clothing. But there's plenty of scope betwixt/beyond the two to rule in/out the likes of milk, eggs, wool, leather- according to personal sensibilities and principles. i.e. There's those who just don't want animals to be slaughtered (to provide their own diet, at least), and others who don't even want to support the whole animal husbandry system, if they can at all help it.
:It gets a bit unwieldy to say "pisco-ovo-lacto-vegtarian", but I tend to assume (before I can confirm) that someone who says they're a "''foo-''vegetarian" eats vegetables, grains, fruit and ''foo'', but not meat nor whichever of fish/eggs/milk isn't already covered by the ''foo-''. It generally works out Ok.
:However, there are other opinions as to the definition, so it's still good to check. Please feel free to meet me to talk about your own proclivities. You'll find me easy to get on with. I am, of course, a humanitarian... *nom nom nom* [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.159|141.101.98.159]] 12:45, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

I think the heated discussion about whether or not something might need googling is quite powerful evidence that it might… [[User:StealMyCode|StealMyCode]] ([[User talk:StealMyCode|talk]]) 12:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

"These animals do not have a skeleton".
Shrimp and clams have skeletons. Specifically they have exoskeletons. Squid on the other hand do not have a skeleton in any meaningful way.

--[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 19:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1562: I in Team

2015-08-11T14:43:38Z

198.41.235.101:

There is no I in team, but there is an M and an E.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.56.215|162.158.56.215]] 08:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
: Ha, yes -- but they are backwards [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:37, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Check it out! there's "l" in "vowels"! --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.89.222|141.101.89.222]] 08:51, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

<sarcasm>There is an (annagram of) Randal in "People who don't understand how a proverb works" </sarcasm> No, seriously this is just cueball being a smart-ass. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.230|162.158.91.230]] 08:53, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

There's no I in team, but there is an I in pie; there's an I in meat pie and meat is an anagram of team, so... {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.82}}

:There's a 999999 in pi. {{unsigned ip|198.41.239.32}}

:: Doesn't pi contain every possible number sequence though? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.235|162.158.91.235]] 11:17, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

::: No. There is no evidence that pi includes an offset of pi.
:::There is no I in team, but there is meat... blessed meat :::Simpson drool:: {{unsigned|Cwallenpoole}}

:::: ''finite'' sequence. the kate bush conjecture is unproven. {{unsigned ip|141.101.98.34}}

The arbitrariness of this saying was demonstrated considerably more elegantly in Jeffrey Rowland's Wigu: "There is no I in 'team', but there is in 'family'." [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.93|198.41.242.93]] 11:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

This joke is not self-referential, it's metalingual. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakobson%27s_functions_of_language [[User:Xhfz|Xhfz]] ([[User talk:Xhfz|talk]]) 13:10, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

[http://rlv.zcache.com/i_in_team_there_it_is_hidden_in_the_a_hole_tshirt-r0aff1796c915419aaa4c3f9c73794dcf_f0yq2_1024.jpg There is]. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.185|141.101.98.185]] 16:18, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

: That's deep. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.188|108.162.229.188]] 18:05, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

It is interesting that Randall worded Cueball's dialogue as "There is a 'U' in People who apparently don't understand...". There is just that one 'U', in "understand". If he'd said instead something like "There is a 'U' in People who apparently don't get...", the reference to Hairy through 'U'/you would've been entirely allusional!
- Vik [[Special:Contributions/108.162.225.76|108.162.225.76]] 19:30, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

This comment is my way of noting and speculating that it makes sense that the origin of "No I in Team" is from baseball pitchers: They're the only team sport player I know of who is regularly replaced mid-game for reasons besides injury. If a pitcher thinks he's on a hot streak, but the coach replaces him because reasons, a phrase like like "No I in Team" may be needed to smooth over the resulting disagreement, regardless of whether the coach or the pitcher has their respective heads up their asses or not. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.53|199.27.133.53]] 20:05, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

But there IS an I in team! http://i.imgur.com/prPC7BX.jpg [[Special:Contributions/141.101.85.151|141.101.85.151]] 02:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I think it's interesting that there is exactly one "u" in "People who apparently don't understand the relationship between orthography and meaning", which has 76 letters. "U" isn't a terribly infrequent letter. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.133|108.162.221.133]] 04:42, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
: The frequency of "u" is about 2.8%. Assuming a binomial distribution, one "u" out of 76 letters is about a 25% probability. Nothing of significance here, even though 2 "u"s would be slightly more likely. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.101|198.41.235.101]] 14:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I think part of the joke that is missed in the current explanation is that cueball is responding with a less vulgar version of the common retort: "But there is a 'U' in c*nt."[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.188|108.162.250.188]] 09:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

:I have to say I've never heard that retort before. I'll have to try and remember to throw it into conversation next time I get the chance! --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 14:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)