explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

File:delivery.png

2025-08-20T20:49:41Z

92.23.2.228: Undo revision 384646 by 38.75.236.152 (talk) As explained on the actual explanation page... Tidying this comment away again.

== Summary ==
XKCD Comic #431
== Licensing ==
{{XKCD file}}

[[Category:Comic images]]

Talk:3131: Cesium

2025-08-20T20:42:46Z

92.23.2.228:

I think that's called a recipe for disaster. NOTE: I am also 104.225.172.143. [[Special:Contributions/138.43.101.123|138.43.101.123]] 14:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: No, ''I'' am 104.225.172.143! [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:09, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
:: I'm 104.225.172.143, and so's my wife! [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 20:42, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

My best recipe comes with a Notice to Mariners [[User:Hcs|Hcs]] ([[User talk:Hcs|talk]]) 14:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I added a transcript. Hopefully it's okay. [[Special:Contributions/104.225.172.143|104.225.172.143]] 14:54, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

A gram of gold runs on the order of ~$100 USD as of writing; a gram of cs-137 looks to be in the millions~billions range. --[[Special:Contributions/158.91.163.9|158.91.163.9]] 14:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

: Nope. [https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2024/mcs2024-cesium.pdf It's 99 dollars]. [[Special:Contributions/191.57.16.100|191.57.16.100]] 20:40, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

:Caesium contamination usually is caused by nuclear accidents (or atmospheric nuclear weapon tests) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137#Environmental_contamination. It is unlikely that someone acquired pure Cs-137 and then "accidentally" contaminated the shrimp with that. --[[Special:Contributions/134.102.219.31|134.102.219.31]] 15:31, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Bothering the NSA shouldn't be hard, just write some of their secrets on a cake (with frosting is optional) and post it online. [[Special:Contributions/212.101.26.209|212.101.26.209]] 14:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

What would IMO do, revoke your math license? [[Special:Contributions/216.73.162.10|216.73.162.10]] 15:22, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: They have numerous penalties at their disposal. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:27, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
: I imagined the reason the IMO would get involved would be because the recipe created some interesting mathematical problem that could be used for the next competition. For example, something like [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ct3lCfgJV_A this video], where a grocery order taken too literally creates a seemingly harmless Diophantine equation whose smallest positive solutions are on the order of 10^80. [[Special:Contributions/137.25.230.78|137.25.230.78]] 15:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Maybe The IATA could get involved if your ruined recipe caused food poisoning on a commercial airliner that then resulted in an in-air emergency (whole flight deck passed out).
:Or if you create a column of dense toxic fumes that spreads over a wide area (on the level of a volcano eruption). On the other hand, I wonder what could bring the attention of the IMO when Terryology seemingly couldn't.--[[Special:Contributions/94.73.52.245|94.73.52.245]] 18:56, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

The criticality accident in 1999 at the Tokaimura nuclear facility seems like a good example of messing up a recipe in a way that draws considerable attention. {{w|Tokaimura nuclear accidents}} [[Special:Contributions/2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B|2600:387:4:803:0:0:0:1B]] 19:11, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals

2025-08-19T20:04:08Z

92.23.2.228: /* Unicode emoji support */

<noinclude>{{Community links}}

{|-
|valign="top" width="100%"|[[File:Crystal Clear app ktip.png|left|120px]] <big><big>Proposals</big></big>

Place for ideas and suggestions to improve the wiki's design and organization on general issues can be incubated for later submission for consensus discussion. Be sure to check whether your proposal has already been submitted. {{AddNewSection|Page=Explain XKCD:Community portal/Proposals|Text=(+post)}}
|}</noinclude>

==ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS==
<div class="plainlinks" style="background:#edf6ff; border:1px solid #a7d7f9; margin:1em auto 1em auto; width:100%; font-size: 120%; padding: 0.5ex; text-align: center;">Most of the discussions on this page have been archived. The archive is available at '''[[explain xkcd talk:Community portal/Proposals]]'''.</div>

== Removing unnecessary 3-comic categories? ==

I count eight categories on explainxkcd that satisfy the following properties: 1. They have only three comics in them. 2. They aren't really a comic series; they just feature or reference a comic theme. 3. They aren't Featuring some person or character. In short, they seem to have no real reason to exist. (They're [[:Category:Spice_Girls|t]][[:Category:Wind_turbine|h]]e[[:Category:Ender%27s_Game|s]]o[[:Category:FernGully|n]][[:Category:Giraffes|e]]s.) So my proposal: remove them. -[[User:Account|Account]] ([[User talk:Account|talk]]) 20:37, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
:In addition, there are [[:Category:Sketches|t]][[:Category:BSD|h]][[:Category:Emacs|i]][[:Category:Identity_Theft|r]][[:Category:Katamari_Damacy|t]][[:Category:Super_Bowl|e]][[:Category:The_Matrix|e]][[:Category:Tournament_bracket|n]][[:Category:Traffic_light| ]][[:Category:Trebuchet|m]][[:Category:Wingsuit|o]][[:Category:Euler_diagrams|r]][[:Category:Pedantic|e]] four-comic categories that also seem rather in need of deletion.
:: Shouldn't the community at least have some time to expand on these categories, in case they're currently incomplete? For example, [[:Category:The Matrix]] is on your list and now contains 7 strips, and [[:Category:Tournament bracket]] got its 5th entry after your post. Even if they're not, a theme category can save some typing in the search box (and is probably also cheaper in terms of server resources than all the searches it'll eliminate). [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 22:43, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
:::So what do you think the limit should be for categories? Should we create a category when two comics mention the same topic? Three? --[[User:Account|Account]] ([[User talk:Account|talk]]) 16:28, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
::::Three seems reasonable to me, and I could see a case being made for two. Categories aren't expensive. [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 00:17, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

== New transcript ==

The transcripts in the comic pages are quite inconsistent, especially in the brackets where you have to describe what happens in the panels. If I understand correctly, the transcripts are for people to copy the text in the comic without having to type them out. If that's the case, then I think propose a new transcript. This transcript should have the comic with the words erased, and then the copy-pasteable words on top of that. Such a transcript would have no room for error, which would let anyone contribute to a seamless transcript.
:The aim of the transcript is to provide a text-only version of the comic that would allow someone who is visually impaired to use a text-to-speech converter to understand the comic and also in a machine readable format for searching (see the [[explain_xkcd:Editor_FAQ#What_is_the_format_of_the_transcript_section?|Editor FAQ]]). Anything using mark-up, images or anything other than plain text will interfere with this and so should be avoided in the transcript. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 18:22, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

== Add title text and heading to transcript section ==

It has always bothered me that the transcript did not include the title text since it contributes so much to the humor of the comics. Also, it looks to me like the comic heading is sometimes included as part of the transcript and sometimes left out. I checked the previous proposals and did not see any discussion of these issues. Please consider having a policy going forward of including the heading and the title text within the transcript. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 22:43, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
:To my understanding (and also others, see discussion directly above) one of the main points of the transcript is to make the comics searchable, the other is, to make it readable when images are not an option. In both cases the comic's name and the title text mentioned above and below the image should be sufficient. I personally think this convention is fine. [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 08:28, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

::Pardon me -- (and, '''<big>''thanks'' for your patience</big>''') -- if this is too off-topic (/slash "boring") or [[wikt:TMI|TMI]] (see {{w|Information overload#Web accuracy}} e.g.), '''...OR''' if this should have been posted elsewhere ...instead of here.

::IMHO the term '''"title text"''' is a misnomer. I think the term is used to refer to the little (or, '''BIG!''') pop-up -- (kinda like what is sometimes called a <code>"tooltip"</code>, but ... aren't those usually pretty '''small?''') -- that appears when one "hovers" his mouse [pointer] over an XKCD cartoon. ...at least, according to '''the "Talk:" page section''' [[Template talk:comic#The template field called .22titletext.22]] which was added almost 3 years ago. I think that calling it a <code>"BONUS text"</code> would be even better than calling it a "caption". However, [to me], '''either one''' of those terms would make sense ''WAY'' more than calling it a '''"title text"''' ... for reasons which are stated in the [Template] "Talk:" page section mentioned (and ... '''LINKED TO''') above. '''<big>Any Comments? . . ''' *** Thanks! *** for listening!</big> --[[User:Mike Schwartz|Mike Schwartz]] ([[User talk:Mike Schwartz|talk]]) 08:57, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

:::Hi Mike, I see your point, and yes, something like "bonus text" might be a bit more descriptive. But FWIW, I think the reason it's called "title text" is because that's the text that appears in the <code>[https://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_global_title.asp title]</code> attribute of the HTML <code>[https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_img.asp <img>]</code> tag of the comic's image on the xkcd.com site. For example, at https://xkcd.com/2364/, the code for the comic image looks like this:
<pre>
<img src="//imgs.xkcd.com/comics/parity_conservation.png"
title="Bloody Mary is made of antimatter. It explains so much."
alt="Parity Conservation"
srcset="//imgs.xkcd.com/comics/parity_conservation_2x.png 2x">
</pre>
:::In there, you can see the title text as <code>title="Bloody Mary is made of antimatter. It explains so much."</code> See [[title text|here]] for more explanation about that, and some discussions about it [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous#Common mistake|here]]. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 03:11, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

== Wikipedia links. ==

I think the links to Wikipedia should have symbols, so it's not confusing which ones lead to other comic pages.

== It's time to remove the HTTPS lock icon ==

Explainxkcd should do the same thing that browser makers have done: treat HTTPS as the modern standard, and mark HTTP as the deviation instead.

Here are appropriate replacement icons:
* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Unlock_Icon_Red_(32_bit).png
* https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Unlock_Icon_Red_(4_bit).gif
- [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 12:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

== New page for Randall's regular column in the New York Times ==
Randall Munroe has been writing and illustrating a monthly science column in the New York Times. I suggest a page in this Wiki, indexing those columns. For some reason the New York Times itself does not provide such an index. If they ever do add one, we would still have a topic article here, similar to the one we have for the What If blog, that could link to their index. --[[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 00:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
------
=== New York Times column: Good Question ===

'''Good Question''' is a more-or-less monthly column written and illustrated by '''[[Randall|Randall Munroe]]''' in the '''[https://www.nytimes.com/section/science Science section of the New York Times]''', beginning in November 2019. The columns give serious answers to science questions, in Munroe's inimitable style.

The New York Times website ordinarily requires registration, and its content is always protected by copyright. Most particularly it is ''not'' under [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License] the way [[xkcd]] is. The good news: anyone can register for a free digital subscription to the New York Times, with access to 'recent' Science articles among some others, but outside of that only five articles per month. See [https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/info/help/freesearch.html Free Articles].

Unlike for many of their other regular columnists, the New York Times does not provide a clickable link either on the byline '''Randall Munroe''' or on the column title '''Good Question'''. The following tables are intended to correct that omission.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ New York Times columns ''by'' Randall Munroe
! Column !! Headline !! Byline !! Date
|-
! SCIENCE
| [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)]
| Randall Munroe
| Aug. 13, 2019
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/12/science/randall-munroe-moon.html If I Touched the Moon, What Would It Feel Like?]
| Randall Munroe
| Nov. 12, 2019
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://nytimes.com/2019/12/10/science/earth-size-mass.html Is Earth Getting Bigger Over Time?]
| Randall Munroe
| Dec. 10, 2019
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/21/science/human-running-speed-quadruped.html How Fast Can a Human Run?]
| Randall Munroe
| Jan. 21, 2020 / Feb. 7, 2020
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/17/science/worst-odor-smell-thioacetone.html What’s the World’s Worst Smell?]
| Randall Munroe
| Feb. 17, 2020 / Feb. 26, 2020
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://nytimes.com/2020/03/10/science/question-randall-munroe-bobsled-gravity.html What if Galileo Had Dropped Bobsleds From the Tower of Pisa?]
| Randall Munroe
| March 10, 2020
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/07/science/pulsar-xkcd-munroe-stars.html How’s the View From a Spinning Star?]
| Randall Munroe
| April 7, 2020
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/11/science/traffic-barrier-rice-krispies.html What’s the Sweetest, Crispiest Way to Stay Safe in a Car Crash?]
| Randall Munroe
| May 11, 2020
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/09/science/randall-munroe-question-eggs.html Can You Boil an Egg Too Long?]
| Randall Munroe
| June 9, 2020
|-
! GOOD QUESTION
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/science/neutrinos-snowball-randall-munroe.html Could You Make a Snowball of Neutrinos?]
| Randall Munroe
| July 7, 2020
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ New York Times columns ''about'' Randall Munroe
! Column !! Headline !! Byline !! Date
|-
! LINK BY LINK
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/26/business/media/26link.html This Is Funny Only if You Know Unix]
| Noam Cohen
| May 26, 2008
|-
! BITS
| [https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/14/techs-favorite-cartoonist-enters-mainstream-publishing/ Tech’s Favorite Cartoonist Enters Mainstream Publishing]
| Noam Cohen
| March 14, 2014
|-
! SCIENCE
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/04/science/randall-munroe-the-creator-of-xkcd-explains-complexity-through-absurdity.html He’s Glad You Asked]
| Kenneth Chang
| Nov. 3, 2014
|-
! BOOKS
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/24/books/randall-munroe-explains-it-all-for-us.html Randall Munroe Explains It All for Us]
| Alexandra Alter
| Nov. 23, 2015
|-
! SCIENCE
| [https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/science/randall-munroe-xkcd-science-textbook.html Randall Munroe, XKCD Creator, Goes Back to High School]
| Kenneth Chang
| March 21, 2016
|-
! SCIENCE
| [https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/18/science/document-Munroepages.html Randall Munroe of ‘XKCD’ Explains the Human Body, Elevators and the Saturn 5]
| (Actual pages from '''{{w|Thing_Explainer|Thing Explainer}}''')
| March 21, 2016
|}
------

: Looks goods to me, you should probably make that an article of its own, maybe [[New York Times: Good Question]]? --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 22:58, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

: {{notice|I went and added the page, here: [[New York Times: Good Question]] --[[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 02:42, 11 July 2020 (UTC)}}

== Bring back the {{rw}} template! please ==

Can someone restore the <nowiki>{{rw}}</nowiki> template? I insist on its existence. I further assure that it will be of much use. It was deleted by an admin. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 06:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
:nm, did it myself. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 04:15, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

== Link to high-resolution images? ==

The wiki includes the "standard" resolution images, but would it be worth adding a link to the higher-resolution image on each page? It appears that this could be automated in at least a strong majority of cases: if the standard image is ''xyzzy.png'', the hi-res one is ''xyzzy'''_2x'''.png'' . [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 22:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
:Please stop adding this to the explanations. This is not needed. [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:56, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
::The high-resolution image was quite useful in parsing the "Amelia's Farm Fresh Cookies" comic. I'm not convinced that the hi-res images are commonly known. I've been reading xkcd for about 7 years and hadn't heard about them until I stumbled across a mention of them in one of the Discussions here. What is the harm in having a one-line ''link'' here? -- not, I emphasize, the actual image, which would take up a great deal of space. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 17:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
:::I didn't know about the high-resolution images either. While it might be a bit repetitive to add a full sentence to every comic's explanation, I agree that having ''some'' easy way to link to the hi-res image on xkcd.com could be handy. For example, maybe a "hi-res" or "2x" button before the "Next >" button above the comic in [[Template:comic]]? That's a bit extreme, but I added an example template, derived from the existing [[Template:comic]], to demonstrate how that could work:
:::* Template: [[User:Yfmcpxpj/Template:comic 2x test]]
:::* Demo: [[User:Yfmcpxpj/Sandbox#2x comic template test]]
:::With those changes to the template, for all comics as of [[1084]] the "2x" button would automatically appear. (No need to go back and change all comics.) This assumes the images hosted on explainxkcd generally have the same filename as on xkcd.com, but there are optional parameters to override the filename or omit the "2x" button altogether for specific exceptions. I'm not suggesting we actually go ahead and implement this; but if there was enough interest, an admin would be needed anyway, to make the changes within [[Template:comic]], which is currently protected. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 23:25, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
::::FWIW, I like this. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 20:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
:::::My proposal is that a bot should add it automatically to the description of each comic image when available so that it does not take up space anywhere and is easily accessible. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 13:49, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

== Proposal to replace the top section with this... ==

I have come up with a new design for the top section of all community portals...
It’s located here... https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=explain_xkcd:Sandbox&oldid=199882 — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 14:15, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
<hr/>
{|-
|valign="top" width="80%"|[[File:Crystal Clear app ktip.png|left|120px]] <big><big>Proposals</big></big>

Ideas to improve the wiki's design and organization can be added here. {{AddNewSection|Page=Explain XKCD:Community portal/Proposals|Text=(+post)}}

|valign="top" xalign="right" width="100%"|[[File:Crystal Clear app package settings blue.png|50px|link=https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Technical]][[File:Crystal Clear teamwork.png|50px|link=https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Coordination]][[File:Mop.svg|50px|link=https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests]][[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|50px|link=https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous]]
|}

== I made a template for welcoming new users. ==

{{Welcome}}
<hr/>
Any ideas? Suggestions? Objections? — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 16:35, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
: this is now in at the top of the Main Page --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
::Why? This looks like a template intended for (newly created) UserPages. And it replaces interesting data from the frontpage with something not useful for casual visitors (or even non-casual lurkers). I'd undo this change in an instant if I had authority to do so. ((The template looks good, to clarify, just obviously not intended to be in that location.)) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.154|141.101.76.154]] 01:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:::[[User: Jeff|Jeff]] is the owner of explainxkcd you dingus. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 13:46, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

== comic groups ==

i think we should have a tech problems list of comics ( as there are quite a few)
:We already have a category for it. [[:Category:Cueball_Computer_Problems]]. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 13:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

== Archiving interactive comics? ==

Has the possibility of archiving interactive comics been discussed? Of course, users can view them on the original website, but it’d be nice to have a working backup of sorts, especially considering some of the interactive comics haven’t aged too well in terms of compatibility or support (e.g. Umwelt displays a blank page for me.)

It probably wouldn’t be possible to do so directly from mediawiki, but I’d be happy to experiment with cloning a few of them on another server, or as simple PHP pages that could be embedded, if it would help. Most of the interactive comics appear to be implemented mostly in client side JS anyways, so replicating them shouldn’t be too bad.

[[User:Tague|Tague]] ([[User talk:Tague|talk]]) 13:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

== Replace head shots of characters in the wiki with these new and high quality head shots! ==

https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/n2u28r/i_took_head_shots_of_the_reccuring_characters_and/

These are not only upscaled, but are all squares and have all the features of the characters. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 03:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
:I think you should do it (because higher quality = better) :] [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 13:42, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
::There seemed to be no objections, so I went ahead and did it. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 12:40, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

== Cleaning up [[Special:WantedTemplates|Special: Wanted Templates]] ==

I decided to take a look at the list of wanted templates. Imagine my surprise when I see that a lot of the templates wanted were mis-capitalizations or misspellings of existing templates. I hereby request permission to create redirect pages for some of the most popular errors.
I intend to do five, wait a week, and do another five as to not spam the wiki. I will not begin for a week, at which point I will only proceed if nobody has said no OR a moderator has said yes. May I proceed? [[User talk:Quillathe Siannodel|{)|(}]][[User:Quillathe_Siannodel|Quill]][[Special:Contributions/Quillathe_Siannodel|{)|(}]] 11:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

== Knit Cap ==
Sometimes Knit cap has long hair, sometimes short. Is Knit Cap meant to be a male character that sometimes has long hair, or is Knit Cap sometimes female? I want to clear this up before I finish editing [[1350: Lorenz]]. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 13:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
:Hm, in the 'Enemy Pikachu used theft' scene in [[1350: Lorenz]], Knit Cap's hair looks merely slightly unkempt. From this, I will assume that Knit Cap just sometimes has long hair and is always male. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 13:10, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
::Ok, the official transcripts say that Knit Cap is 'A guy in a knit cap'. I will take that to mean that Knit Cap is definitely male.

== We still need to complete some explanations like this one: ==

I think should change the banner shown at the top of every page to show a comic that is still incomplete, like Hoverboard or something. [[User:Sure|Sure]] ([[User talk:Sure|talk]]) 21:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

== Update MediaWiki ==
explainxkcd is running MediaWiki 1.30.0, which reached end-of-life in June 2019. There are likely security issues because of this, so please update MediaWiki to the latest version (or LTS) using the instructions here https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Upgrading [[User:Cam1170|Cam1170]] ([[User talk:Cam1170|talk]]) 19:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
:It seems like the mysql is too outdated for the upgrade [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 17:37, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
::Upgrade MySQL then[[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|talk]]) 03:16, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Does anybody know how to contact an admin for this? I have no clue. [[User:Cam1170|Cam1170]] ([[User talk:Cam1170|talk]]) 03:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

== Allow Users to Edit their own talk page if not auto confimed ==

I can edit this page, but I can't create my own talk page! [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 17:34, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

== Upgrade Icons ==

The icons look quite old fashion (the ones on the sidebar and the ones above the editing text area), could they be replaced? [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 23:07, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
:They probably could be, but changing icons the moment they're not absolutely cutting-edge just means using new icons that are as easily edged-out (as tastes change yet again), meanwhile annoying those who prefered the first set and rather wouldn't see a revolving door of ever-evolving aesthetics.
:If I had a vote, I'd say keep the simple glyphs we're used to. If any are not totally obvious (perhaps some would not be, without the text captions) consider revising, but I think you'll get less agreement on what new images to use than that which would advocate the retention of the current ones.
:Alternately, it would definitely be on-theme to find Randall-drawn illustrations to replace them all. But the constraints of adapting (say) any particular stick-figure-world depiction of randonmess to ''meaningfully'' replace the current Random Page icon (at the same scale!) might be less than optimal.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.57|172.70.162.57]] 01:08, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

== Make searchbar not case-sensitive ==

The way the search bar is currently set, it only suggests comic links when what is being typed is capitalized ("Assigning Numbers" rather than "assigning numbers" for instance). Would be nice if we could make it not case-sensitive :D [[User:Char Latte49|Wielder of the Staple Gun]] ([[User talk:Char Latte49|talk]]) 02:48, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
:Good idea. [[User:Marethyu|⟨Winter is coming⟩ Marethyu]] ([[User talk:Marethyu|talk]]) 17:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

== Do not allow ordinary users to edit redirects that are just numbers ==

This overrides the default page you're sent to when you check a comic; e.g. recently a vandal edited the page entitled "2614" so it overrode the actual page, [[2614: 2]] on the main page.
:The problem would be when creating a new page and the overrides are needed... [[User:Marethyu|⟨Winter is coming⟩ Marethyu]] ([[User talk:Marethyu|talk]]) 17:48, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

== ExplainXKCD discord (or other platform)? ==

I'm just saying if we had instant messages, pings etc. there would be a lot faster reaction to vandals.
The community portal is hard to get attention from and comments are all very well and good but conversations on Discord could get very quick response, and people could request edits, organise page re-writing etc.
Idk if we can get "official" backing by anyone high up but we could make one anyways?
:The problem with platforms like Discord or others is that we can't guarantee that everyone has access to them; on the wiki, anyone can edit, while some people may not have access to discord or such. A possible solution would be having a sort of service built into the wiki, but not sure how that might be done. Besides, this is a wiki, not an xkcd chat site. This is a good idea, though. [[User:Marethyu|⟨Winter is coming⟩ Marethyu]] ([[User talk:Marethyu|talk]]) 17:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
::Anyone can create a discord account like anyone can create an account on this wiki. You don't even need a dedicated client/app as it can run in browser. Just like the wiki. Just my two cents. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:28, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
:::Some user may not wish anyone to be able to contact them outside this wiki. You do not need an acount to edit this wiki... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:14, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

== So, I got a question about transcripts. ==

A lot of comics show links (e.g.: all the ones with a drawing of wikipedia on it), and the transcripts don't really have a standard. In the transcript, should it be an actual link or just blue text or what? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.52|162.158.79.52]] 15:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Bumpf
:I'd say that if the linked thing (presuming it's a real linkable target!) is linked in the Explanation, it doesn't need to be (re)linked in the ostensibly flat-and-descriptive Transcript.
:And I know that some Transcripts are hypertext formatted to emulate the thing they are transcribed from (whether bolded, enbiggened, sub-/superscripted and and/or given the hue) but maybe ''primarily'' the "<code>[:Text that describes the text]</code>" should be explaining the details, in case the screen-reader (or text-searching algorithm grepping the Transcript text for "green text" or "superscript" instances can't quite work it out from the various style-tags that can be applied to that effect in so many an various ways.
:But this is IMO, I don't know if there's a specific policy about it, but it is how I've seen it vaguely applied... Not everywhere quite so consistently, though. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.128|172.70.91.128]] 20:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
::We try to keep links and explanations out of the transcript. The link and the explanation goes in the explanation section above. [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:12, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

== Use 2X Images ==

Apparently xkcd.com provides double-sized versions of almost every comic if you add '''_2x''' to the end of the image name. For instance,

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/watches.png

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/watches_2x.png

Since we are in 2022 and computers can load high-resolution images just fine, and they are easier to read, I propose that this website should use the provided double-sized images. Really, I think Randall ought to be doing this himself as well. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.18.107|172.68.18.107]] 12:22, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

:While I agree with using the higher quality images which are default on xkcd.com for many people, there has been [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Link_to_high-resolution_images.3F discussion] about this issue already. At the moment, the consensus seems to be to continue using the 'standard' size to 'use less space,' and instead link to the higher quality image on the image page. —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 14:35, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

::I think I may have mentioned it on that link (or similar), but often when the 2x image is used (or even an unwise too wide image/unbreakable-line-of-content) the explainxkcd site cannot sensibly handle it and it forces the default 'page width' of stuff into a zoomed out narrower column to the left (including the margin-line normally inset a dozen or so pixels in from the right) so that browser-window can display the whole of this wide element.
::While "saving space" does apply to server resources and viewer download bandwidth/quotas (e.g.[https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/unreliable_connection.png 53kb] vs [https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/unreliable_connection_2x.png 109kb]) may seem insignificant, screen-space can be badly hit by this.
::The motherlode xkcd site has code behind it to (usually?) serve the right image for the right displays, but explainxkcd isn't currently equipped to do the same choose-and-provide (which would need ''both'' images uploaded to it and a revised {{template|comic}} implementation, once we work out the method it could use). And I've never seen any case where the 'low quality' comic is conversely too small and narrow to appreciate (though occasionally the larger one reveals minor drawing details that have been obscured by the downscaling), just when the _2x one makes everything ''else'' too small.
::...this may not apply to everyone's browser implementation, but it definitely happens, and consistently, on my usual Chrome and/or Firefox on Windows and/or Android platforms (according to which system I happen to be on at the time). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.147|172.70.162.147]] 21:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
:::ExplainXKCD actually does have the capability to do this. For example, see [[1079:_United_Shapes]]. It generates multiple images, automatically choosing one based on screen size (similar to how xkcd.com does it). The bot could use the `imagesize` parameter to keep the image within the page's width by using the 'standard' image size. This does add a button labeled "click to enlarge," but if that is annoying, the comic template can be modified to hide that button if specified.
:::Here is what it might look like:
:::{{cot}}
{{User:Theusaf/Template:comic_2x
| number = 2647
| date = July 18, 2022
| title = Capri Suns
| image = capri_suns_2x.png
| titletext = [As security is dragging me away] "Come on, at least I didn't make the mistake in the other direction!"
| imagesize = 315x317px
| noexpand = true
}}
{{cob}}
:::which is clearer than the original comic page and the same size. —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 05:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
::::As specificaly implemented above, I certainly see no immediate problem (need to check across machines/devices), but I suspect that part of the mechanism here is the "imagesize = 315x317px", which seems like it would need (albeit by the page-create bot, algorithm8cally) to be tailored to the 'input' image, not always in this ratio). I'm not technically conversant with the nature of your back-end scripting and doubtless it's all possible (scripts can do almost anything... once you know that they (may) need to do them and rewritten them to catch all the contingencies ;) ), but I don't know know if that's something you've accounted for (e.g. test with a three/four-panel wide comic, or the Earth Temperature Timeline or whatever, and see if it can facilitate them all nicely). Not to mention that if theusafBOT goes offline, the manual-add instructions (as used prior to your replacing the prior functioning bot, for which I thank you) also need this extra step of user involvement to be done, whereas usually the fallback manual method needed little thought in this direction (or indeed however much carbon or silicon there is in the 'brain' involved) except for exceptional circumstances or those rare prior slip-ups by Randall.
::::I'm just going through the first obvious issue (to me), didn't mean to concentrate so many words on just this before even checking everything else! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.80|172.70.91.80]] 09:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
:::::Basically, on the backend, the bot will fetch both the small and the large images, and measure the size of the small image, which is what it will use for the <code>imagesize</code>. I have actually used this system in the past for this bot, but was told to revert it due to the "click comic to enlarge" text. As for if the bot goes offline, there is no problem with falling back to the small image, and if editors want to, I can also provide instructions for using the large image. I'm mostly just waiting to see what others think about this. Are there any other problems to consider? —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 14:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

== I'm making an App that collects web comics ==

My original idea was to use the rss feed present on xkcd, and other webcomic websites, but now im starting to wonder if there was a way to make a better service, that allowed users to maybe look at older comics, and explanations and such as well, and thats how i happened to come across explainxkcd.com. The RSS Feed for this website, would be pretty helpful, if it were like reddit's but apparently, the rss feed is only maintained for the home page. I was wondering if you guys provided that data through an API or something? Also are there wikis for other famous comics like this one? Any other suggestions and ideas for the app are welcome 🙌🙌.

== Comics edited after their publication ==

many more comics have been changed than are in Category:Comics edited after their publication ! please add them (i already have done two i remember off the top of my head) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.134.223|172.70.134.223]] 12:56, 7 October 2022 (UTC)Bumpf

== What if 2 book page creation ==
What if 2 has come out, but I don't know which page is to be created. There is already a comic under the same name. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 08:54, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

== Default to 3 Section Headings for Each Explanation: Non-Obvious Info, Recap, and Background Trivia ==

This is a proposal that all new comic explanations should, by default, have 3 Sections:

'''I. Explanation of the Non-Obvious''' (an actual explanation of the non-obvious elements of the comic for the average reader who might not understand the references/joke/relevant science)

'''II. Full Recap'''

'''III. Background Trivia'''

Most of us can agree that Category I is where the value of this website shines.

But today, all 3 of these categories of explanation are typically merged together, making it hard to find the Category I nuggets of goodness.

If we make these 3 section headings the default on every comic explanation, then this default will helpfully nudge editors to put the juiciest stuff up top, and not to clutter that section up with fluff or trivia.

——

As an example, take the recent comic #2878 about Astronomer Happiness and Supernova distance.

The main thing a lay reader would want to know — the Category I information — is…

..That the shape of the graph is probably a clever reference to a Light Curve, a type of supernova graph

..why astronomers like it when a supernova is close, and what happens when it gets too close

Everything else in the (currently) very wordy explanation gets in the way of the lay reader finding out these two things. It’s a bunch of Category II and Category III info that makes it hard to tease out the Category I info. It’s not BAD information, but it’s sandpaper. It’s friction slowing down the average reader.

Obviously I could go in and edit this particular comic, and I often do this kind of edit, but I think this issue pops up for most explanations, so I think changing the standard default interface will help everyone put their contribution into the right section.

In sum, my proposal would elevate Category I info to the top of each explanation, so instead of full recaps, we get right into the explanation that is going to be most efficiently illuminating for the average, non-expert reader, answering the most common questions.

[[User:Laser813|Laser813]] ([[User talk:Laser813|talk]]) 10:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
:In general (if I get dibs on the edit, or think I can legitimately re-edit/rearrange), I do try to go for "hook, line, sinker" format (i.e. establish the basics, relate that to what the comic shows, move on to any relevent speculations/extrapolations), very like your setup. Though it is often ''much'' too complicated (multi-layered, cross-disciplinary, etc, so that maybe it has to be interwoven 'mini explanations' per tabulated item) so I'm not sure how easy it would be to enforce a strict structure. I think there's merit to the principle, though. Assuming we can all agree what each comic needs focus on (apply that problem to the following proposal too!), as I've occasionally inserted a sort of "first you need to know <subject>" into an established cold-start explanation ("you see <foo>" only for a later editor to consider it more an afterthought and shuffle it to later ("you see <foo>" ... "<foo> is part of <subject>"), or variations on such layouts. Especially as different people have different ideas as to what's obvious/can be keyword-wikilinked and what needs more waffle to properly enlighten readers.
:Also, prosaic variation is a good thing. Too formulaic and it could be (whilst accurate) considered too robotic, so some leaway should really always be allowed as we collectively bash together a community interpretation and elaboration. Within communal guidelines, clearly. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.203|172.69.194.203]] 15:53, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

== FAQ Style Editing should be the norm ==

Simply, we should experiment with more FAQ-style explanations.

We think of the top questions that the average reader might have about a comic, and we use those as bolded headers to explain the most curious/confusing/subtle/sciency parts of the comic.

The structure would be this (using a recent comic as an example)…

'''Q: Why did Randall use this shape of graph?'''
A: It’s likely a clever reference to a Light Curve, a similarly shaped graph in the study of supernovae that…

'''Q: Why do astronomers prefer it when supernovae are closer?'''
A: It makes it easier to glean information because…

[[User:Laser813|Laser813]] ([[User talk:Laser813|talk]]) 10:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

== sidebar revamp ==
I think that the sidebar looks plain and it should have a new design. It could be voted on by users [[User:Moderator|Moderator]] ([[User talk:Moderator|talk]]) 02:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
:In leiu of you telling us what you think would be better, my starting vote is that I'm perfectly happy with that 'plain'. If it has the links I might need, why does it need a reskin? Or, worse, a functional revamp which probably removes the easy to use bits I was using already.
:...could you do a mock-up screenshot (or render equivalents directly in markup) of before/after side by side, at least? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.120|172.69.194.120]] 03:11, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

My biggest problem is it doesn’t scroll down with you which can be a big pain [[User:Moderator|Moderator]] ([[User talk:Moderator|talk]]) 01:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
:Don't know about anyone else, but (when not on a desktop) I read this on a tablet, in landscape, with the effective window quite short (ratio of 1:2 with width, approaching 1:3.5 with already narrowed onscreen keyboard popped up) and if I'm scrolled to the top I see nothing beyond Browse Comics.
:If we assume separate scroll-control on the sidebar, setting Main Page at the top of browser pane gives What Links Here at the bottom. Now, I rarely use the next three links (or at least reach those pages using them), and separate scrolling wouldn't stop me even seeing the even lower Ad bit (but it ''would'' defeat the entire purpose of the Ad, in that position, whether or not I bother to notice it these days).
:So whatever missing about you propose, I'm betting it would impact me. Perhaps not negatively, but I've seen enough awful assumptions about my screen-area in the name of scroll-free design. Including the "give us permission (or not) to give you cookies" popovers where it appears the actual buttons to confirm (or deny, or go somewhere to review and customise, if they have that option) are beyond the bottom of my screen. I can temporarily rotate the screen, of course, but often I just back out and don't bother in those cases. I wouldn't be reticent to rotate this site, on occasion, but ''I'd really rather not have to'', if I can be so selfish and stick-in-the-mud, because websites just are not good to use (even temporarily) in narrow-portait mode. (What's worse is the websites that detect I'm on a mobile platform and redesign styles/placements on-the-fly to 'fit portrait view', assuming a vertical smartphone, ''regardless'' of my actual viewport orientation, etc.)
:So, please, a hard no from me. Notwithstanding that just as solidly "always browse in portrait" people might be overjoyed at changes that would give ''them'' a better site design. But that's a tricky circle to square (or letterbox!), and not what you were suggesting anyway (now we know what it is). I just want to plea that any changes be made with a very good idea of all the knock-on effects of 'improving' certain edge-cases, especially when it comes to yet other edge-cases. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.23|172.70.85.23]] 10:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
==New Logo and Banner Proposals==
:I have new logo and banner proposals for this site.
:They're made on Scratch, an all-ages block-based programming language, and are in the style of Right Click.
:Here they are!
:Logo proposal: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_proposal_for_explain_xkcd.png
:Banner proposal: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Banner_proposal_for_explain_xkcd.png {{unsigned ip|172.69.71.37|01:54, 19 February 2024}}
::I can't see the xkcdicity of the logo, really. The banner is certainly flavourful in the right way (does it scale down well? ...is that what your use of Scratch is for, as opposed to standard static Photoshop/GIMP image editing?), but not sure it'll work better for the current top-left-of-page xkcd (with three xkcd figurses idling away, sat on the letters).
::Decent concept art for something else related, certainly. I could believe it was a Randall's-own interactive comic front-end of some kind (which would make sense of the "play button" that is the "►"-bit). Given that it's now in a programming system already, have you tried making a drag'n'click game of the idea of linking/looping the blue-trail, and animating the hanging-on characters? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.29|172.70.90.29]] 13:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
:::It's an arrow, not a play button. Get it right. {{unsigned ip|172.69.71.72|01:05, 20 February 2024}}
::::Hold your horses... I was just trying to find a good reason for the whatever-it-is triangle to be there (gave the example of a 'play' button in my speculated usefulness of it). And it isn't really obviously any more of an arrow (c.f. "→"), either. I like your(?) banner's use of xkcd-figures, just not sure where the logo exhibits any form of being xkcd-related, except by the literal reading of it.
::::Perhaps if it were "xkcd font" (i.e. artfully composited from actual samples of Randall's ALLCAPS comic-writing) then it wouldn't matter so much, but I just wouldn't say it was any more on-brand than the current logo/etc. This being intended as constructive criticism, I hope you understand. And there's more opinions than mine, so maybe I've indeed just missed some point that ''everyone else'' (especially named-users) have already realised. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.5|172.70.86.5]] 02:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

== Regarding precision in the Unexplained popup ==

Would it be possible to add an extra decimal point for the sake of precision? Currently, it shows that 0% of comics are unexplained, which is (as of 13:21 UTC on March 27, 2024) incorrect. It's a small thing, but it's rather annoying. {{unsigned ip|162.158.158.233|13:23, 27 March 2024}}
:With the current 2911 comics (give or take #404), 0.1% would be slightly under 3 comics. You'd need at least three before 0.1% appeared instead of the equally unuseful 0.0%.
:I'm of the "at least give everyone a week before you unilaterally declare it 'done'..." camp, so right now ''just'' the latest M/W/F comic incomplete would hover at a token 0.1%.
:(Actually, from two (0.06...% rounded up) to 4 (0.13...% rounded down. The good news is that it'll be almost seven years until two-rounded-up is insufficient, but also up to six-rounded-down is now "0.1%", if I've not goofed the carries/etc.)
:If going to the trouble of editing it to 1DP, make it 2DP with ''exactly'' the same editing effort..?
<blockquote>
<center>
''Welcome to the '''explain [[xkcd]]''' wiki!'' 
We have an explanation for all [[:Category:All comics|'''{{#expr:{{PAGESINCAT:All comics|R}}-1}}''' xkcd comics]],

and only {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}}
({{#expr: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} / {{LATESTCOMIC}} * 100 round 2}}%) [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|are incomplete]]. Help us finish them!
</center>
</blockquote>
:(As of time of posting, the above says "only 2 (0.07%)". From 0.0687049...% rounded up to 2DP.)
:Though given that we're only going to go into the future,{{Citation needed}} I suggest we can state the flat-out number. It's not now really going to be as scarily huge as it might have been, as the actual percentage becomes generally less significant.
:And, for niceness, give it a grammatically/factually agreeable form:
<blockquote>
;General form:
:<code><nowiki>... and {{#ifeq:  | 0 | no |  }} comic{{#ifeq:  | 1 | | s }} [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|{{#ifeq:  | 1 | is | are }} incomplete]]. ...</nowiki></code>
;Zero cases (hardcoded):
:... and {{#ifeq: 0 | 0 | no |  }} comic{{#ifeq: 0 | 1 | | s }} [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|{{#ifeq: 0 | 1 | is | are }} incomplete]]. ...
;One case (hardcoded):
:... and {{#ifeq: 1 | 0 | no | 1 }} comic{{#ifeq: 1 | 1 | | s }} [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|{{#ifeq: 1 | 1 | is | are }} incomplete]]. ...
;Multiple cases (hardcoded):
:... and {{#ifeq: 42 | 0 | no | 42 }} comic{{#ifeq: 42 | 1 | | s }} [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|{{#ifeq: 42 | 1 | is | are }} incomplete]]. ...
;Current cases (dynamic):
:... and {{#ifeq: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} | 0 | none | {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} }} comic{{#ifeq: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} | 1 | | s }} [[:Category:Incomplete explanations|{{#ifeq: {{PAGESINCAT:Incomplete explanations|R}} | 1 | is | are }} incomplete]]. ...
</blockquote>
:...easy to replicate to get "Help us finish them!" to change (upon a zero-test truth) to "But they all might be improvable!". Or change the :Cat:Link to not even be a link when zero, with alternate phrasing dodged over to in order to avoid "no comics are incomplete" in other ways.
:I wrote the above for minimal nesting of overlapping conditions. You might prefer just to go with <code><nowiki>{{#ifeq: <count> | 0 | <whole "zero cases" version> | {{#ifeq: <count> | 1 | <whole "single case" version> | <whole "plurality of cases" version> }} }}</nowiki></code> - both approaches involve repetitions, but maybe this other one can be given a ''degree'' of wikimarkup-readability within each case, to take pity on future editors. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.166|172.70.160.166]] 16:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

== Hear me out: What If? discussion page. ==

That's it. That's my idea. Go crazy, everyone. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 14:05, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
:Yup, I've been thinking the same thing. I would like a page on each What If entry. [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 07:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
::I've thought about this, over the years. Having 'a page' (rather than the summary table, in the [[what if? (blog)|overview page]], etc) does sound more completist than what we currently have but I then tend to hit the main ontological problem...
::In the What-Ifs, Randall takes a 'simple' question and then ''explains'' the consequences. At length. A 'comic page' structure (starting with how we'd deal with the multiple midpoint images, so we would stray far from using the {{template|comic}} introduction) that followed the header(image,etc)/explanation/transcript/(trivia)/included-comments format would be silly and have many parts inappropriate. Remove the Transcript, for starters. ''Or'' need a mini-Transcript for each 'illustrative' image. (e.g. ":[Black Hat:] What if we tried more power?", several times.)
::Is there an actual need to ''explain Randall's explanation..''? Because that's the only thing 'we' can do. Which is rather silly, and seems like it would take a small (entertainingly rambling) essay and expand it into a large (pedantically rambling) one.
::Or else we just straight-copy the What-If over here as a 'backup'-blag? Allowable, but not exactly a USP, there'll be Internet Archive and personal copies, should things go bad at Randall's end. Not really a noble-cause.
::My suggestion, as to how to cover the remaining "explanation gap" and provide a useful 'service' that's worthwhile maintaining, is ''maybe'' two What If? (Blag) sub-pages:
::#A place to collate all inter-text images (and hover-/title-texts), and Transcript them, for easy searching.
::#*e.g. when you know you want to refer to the "bomb to the eyeball" one (internally or for something external) but think you might not realise where you need to go to (the supernova neutrinos one!) just by scrolling a bare comic list.
::#*Or you'd like to see, at a glance, how many different places the Black Hat Try More Power running joke occurs.
::#*Even if you don't want to open the page itself (160+ 'comics' with say 5 images each, is an 800ish-image page, less rationalising 'repeats' to a single entry), it should at least give you a search result for "dry waterfall" that points you in the direction of the "Niagra Straw" one (and maybe others?).
::#*I could see these being brief Image/Titletext/Transcript/(optional explanatory context), but not enough material to make them separate comic-style-pages in their own right, right?
::#Something of the same 'collation page mechanism' for all those superscript-popup-'footnote' bits. Though I admit I'm not entirely sure for what purpose except that it just ''seems'' like a good "collection page" to maintain. Perhaps to offer updated onward-links if any of the originals suffer link-rot? (But then, that fate can occur to all non-popupped links, so maybe I've chosen the wrong thing to highlight.)
::...the question is, what do you want from it. Bear in mind that if you can creae pages here then you can set up what ''you'' think you'd like to see (e.g. for What-If#1, for starters) then get the community to assess it. Do it as a sub-page to your Userspace, maybe, as proof-of-concept.
::Just because it's not been seen as necessary so far, doesn't mean it's not necessary. I've thought about it a lot (not thst I'm in a position to inplement anything), but I've only decided that I don't see a need for a straight copy (others' views may differ on that) and not enough reason to pester for ''my'' 'ideas' to be fulfilled. But I aint 'in charge' here, and happily so. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.100|172.69.194.100]] 11:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:::You make a fair point. He did already explain in great detail what would happen if [x] scenario happened. It just seems like it would be nice to have a page exclusively for discussing all the ''What If'' articles. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 20:49, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
::::People just need to make a draft or two and see what happens. Be sure to link a draft here if one is created, I would like to help on it. "I want to learn more and explore this scenario further" is a valid feeling to have. [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 07:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

== Randall-ify the Captcha ==

Let's have some fun: Is it feasible to replace the Captcha with something "xkcd-ish" like "click on Randall's work" with a mix of XKCD stuff and generic pictures. If not, how about a replacing it with a quiz like "which of the following IS [or IS NOT] xkcd character" with one obvious correct answer. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.26.75|172.68.26.75]] 16:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
:are YOU able to create a CAPTCHA from scratch? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 15:59, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
::Choose any images that contain user-made CAPTCHAs from the following selection. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 21:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

== Incomplete Tag Vote ==

I think each comic's discussion page should have a section to vote on whether the explanation is complete or not. How long do you think the voting period should be?[[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 03:42, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:Rather than a voting period, I think it would be ideal if people could "vote" on the completeness of an article at any time. As I go through all the old pages, I come across lots of pages that feel a little bit incomplete. It would be nice if we had a measurement of completion that wasn't binary. [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 10:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
::Feel free to add the incomplete tag again. But don't forget to mention WHY (either in the tag or the discussion or both) you think it's incomplete. :) The tag is mainly there so you can have a list of "incomplete" comics. A comic is either on that list or it isn't. This is pretty much binary. As for voting: If I think an explanation is complete and it bothers me that it's flagged as not I generally juts make a comment in the discussion asking if someone has still something to add or actually knows WHY it's still incomplete. If there's no response after a few days I delete the tag. There's no need to make a voting out of this. And if somone strongly disagrees to you there's always the "Undo"-link ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:::Sometimes I just feel "this could use more detail," without specifically knowing what the detail would look like. This can be a problem when it's about explaining complicated science: the "completion" of a description of quantum mechanics that is readable by a novice, is very subjective. I am realizing the problem with the persistent voting idea tho: many people will vote something as "incomplete" but wouldn't come back to check on it later. [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 12:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
::::I'm more in the "less is more" camp. Most of my recent contributions to this wiki were deleting parts of bloated explanations: You don't need to explain quantum mechanics unless it's absolutely crucial for understanding the respective comic. Of course, if you are an expert in any given field, [[2501|it's hard to tell]] whether or not the current explanation is sufficient for a layperson and most contributors tend to write "too much". Which is totally fine. People like me take care of the "too much". ;) So, if you are an expert in quantum mechanics ignore "completed" comics about quantum mechanics. Surely you could contribute a lot to it but chances are high that most of it is unnecessary for the comic. Instead ask yourself if you need more information to understand that comic about biology. And if you do, add an incomplete and ask for that information ;) [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 12:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
:I've been here a long time, effectively back to when there were ''missing'' explanations (other than the "too new to have the barebones put in" ones, these days only seen when the current BOT is tardy or offline for some reason), and I've seen the Incomplete template change from the useful 'infill marker' to become a regular joke-tag of a similar nature to the Citation Needed. Yes, I agree that both of these (and the Because You're Dumb" tag) are perhaps a bit confusing for new users (like the one who badly edited out a link, just now, apparently thinking it was spam, because of the way it mentioned viagra), but I have grown to see them as community in-jokes (of various degrees of subtlety) that many people seem to appreciate under their current incarnations.
:We've recently removed the Main Page's more literal "there are # incomplete articles" announcement, which leaves the purpose of ''more accurately'' using the Incomplete tag a little less important. Apart from letting us dive into the (purported) list of Incomplete Explanations, one of the main ''serious'' purposes of the Incomplete tag is removed, leaving the now consistently employed purpose of doing a "Created by a THING OTHER THAN THE BOT" joke much more prominent.
:Really, all articles are potentially incomplete, still. Some more than others. Something big, like Hoverboard or Gravity, might truly have easter-eggs or subtle details as yet not properly commented upon, but there have been edits to ''double-digit'' comics recently which might be considered improvements. As such, there are really only two 'sensible' direct courses of action:
:#Completely remove the Incomplete tag, from use, as all pages are only ever as complete as the eye of any particular beholder, and the more recent pages are ''obviously'' incomplete by their being barely 15 minutes (or a day, or ''maybe'' a week) old. Or being so huge (or Time-like!) that they clearly still haven't been 'completely' documented. Maybe the BOT can add a Created By The Bot tag that gets wiped out by the first serious attempt at human editing, but if we wish to lose this part of our site culture so readily then why ever have it at all? A wikivote system is not really that accurate under these circumstances, for a number of reasons that I needn't explain, so go straight to assuming that any such 'vote' would pass, right from the off...
:#Embrace it for its THING OTHER THAN A BOT usage, alone. Don't be so eager to remove them just because you have no personal changes you'd wish to see. (Votes or not, there could always be another editor along in a minute who has, unlike the rest of you, picked up on an obscure visual pun rendered in what turns out to be hieroglyphs, or similar.) If we have to cull them (not a given!), then let it be an unstated rule (or a stated one?) that if there are more than (e.g.) half a dozen then the 'least amusing' may be removed by the first editor who wishes to express a critical opinion. Just the one at a time. No reinstating, no resurrection, no adding to old articles that never ever had a 'joke Incomplete' before, no entirely new joke (but you can refine what's there, to a degree), just a rolling (and not necessarily consecutive!) set of the "finest natjve explainxkcd wit". Or at least the least objectionable surviving examples of same.
:As a practical guide, the "reason why you think it is Incomplete element" could be entirely served by in-line tags (the "What?" and "Why?" and "Date?" things you might see elsewhere). Perhaps we could even do ''both'' things by instead having a "Complete" tag ''explicitly'' for BOT-REPLACEMENT-type tomfoolery (and tongue-in-cheekness about Completion, as we might currently be about Incometeness) from the off. That might confuse the newbods, of course. At least until it doesn't, and then they're not newbods anymore...
:The companion tag, for Incomplete Transcript, is presumably going to serve as it currently does (as a still serious hint as to actual Incompleteness), albeit that I've noticed a trend for the first editor of a brand new published comic to (possibly ''after'' doing the BOT-replacement joke, or after the editor who did ''only'' that) go straight in and enTranscript it (to varying degrees of accuracy and completion), whether or not they also then remove that specific tag-template at the same time. It seems that some people are more comfortable at providing a ''Transcript''ion-service than they are at establishing even the seed of an Explanation. (Or they only have enough time to do the latter, to the level of detail they wish to achieve in the moment open to them.)
:This is, of course, a cultural issue. All the above (from me) is just my own perception of practical aspects, notwithstanding those opinions already expressed before that (and elsewhere). I don't speak for everyone. And, as a perpetual IP, technically I should say that I don't speak for ''anyone'', either... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.140|172.70.160.140]] 14:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

::I like the idea of removing the Incomplete tag. What do you think? [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 14:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
::I greatly approve of a {{what}} tag, as a Wikipedian that's actually really funny. I would want to keep the Incomplete tag, as I think it has purpose, even if it no longer represents a goal to achieve. I think this website will never reach 100.00% completeness and that is good, actually. [[User:Maplestrip|Maplestrip]] ([[User talk:Maplestrip|talk]]) 14:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::Okay. If someone wants to they can just ignore the incomplete tags. [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 14:37, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

== "As of <now>"... ==

What would be rather useful is an <code><nowiki>{{As of now}}</nowiki></code> template (or similar wording, and perhaps an "as of now"-cased alternative for use mid-sentence). There are many articles that will have words along the lines of "this has not yet happened, as of August 2024" or "this situation is continuing, as of August 2024". Every now and then, someone will come across one of these with an older date (perhaps only just out of date, perhaps years old) and [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1858:_4th_of_July&curid=20285&diff=348082&oldid=315524 edit it accordingly]. You could also seek them all out, deliberately, with a bit of effort in the search-bar.

(Note that "as of" does not ''always'' need updating, there are non-dated examples such as in [[1074: Moon Landing#Trivia]], static transcript versions, like [[1071: Exoplanets#Transcript]] and other instances where the text "as of", with or without a date, really does not need to be changed... but sometimes is anyway by a well-meaning passer-by.)

Sometimes, this can be done along with another useful edit/update/revision that is spotted, or is just one of the revisions that some other need for change conveniently allows. But it seems a bit vague to rely upon occasional attention. Instead the template will implement something like "<code><nowiki>As of {{Monthyear}}</nowiki></code>" (here having to use <code><nowiki>{{#time:F Y}}</nowiki></code>, ..."As of {{#time:F Y}}"...), though there's the possibility that a parameter-mediated switch can let it alternatively become a to-the-day-level format option (at which point you could even implement/calcuate something like {{template|Yesterday}} would be) or just to the year-level. (Or add {{template|As of this year}}, {{template|As of this month}} and {{template|As of this day}} separately.)

This would negate the need to ''just'' poke and prod any article that happened to 'need' updating every month (or year, or possible day). And to deal with the possibility that some of these cases might actually need to be edited because "as of" does ''not'' now apply, include within it a {{:Category:As of}} membership, letting anyone who is interested keep an eye on these aggregated 'As of's, ready to jump in there and change it to some straight up "Up until <fixed date>" equivalent should any one of them actually no longer apply.

...obviously, I can't even begin to create the template page required, but I'd be happy to work on the exact wikimedia code required if anyone thinks it needs anything but the most basic transcluded formatting and doesn't know how. Open to discussion, and I'll tag on more if I happen to see that discussion developing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.186|172.70.162.186]] 18:04, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
:As an addendum/change to my above suggestion, considering a simpler {{template|as of}} (and {{template|As of}}) which does ''no'' automagical continuous updating (just gives the "as of" literal on its own), but still guarantees "Category:As of" membership, so that it doesn't actively give wrong (new) date+circumstance relationships in the likes of [[1047: Approximations]]. In that, the several mentions of populations can safely stay as old years until someone rewrites the proposed value and assessment as well, but it still could be a task to pursue every new year after checking the Cat for likely comics needing a quick check'n'edit.

== “Grammar Bot” ==
I’m working on a python based bot written with the Pywiki library that aims to use the replace.py scripts to fix simple grammatical mistakes, e.g. correcting Citation needed placements, cleaning up extra spaces, etc. I will be posting the code in a few weeks after I finish it (I’m a bit busy at the moment with school and orchestra) so the entire community can view it. Any thoughts on the idea? Thanks. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 21:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
:First thoughts are that there are going to be so many exceptions. I definitely agree with the idea of {{template|Citation needed}}s being made consistent (if only it weren't sometimes complicated{{Citation needed}}), as well as that of mysterious extra spaces. But that's not really grammatical. Punctuation, in the first case. I fear a full (or even fragmentary) grammar-checker is going to be complicated and give many false positives.
:At least at first, perhaps have it ''report'' what it thinks it has found. You may discover definite times that it isn't necessary and it would indeed create new errors.
:At the very least, run it with two checklists: One to do an automatic replace.py and one to just report. Start with the first list empty. Introduce potential ones to the latter, review all the reports carefully, ''then'' move any sensible-looking ones to former.
:And have it not fighting other bots (particularly theusafBOT), perhaps selected users (e.g. the likes of Kynde, and of course yourself) or indeed itself (if it makes a change that might inadvertently trigger another 'check') by excluding such changes for a recheck/rechange. Keep a record of what it changed, so that if anybody reverts/recorrects something that seems to have gone wrong it doesn't force it 'wrong' again. At the simplest, give a whole page a decent time-out and/or number of subsequent limits before it ''considers'' a new change. Implement from the start the option of a 'whitelist' (of pages it can ignore) or 'blacklist' (of rules it shouldn't apply, or at least actively apply, to a given page), so you can quickly manually add a throttle-down by simple config-file rather than have to add in a code-kludge when something obviously (in hindsight!) needs correcting about the way it works. And also maybe throttle it to have no more than one bot-edit per hour (while starting from scratch) to not swamp the system and give the rest of us time to assess any errors it has made (and its successes!) - you can unstick that throttle later, when you consider it tested with all its backlog of microcorrections.
:...there are a few other guidelines I would suggest, but the cautiousness already present in the above approaches might mean that they are left as not so important. Just consider what ''could'' go wrong before unleashing it on our world.
:And all power to your elbow, it is of course something we all might have considered (I know I have... not that I have the login for it, but what really stopped me was knowing how badly I could mess it up by getting just one detail wrong if I tried it).
:Among changes/alerts I would have it make would be cases of {{template|cn}}, {{template|citation needed}}, etc, instead of the 'main' template. Plus []-links to either wikipedia pages (most of them should be {{template|w}}-templated) or explainxkcd.com pages (most of them should be [[]]ed), although there are even then some exceptions. It'd also be nice if it can identify all Talk (and Community Portal) contributions that were not signed (more complex, as some may be after the fact, or have been after several years and further editings). I know how I'd do all this, or think I do (only upon starting to do it can I be sure I've actually theorised it correctly!), but I mention this mostly to point out how ''you'' might want to cautiously implement ''your'' ideas. HTH. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.15|172.70.86.15]] 00:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
::you have made plenty of wonderful points that I clearly have not thought about-quite the critical oversight on my part. Is anyone interested in collaborating? I don’t think that my skills are good enough to satisfy all of those points. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 01:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
:::hello? Anybody? Please help… [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 17:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
::::I believe this would be a great idea and also an incredibly complicated feat. Randall is no stranger to using weird punctuation in comics or misspelled words. I think it would be neat if it weren't automated and just reported errors it found so we could manually fix them, which would make its development much easier, but at that point it's very similar to a series of search queries for misspelled words, which we can already do. I have no coding skills so I'm not going to be of help. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
;Update
I have found a solution to fix most grammatical mistakes, I just need to make sure that it doesn’t correct character names like “Cueball”, not edit war with other bots, come up with a system to log the edits it makes so that it doesn’t revert again, and fix Citation needed templates. I already know how to make sure that it asks me before editing, so I want to create an account to test it out. Does anybody have ideas on what to name the bot? I don’t want to call it 42.book.addictBOT, since the username would be a bit clunky. ToriBOT could work, but I’m also open to any other names. Feel free to reply to this or reply to me on my talk page! '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 20:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

== "dark mode" ==
add dark mode [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 09:54, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
:See [[User:Certified nqh/common.css]] or copy/paste my old [[User:42.book.addict/common.css|common.css]] page history into your common.css page: -42.book.addict [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.208|172.69.134.208]] 16:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
::ha, thx tori, nqh's common.css works like a charm :) [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 08:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

== reddit ==
Add reddit- Anonymous {{unsigned ip|172.71.214.80|08:31, 21 November 2024}}
:You probably need to explain what you mean by that. Add reddit discussions to here? Add this site to reddit? Add some simple link to one from the other? Something else? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.163|172.70.162.163]] 13:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
::>Add some simple link to one from the other?
::I have no idea what they meant either, but I hadn't thought of this! I could see the addition of a simple link to the comic template, like "https://reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/{{PAGETITLE}" or "https://reddit.com/r/xkcd/search/?q={{PAGETITLE}"
::I don't partecipate much in the r/xkcd subreddit, so i'm not sure if they have structured post titles or even if they posted all the comics, or if it's automated, but I think this could be cool! Some people will likely come from Reddit, so it would be a straightforward way for them to go back. Thoughts? {{unsigned|FaviFake|16:55, 11 January 2025}}

== viewer ==
i propose to add random page to comic viewer {{unsigned ip|172.71.150.14|00:17, 25 February 2025}}
:There's already a "Random Page" link.
:If you mean (it's ambiguous!) a "Random Comic Page" link, then I'm not sure it's needed. There are so many "Comic pages" that it's a fairly good chance that you'll land on one of them for any given click, much more chance within two clicks. The likelihood of not getting a comic within ''three'' clicks will be tiny. Another way to do it is to just use the xkcd.com "Random" button, then (whichever comic you land on, which will be any but [[404]]), change the "xkcd.com" bit of the URL to "expxkcd.com" and... you end up here.
:If none of that really does what you want (especially if you mean something completely different from what I read it as), some more explanation would probably be appreciated. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.164|172.69.79.164]] 01:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:If you want to make sure to land on all comics, you can go to "Special pages" on the sidebar, scroll down to "Random page in category", and enter "All comics". As far as I'm aware, there isn't really a way to automate this, so you have to keep inputting it manually. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 06:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
::I think they meant a button on the {{tl|comic}} template. Would it be technically possible to make it such that it works exacly like the one on the official site? --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:::It ''should'' be a matter of using [[Special:RandomInCategory/All Comics]], I think, but doesn't seem to work when I try that exact attempt. Perhaps mediawiki or the mediawiki extension is not updated enough, or else I'm getting my wikisyntax slightly wrong.
:::Functionally, though, where the website has its Random button, we have our "go to the xkcd.com original", so more thought is needed before we just "add a button". If we do, we want it where the 'mothership' website does, but we still ought to have our details-and-link-to-original given, and I like it as a (faux) button.
::: Perhaps the {{template|comic}}, where it currently has header 'buttons':
[|<<] [Prev] [#9876 (Grune 32, 2525)] [Next] [>>|]
::: Needs to be changed to maybe:
[ #9876 (Grune 32, 2525) ]
[|<<] [Prev] [Random] [Next] [>>|]
:::...or equivalent. Haven't checked, but if it's a one-line table, can be easily made into a two-line one with colspan=3 (or 5?) in the right bit. If it's just centred, then it should come out Ok, in a simple way. But I'm not too keen on that change, really, and you'd need to actually have the Random->Comic link working first, ''anyway''. So I'm giving you my opinions and (slightly lacking) knowledge, in case that can at least make for the better outcome than either nothing (though not sure that's bad!) or some half-hearted ideas from elsewhere. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.116|172.70.86.116]] 21:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:::: Unless someone can figure out the requests made by the random in category, a workaround could be to use a (pseudo)random number generator (mediawiki has a [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Random_number template] on their website) to get a random number in the range of 1 - {{template|LATESTCOMIC}} and put in a link to that comic number using <nowiki>[[number]]</nowiki>.
:::: Note: There already is a "Random" template, but it was just using random page and was blanked by the person who made it [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 03:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{Done|Done!!!}}  I tried that wikimedia templaete but couldn't figure out how to make it work. I did it using Special:Random, hoping there aren't too many non-comic pages. Check [[{{LATESTCOMIC}}]] for an example of how it looks and works. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:02, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::thanks! (i hav an account now) [[User:Bb777|me, hi]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 22:30, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::No problem! There's also a special custom-designed navbar for the original comics: try clicking the "|<" button! (It's not complete yet, but i'm slowly finishing it!) --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 22:36, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

== Contentious Topics Template ==

I propose that we create a unified template to slap on contentious and possibly controversial comics, with a warning similar to the one I (and a couple other people added on) wrote in [[3073: Tariffs]]. Now, since I don’t know how to create a template and don’t understand how they work, this is my request for help. If you are available to help write it or have any tips for me, please contact me either in this thread or on my [[User talk:42.book.addict|talk page]]. Thanks! '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 18:01, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
:Hey, I just wanted to ask why you think a new template is needed. {{tl|notice2}} and {{tl|notice}} seem pretty solid. How would a new template differ from them? Btw, I switched the template in [[Talk:3073: Tariffs]] from {{tl|notice}} to {{tl|notice2}} so it's more like a warning, feel free to revert it if you prefer {{tl|notice}}. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:56, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::I read the idea (which I'm not too enamoured with, but wouldn't argue against either) as being to create a <code><nowiki>{{contentious}}</nowiki></code>-like template in its own right that (perhaps by using {{template|notice2}} within it) had a standard "This comic, and its explanation, covers a particularly contentious subject. Take even more care than usual when adding to or editing this Explanation/Talk Page" (or similar) text with it.
::It would probably also have the ability to add further (or alternate) info, by standard template parameters, in case you want to personalise it to the ''exact''nature of the contention.
::But, my reasons why I didn't volunteer my ideas immediately are:
::*It paints targets. Anybody who wants to can look at all "pages using the Contentious template" and then troll-bomb them ''specifically''
::*Looking at the Tariffs-comic warning, that's ''huge'', and catering for that with a "standard text + additional notes" would be awkward... if you really believe it should be so huge in the first place,
::*Just by being so obviously available, there'd be creep. "Hey, this comic talks disparagingly about Newton's belief in alchemy... Surely that needs a warning too!", or start off with "Well, nobody's warning about our attitude to the US Senate in this comic, so I can be disparaging" which then practically forces another contentious-tagging (''possibly'' useful, but maybe in making a bolt for the barn door only ''after'' the horse has already made its own bolt through it) as it gets toned-down/-back again.
::And, though I also imagined the Tariff comic ''would'' get some push-back (there was some minor bits, but we seem to have kept it mature enough, IMO), it seems to be quiet. Can't say for sure it would have been without the warning it now has, but it survived ok before that was added. Hence why I'm ''meh'' about the very proposal. Hard cases make hard laws, and hard situations may prompt hard solutions. But I'm dubious about the actual case for the need. (As you say, we have 'freeform' notice+notice2, and I haven't seen proof even that was necessary as it was used.)
::But it would be trivial to implement, give or take some fine-tuning. I'll say that as a positive for the idea. Even if we never really use it as much as we could. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.83|162.158.216.83]] 20:35, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
:::Agreed. Maybe it's a good thing that we have to craft one for each comic we want to tag; this makes sure only actually contentious comics get tagged. An upside to having a specific template is that we wouldn't need to type <nowiki><noinclude></nowiki> every time, to avoid it displaying on the transcluded talk page.--[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 21:00, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
::::mm. all of these are good points. now that i think about it, copy-pasting old warnings and tweaking them as needed is probably better than creating a new template. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:45, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

==Proposal for template page==
I was thinking that making a template page with instructions about what should and should not be included in which sections would make it easier for new editors to help. I have no idea how I would do this, though.[[User:BobcatInABox|BobcatInABox]] ([[User talk:BobcatInABox|talk]]) 11:49, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:Which particular template? Many templates ''do'' contain instructions (from basic to rather thorough), and some common ones are also gone into in the FAQ page. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.245|172.70.91.245]] 20:25, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

== The newest stuff goes at top ==

I’ve been thinking the newest comments should go at top and replies are under the chose comment with a colon or more. Because every time someone makes a comment but not replying to you, you still get a message. So you only get notifications when someone replies to you. And the always get notifications not related to you is kind of annoying. [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 04:30, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:(Ah, so you found it, before I even wrote my directions down on how to get here.)
:Not sure this helps.
:Firstly: Top-posting is <s>the work of the Devil... burn it! Burn it all!</s> very hard to read.
::A: Because it's in totally the wrong order.
::Q: Why is Top Posting bad?
:(Yes, I know you want top-posting ''threads'' but retain bottom-posting ''thread replies'', but can you even imagine the chaos involved with people not properly realising what's top- and what's bottom-posted. Or inter-posted into an existing hierarchy? Not with this 'flatfile' structure, anyway.)
:Secondly: Does this count for headers (like <code>== The newest stuff goes at top ==</code>)? For 'no-colon' starter comments under a Discussion header? For both?
:Thirdly: what are we doing with all the past ''pages and pages'' of things that are (more or less..) consistently chronological and bottom-posted? To make new additions work, someone (and probably ''before'' the first commentator who wants to add a brand new one-line witicism to the top of any multi-year-idle page) has to go into every Discussion page (and more?) to reshuffle it all by whatever Top(ish)-Post Criteria are adopted.
:Fourthly: It wouldn't even change how frequently you get notifications. (Actually, it might make it worse, as inveterate bottom-posters have to be 'corrected' by the followers of the 'new rule', as well as for any actually idle pages that get redone as part of the "thirdly" point.) But I don't think Notifications are clever enough to imagine that a new section ''above'' what you previously wrote doesn't possibly interest your registered "watch and notify" intent upon any given page.
:I have a Fifthly and Sixthly, too, but I assume I've made my general opinion quite clear. (And I noted that this is not the only Community Portal edit you made, just before arriving here. Will check the other in a moment.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.229.142|172.68.229.142]] 06:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
::Never mind. I don’t even need to read the whole thing to know it is complicated. To many words {{unsigned|Aprilfoolsupdate|07:54, 15 May 2025}}

:::Short version: It's complicated, confusing and troublesome to change to. And won't even solve your problem. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.197|172.70.160.197]] 12:22, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Agree with this message but disagree with the proposal. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 09:28, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

== By the Numbers ==

Greetings all,

So we all know that Randall numbers each XKCD comic with an ordinal number in a simple ascending sequence. I have become exceedingly intrigued by the particular properties of numbers now, especially their factors and primes. The most recent prime-numbered comic is [[3109]] and we'll soon see another one with [[3119]]. Does Randall ascribe any meaning or humor to the numbers that happen to appear as the posts play out? He certainly celebrates special dates! As a math-humor-based comic, there certainly must be jokes or surprises hidden therein. I'm not sure I've noticed any yet, though. [[386]] is certainly notorious, though doesn't seem to have a direct sort of Intel connection. [[42]] is unremarkable.

I once read a novel with an autistic protagonist, and each chapter was assigned a prime number. I will henceforth be on the lookout for interesting numerical happenstance as Randall continues to post! Anyone else? [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 08:56, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

== Misc pages ==
I would like to propose the creation of an additional category for "miscellaneous pages" that aren't really comics, and which generally have a URL slug that's an English word or phrase instead of a number. This includes xkcd.com/YES and xkcd.com/NO, both of which currently have articles. It also includes these ones:

::''[Note by User:FaviFake: I organised this section and moved the links below]''

...and others as they are found or recovered. If only we could access the forum thread mentioned on the YES and NO pages! I was able to find a link to the thread here, but it's inaccessible. A
It's the one labeled "Hidden pages on xkcd": [https://web.archive.org/web/20170927200737/http://forums.xkcd.com/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=973b8a1dcd0a727a9177aa757108d4f6&start=250]. I was able to find the pages above via Reddit: [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/gixd96/what_are_all_the_hidden_pages_on_xkcd_that_you/] [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/35whzf/what/] --[[User:Rumbling7145|Rumbling7145]] ([[User talk:Rumbling7145|talk]]) 00:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Update: I got into the forum page! [https://web.archive.org/web/20151206001238/http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=110093] We can now add these pages to the list:
[[User:Rumbling7145|Rumbling7145]] ([[User talk:Rumbling7145|talk]]) 23:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

===Pages===
* http://xkcd.com/YES {{Done|Created: [[YES]]}}
** http://xkcd.com/NO {{Done|Created: [[NO]]}}

* http://xkcd.com/nakedpictures {{Done|Created: [[nakedpictures]]}}

* http://xkcd.com/spiral
**Likely a reference to [[1488: Flowcharts]] and [[2322: ISO Paper Size Golden Spiral]], spirals above images of people and things

* http://xkcd.com/burlap {{Done|Created: [[Burlap]]}}

* http://xkcd.com/simplewriter {{Done|Created: [[Simple Writer]]}}
**Tool to Write Like [[Up Goer Five]] and [[Thing Explainer]]

* http://xkcd.com/tree_prank
**This is so funny

* http://xkcd.com/blue_eyes {{Done|Existing: [[Blue Eyes]]}}
** http://xkcd.com/solution, the solution to the problem

* http://xkcd.com/morphs ([https://web.archive.org/web/20130313175333/http://xkcd.com:80/morphs/ archive only] — [https://web.archive.org/web/20060219184352/http://www.xkcd.com:80/morphs/ earlier version with more text])
**"Using several pieces of imaging software, including Photoshop and an image morphing program, I make composite photos of people."

* http://xkcd.com/chesscoaster
**"People playing chess on roller coasters, inspired by this comic:" image

* http://xkcd.com/kite
**"These are pictures I took by hanging cameras from kites, a hobby I've played with on and off over the years"

*https://xkcd.com/kite/kite_trick.jpg

* http://xkcd.com/dot {{Done|Created: [[dot]]}}

* http://xkcd.com/election ([https://web.archive.org/web/20141014075718/http://xkcd.com/election/ archive only])
**Used by randall for tracking elections, "it's the fastest analysis of the state of the race minute-by-minute".

* http://xkcd.com/event {{Done|Created: [[event]]}} (I still don't quite get it)
**There's an image on this site that a web browser fails to load, but when downloaded, Windows Photo Viewer can view the image.

* http://xkcd.com/now (redirect to [[1335: Now]])

* http://xkcd.com/plus {{Done|Created: [[plus]]}}

* http://xkcd.com/sub ([https://web.archive.org/web/20130111054027/http://xkcd.com/sub/ archive only]) — "The Sub Project", a long explanation of how Randall and others build submarines?

* http://xkcd.com/temp ([https://web.archive.org/web/20061219193846/http://www.xkcd.com/temp/ archive only])
**This is super interesting! It lists other sub-directories. [https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.xkcd.com/temp/* These are the ones that survived in the archive]:
**http://xkcd.com/temp/email.txt ([https://web.archive.org/web/20100305065807/http://xkcd.com/temp/email.txt archive only]) — Seems to be an email exchange between Randall and someone else?
**http://xkcd.com:80/temp/euphoria.txt ([https://web.archive.org/web/20160401222138/http://xkcd.com:80/temp/euphoria.txt archive only]) — This says "Ok, that last Randall who said 'to clarify' was actually Randall, but pretty much none of the others were. Also no Sphere after this gets linked in chat a second time is actually Randall either. Randall is probably not there."
**https://xkcd.com/temp/evidenceofidentity.txt ([https://web.archive.org/web/20201118232320/https://xkcd.com/temp/evidenceofidentity.txt archive only]) — "[Randall] Hello to everyone who waited in line to say hi to me on my How To book tour and specifically mentioned this chat! [Sierra] Hello mr. probably not the real Randall :D [...]"
***The rest are all images:
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/baby_mop.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070127045748/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/baby_mop.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/darthswingset.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070127045624/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/darthswingset.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/deb6d13b50a581304bac385c463b09c1.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070225103228/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/deb6d13b50a581304bac385c463b09c1.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/Hacker%20Grave.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070213182708/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/Hacker%20Grave.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/hotornot.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20061219194445/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/hotornot.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/how_rumors_start_office.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070111000437/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/how_rumors_start_office.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/owned.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070228031547/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/owned.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/shark.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20061214082834/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/shark.jpg archive only])
**http://www.xkcd.com/temp/humor/you_cannot_pass.jpg ([https://web.archive.org/web/20070323001005/http://www.xkcd.com:80/temp/humor/you_cannot_pass.jpg archive only])

* http://xkcd.com/test ([https://web.archive.org/web/20170510061033/https://xkcd.com/test/ archive only])
**This appears identical to the regular xkcd.com homepage, it returns a 404 as of today

* http://xkcd.com/time (redirect to comic [[1190: Time]])

* http://xkcd.com/twitter (redirect to https://x.com/xkcd)

* http://xkcd.com/cyborg.txt
**Interesting script. According to [https://blog.xkcd.com/2008/05/20/gps-cyborg-implant/ an old blag article], it is "a short Python script that uses a USB GPS device under Linux to help with navigation. It doesn’t have maps or anything — it just gives distances and, while you’re moving, the direction to the destination (as in 'two o’clock'). It prints this info on the terminal and speaks it using speech synthesis."

* http://xkcd.com/channel.html ([https://web.archive.org/web/20141011002528/https://xkcd.com/channel.html archive only])
**I have no idea what this it. It's full of gibberish and Chinese text.

* http://xkcd.com/channel.txt ([https://web.archive.org/web/20141014083026/http://xkcd.com/channel.txt archive only])
** Same as above, but it downloads the file to the PC.

* http://xkcd.com/me.txt ([https://web.archive.org/web/20141014101900/http://xkcd.com:80/me.txt archive only])
**Only says "I am not in 1110.n01se.net anymore". [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/5tqrew/xkcd_secret_page/ Learn more in this Reddit thread], in this [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvLxOVYeo5w YouTube video of how it used to work], and in the [https://github.com/n01se/1110 GitHub for 1110.n01se.net]. I'm assuming Randall wanted to say that anyone who tries to impersonate him in the future isn't him?

* http://xkcd.com/why.txt ([https://web.archive.org/web/20180729163548/https://xkcd.com/why.txt archive only])
**Contains 33 THOUSAND "why" questions. May be related to [[1256: Questions]]? Very interesting!

* http://xkcd.com/bitcoin {{Done|Existing: [[Bitcoin address]]}}
**There's also this one, which we have dissected on the page [[Bitcoin address]] (very interesting read!)

* http://holistic.xkcd.com ([https://web.archive.org/web/20160304031258/http://holistic.xkcd.com/ archive only])
**"The XKCD Holistic Browser. Because we are all one. Type a web address and you'll be taken to one typed by someone else."

* https://aram.xkcd.com ([https://web.archive.org/web/20110816163403/http://aram.xkcd.com/ archive only])
**"This page is regenerated every day and may be NSFW. It shows a random result from a Google image search for IMG_????.jpg plus a random caption:" Seems it stopped working completely after a few years and got stuck one image&caption. Aram inspired [[Black Hat]], see his page for more.

* https://xkcd.com/verizon/ {{Done|Created: [[verizon]]}}

* http://mail.xkcd.com ([https://web.archive.org/web/20120321204721/http://mail.xkcd.com/ archive only])
**Seems Randall set it up but never used it.

* https://xkcd.com/personal
**There was a /personal folder on xkcd, but it's been entirely wiped https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://xkcd.com/personal/*

*https://xkcd.com/ngram-charts/ {{Done|Created: [[ngram charts]]}}
**Still online, but the images are missing even in [https://web.archive.org/web/20120225171410/http://xkcd.com:80/ngram-charts the archive]. "Some of the interesting charts I've come across while using Google Books ngrams (which analyzes the frequency of word use in their scanned books corpus over time)"

* https://xkcd.com/color/rgb/
** https://xkcd.com/color/rgb.txt

* http://68.57.186.221:8080/ ([https://web.archive.org/web/20041024201125/http://68.57.186.221:8080/ archive only])
** xkcd.com redirected to this at some points during 2004, this capture is from October 24th of 2004 specifically.

* https://throw.xkcd.com (only available [https://web.archive.org/web/20200919232527/throw.xkcd.com/ in the archive])
**This was likely hacked, see [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/iw9jsg/throwxkcdcom/ this Reddit thread]: ''"I emailed the xkcd.com webmaster, it was a testing URL he forgot to shut down. It's fixed now."''

* https://c.xkcd.com
**This is mostly all for comics with dynamic content. There are many subpages, see [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/j54lx3/does_anyone_know_what_cxkcdcom_is/ this reddit thread].
**https://c.xkcd.com/xb/feed
**http://c.xkcd.com/random/comic (redirects to random comic)
**https://c.xkcd.com/graph/1
**[https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/j54lx3/does_anyone_know_what_cxkcdcom_is/ There are others].

* https://static.xkcd.com/ (404, not in archive. [http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://static.xkcd.com/* archived subpages])
** http://static.xkcd.com/bl.png ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070912213845/http://static.xkcd.com/bl.png archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/br.png ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070912213841/http://static.xkcd.com/br.png archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/favicon.ico ([http://web.archive.org/web/20071208203917/http://static.xkcd.com/favicon.ico archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/general.css ([http://web.archive.org/web/20071208203917/http://static.xkcd.com/general.css archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/ieonly.css ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070911163429/http://static.xkcd.com/ieonly.css archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/ml.png ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070912213838/http://static.xkcd.com/ml.png archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/mr.png ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070912213832/http://static.xkcd.com/mr.png archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/tl.png ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070912213828/http://static.xkcd.com/tl.png archive only])
** http://static.xkcd.com/tr.png ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070912213835/http://static.xkcd.com/tr.png archive only])
** http://www.static.xkcd.com/robots.txt ([http://web.archive.org/web/20070501000000*/http://www.static.xkcd.com/robots.txt archive only])
** https://almamater.xkcd.com/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20130402215109/https://almamater.xkcd.com/ archive only])
:: https://almamater.xkcd.com/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20150209005631/https://almamater.xkcd.com/ archive only])
:: and errors out: https://almamater.xkcd.com/ ([http://web.archive.org/web/20160528035956/https://almamater.xkcd.com/ archive only, errors out])
*** http://almamater.xkcd.com/best.csv ([http://web.archive.org/web/20130511122543/http://almamater.xkcd.com/best.csv archive only])
***See comic [[1193: Externalities]]
{{misc page}}
You can monitor the pages that are using this template (so the brand new webpage explanations) by going to [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:misc_page]]

===How should we treat them?===
This is great! I think we should first create an article for each of them, and after we have a few articles then we can start to figure out a good name for the category and answer some questions, like:

*Should we add a new parameter to the template for these non-comics? To do that, we would have to ask an admin to edit the {{tl|comic}} template to allow us to do that. We can ask Kynde, no big deal.

*Some pages, like [[Blue Eyes]] and [[Bitcoin address]] are already in other categories, like [[:Category:Extra comics]] and [[:Category:Design of xkcd.com]]. Should we use the existing categories, or add a new one? How do we distinguish between, for example, [[Blue Eyes]], [[Bitcoin address]], and [[YES]], which are all in theory "misc pages".

*Where should the new category be categorised?

*What title should we give for explanations of pages that don't have a name, like xkcd.com/dot? That one is just titled "xkcd.com/dot", unlike pages like Blue Eyes and [[YES]]. Would it become "dot", "Dot", something else? Should we keep it coherent or base ourselves solely on the rendered title on the official site?

I love the idea! I currently don't have time, but I will create these pages eventually. If anyone else wants to chime in, please do! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

:"Unnumbered publications", or similar, could cover ''anything'' that wasn't xkcd.com/<digits>. Wouldn't cover replacements ([[2642: No One Was Hurt]] was originally 2642, for example), but that's a different class from deliberately off-series items. Also, given that often they are entirely non-image (the Yes and No), or straight text and multi-image (as per Blue Eyes, or other articles with a WhatIf-ish feel to them), I think calling them "comic"s is stretching the term.
:Though "miscellaneous pages" sort of covers this, I've a feeling that there's at least one... 'entity'... that is built upon multiple actual 'pages', but the list of candidates above doesn't contain any that look like they're what I'm vaguely thinking of. (Neither was it anything like the xkcd survey, or other interactive (numbered) comics, but maybe I'll bring it back to mind sooner rather than later.)
:As to the use of {{template|comic}}, I think we could spring to a (modified, 'inspired-by') template specifically for all these no-number/off-sequence explanation headers. Either explicit "prev=" and "next=" (per comic, ''could'' get quite mixed up if not kept uncontradictory) or a "position=" which could help maintain a list (and, from that, an auto-generated first/prev/next/last 'page ring') without having to subvert expectations of fitting in with the normal [[Template:LATESTCOMIC]] system.
:With the Comic template already equipped to deal with "no-number 'comics'", there wouldn't (in the first instance) be much work needed to "decomic" the new copy, with the exact method of resequencing (if desired) as a parallel series being the biggest question. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.49|172.70.85.49]] 17:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

::I'm not sure what the last sentenc means, but I like the idea of a new template! However, I don't think we should call the category "Unnumbered publications". Isn't that just [[:Category:Extra comics]] but without comics [[Disappearing Sunday Update]] and [[No One Was Hurt]]? We should establish a criterion to add pages to this category and then figure out a name i think. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:42, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

On this subject, is there any reason why it's [[YES]] and [[NO]] (currently the valid links) rather than [[Yes]] and [[No]] / [[yes]] and [[no]] (currently invalid links)? And I don't mean "why aren't there redirects?", which I don't even think is the right way of resolving this, but what was the thinking? (Which then didn't result in [[DOT]], etc, so there's ''definitely'' some inconsistency, one way or another.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.92|172.68.205.92]] 21:54, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

:I don't see inconsistencies. The name of the browser tab for the yes page is "YES" by Randall, same for NO. Instead, the page for [[dot]] is called "xkcd.com/dot/". We could use that, but that's likely not what Randall intended and might have been a coding oversight. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:01, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I've created the {{tl|misc page}} template for these pages and removed the incomplete template until we reach consensus on what to do with them. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 14:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Ahem, I'd like to remind everyone that they can feel free to comment on the best way to manage these. Or if they should be included in the wiki at all. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 21:38, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

==Visual Editor?==
I, being a nerd in high school, edit on more than just this wiki. For example, I edit on Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, the default editing mode is a visual editor, which automatically converts your wikitext into the final product in real time. It's useful on many levels, and would save all of us a lot of time (I've spent at least 2 hours total fixing broken wikitext). I feel that using this tool would increase overall productivity in the wiki, and probably lessen the amount of people who are intimidated when attempting to edit, allowing more people to join and contribute to the community. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 22:43, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:Good luck telling that to jeff! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 12:22, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

::Ugh. Well, he's gotta come back eventually, right? He's paying for the domain, after all. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 16:43, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

:::Or maybe he just forgot and we actually don't want him to come back. Who knows! --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

::::Name one person who wants Jeff to just not come back. Either way, I want him back, and I suggested this just in case. This would also be really cool for me, as I joined after jeff's last known user page edit in 2018. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 23:31, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

:::::Jeez that was a joke. Ofc I want him back lol. [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 20:09, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

::::::still no response from Jeff or any of his friends on: Reddit, X/Twitter; GitHub; Bluesky; Mastodon; and email. Oh, and I asked some person on YouTube with the username lcarsos (as in the other 'crat on here) but I think that he deleted my comment on his video (multiple times). (just a little fyi) '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 18:17, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
==Unicode emoji support==
This suggestion was made in response to the discussion above. I was completely unable to realize that FaviFake was joking. I feel that Unicode emojis would drastically improve the wiki and allow for more detailed conveyance of thoughts and feelings, and prevent catastrophic misunderstandings not unlike the one above. Other people have insulted me due to the fact that I was unable to convey enough emotion. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 17:18, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
:Text-only media, like this, always has the issue of not being understood, but if someone forgets (or consciously declines) to put a "/s" or ";)" in there, they'll probably also not add an emoji.
:Of course, one person's very dry humour might go so far over the head of another person that not even a strong hint helps, whereas another's sense of fun might be so obvious that gilding the lilly even sends the ''wrong'' message about it. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 20:03, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3130: Predicament

2025-08-19T19:50:40Z

92.23.2.228:

Those are some pretty dang tall stilts ... oh yeah, and F1RST P0ST! [[User:RadiantRainwing|RadiantRainwing]] ([[User talk:RadiantRainwing|talk]]) 20:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

There's a not entirely tenuous link with [[1660: Captain Speaking]], methinks... [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 21:31, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Is unlocking the phone with stilts even possible? Aren't phone touchscreens based on electrical conductivity? What are these stilts made of? [[Special:Contributions/160.39.41.182|160.39.41.182]] 21:33, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, I just added a paragraph about that! Great minds think alike/fools never differ...
:Probably capacitative (which is what I linked), and indeed I was thinking that wooden/other-structural-material wouldn't get any response unless you put a pad of special material (such as seen on the tips of "iPhone gloves") that emulates the electrical qualities of bare skin. Which is probably not what you usually get, there, even if they're given "little rubber boots/soles" for grip purposes. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 21:44, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

So... is there a special procedure for getting off stilts? If so, it should be mentioned in the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/2A01:36D:104:47E3:7D15:7369:B5C7:C18D|2A01:36D:104:47E3:7D15:7369:B5C7:C18D]] 22:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
:Gravity being what it is, I always found it easier to get down than to stay up. {{unsigned ip|98.5.115.49|23:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)}}
::I think the trick is getting down without hurting yourself. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 04:59, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
:You don’t get down from stilts, you get down from an elephant! [[Special:Contributions/2607:FB90:8B0C:94F1:95A5:B4D0:D3A3:4420|2607:FB90:8B0C:94F1:95A5:B4D0:D3A3:4420]] 06:54, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
::I'm sure you could get down from {{w|stilt}}s if you really wanted to. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 09:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
::Heh. Nice! ("You don't get down from an elephant, you get down from a duck.") [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 14:34, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Why did he make this comic? Is he running out of ideas? [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 15:23, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
:Because it was an idea that amused him? Why did he make any of the previous 3129? [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 16:10, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
:Obviously because he is currently stuck on stilts and hopes to be able to check this website for ideas on how to get off of them. [[User:Tharkon|Tharkon]] ([[User talk:Tharkon|talk]]) 18:02, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
::<big><big><big><big><big>I hope he can read us, from all the way up there!</big></big></big></big></big> [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 19:50, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
:I rather like this comic. It led me into a deep dive with Copilot about how stilt walkers stay safe. Next time I see a parade with stilts, I'm going to watch for the spotters on the ground. [[User:Gbisaga|Gbisaga]] ([[User talk:Gbisaga|talk]]) 19:48, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

2690: Cool S

2025-08-19T19:45:59Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Tweak.

{{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==

The '{{w|Cool S}}' is a stylized drawing of the letter "S". It is a popular doodle among teenagers and pre-teens as it can be quickly hashed out using six vertical lines which are then connected with an appropriate pattern of diagonal lines. The drawing has been around for a very long time, and may be independently discovered simply because it is a logical progression of combining a series of straight lines in an interesting manner.

Randall first draws the steps to make the Cool S. Then he draws a chain of repeats of this pattern, excluding the end caps, making something that looks like a twisted rope. Finally he separates the two strands and adds cross bars, creating something that turns out to have a visual similarity to the discovered helical structure of {{w|DNA}}. However, although the final diagram is a double helix, the chirality, or "handedness", is backwards: an actual DNA molecule usually winds in the opposite direction (clockwise, if you're looking at it end-on). (The tutorial at [http://realerthinks.com/correctly-draw-dna/ How to (correctly) draw DNA] describes this in more detail.) It is possible for left-handed DNA segments, called Z-DNA, to form in purine-pyrimidine alternating regions; but this is much less common than the more typical conformations of B-DNA and A-DNA. (B-DNA is the most common and is elongated with accentuated major grooves: see {{w|Nucleic acid structure}}. This asymmetry can be seen in the spacing between strand segments, which alternates between short and long distances, as opposed to A-DNA and Z-DNA where these distances are much more uniform.)

He posits that the helical shape of DNA was originally discovered when somebody decided to doodle this extended S pattern.

Understanding the shape of the DNA molecule was an important step towards understanding how it duplicates itself and serves as a template for RNA. In real life, {{w|Francis Crick}} and {{w|James Watson}} were awarded a Nobel Prize for this discovery.

The title text is a reference to {{w|Rosalind Franklin}}, who made a material contribution to the discovery of DNA but was [https://web.archive.org/web/20160927113256/http://www.biomath.nyu.edu/index/course/hw_articles/nature4.pdf controversially not included in the Nobel Prize]. Many are quick to assume she was excluded simply due to sexism, although she had also been dead for five years (Nobel rules now prohibit posthumous nominations (though this statute was not formally in effect until 1974)). Franklin's boss at the time of the discovery, {{w|Maurice Wilkins}}, was also named on the prize, and Nobel rules also forbid splitting of Prizes more than three ways. Wilkins had shared some of Franklin's data with Watson, who then shared what he saw with Crick. None of the three men ever told Franklin that Watson and Crick had based their model on her data. Fortunately, an international astrobiology programme, {{w|ExoMars}}, has since named a {{w|Rosalind Franklin (rover)|Mars rover}} after her!

This account is reminiscent of how {{W|August Kekulé}} said he identified the ring structure of the benzene molecule. He claimed to have had a dream in which the atoms were moving around, with the last grabbing onto the first like the classic image of a snake grabbing its tail, forming a ring of six lines.

==Transcript==
:[10 drawings evolving from simple dashes, to a "cool S" symbol, to a representation of DNA. Unless otherwise stated, each drawing adds to the previous drawing]
:First drawing - three vertical lines side by side over three equally sized vertical lines
:Second drawing - Two diagonal lines added from the bottom of the top left line to the top of the bottom middle line, and the bottom of the top middle line to the top of the bottom right line
:Third drawing - Four diagonal lines added from the top of the top left line and top right line, and the bottom of the bottom right line and bottom left line. The two lines at the top meet above the top middle line, at a 90 degree angle. The two lines at the bottom meet below the bottom middle line, at a 90 degree angle, making an incomplete "Cool S", missing two lines.
:Fourth drawing - Two diagonal lines added. One from top of the bottom left line, pointing towards the bottom of the top middle line; it stops halfway where it intersects with the line between the top of the bottom middle line and the bottom of the top left line drawn in the second drawing. One from bottom of the top right line, pointing towards the top of the bottom middle line; it stops halfway where it intersects with the line between the bottom of the top middle line and the top of the bottom right line drawn in the second drawing. forming a complete "Cool S"
:Fifth drawing - Resets the last few steps and is the same as the second drawing.
:Sixth drawing (located under the first drawing, making a new line of drawings) - The lines from the fifth drawing remain present and untouched, but there are now three vertical lines side by side above and below, with a gap left between them and the previous lines.
:Seventh drawing - The pattern between the middle two sets of three lines established in the second drawing is repeated above and below, such that for each pair of three lines, Two diagonal lines are added from the bottom of the top left line to the top of the bottom middle line, and from the bottom of the top middle line to the top of the bottom right line
:Eighth drawing - The pattern between the middle two sets of three lines established in the fourth drawing is both reimplemented, and repeated in the upper and lower two sets of lines. One from top of the bottom left line, pointing towards the bottom of the top middle line; it stops halfway where it intersects with the line between the top of the bottom middle line and the bottom of the top left line drawn in the second drawing. One from bottom of the top right line, pointing towards the top of the bottom middle line; it stops halfway where it intersects with the line between the bottom of the top middle line and the top of the bottom right line drawn in the second drawing.
:Ninth drawing - The same pattern as in the eight drawing, but with dots in some sections of the pattern.
:Tenth drawing - The same pattern as in the ninth drawing, but the pattern is spaced out in halves. The dots have turned into lines, creating something comparable to DNA.

:[Caption below the panel]:
:The structure of DNA was originally discovered by a group of especially cool middle school researchers.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]

2348: Boat Puzzle

2025-08-19T19:42:54Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Probably could be described better, but presumably it was supposed to be this. Not the other implication, that it's the ferrying across the river that is by instinct!

{{comic
| number = 2348
| date = August 19, 2020
| title = Boat Puzzle
| image = boat_puzzle.png
| titletext = 'No, my cabbage moths have already started laying eggs in them! Send the trolley into the river!' 'No, the sailing wolf will steal the boat to rescue them!'
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a twist on {{w|Wolf, goat and cabbage problem|an old riddle}}. In the original riddle, a person has to cross a river in a boat that can only hold them and one other object. They have a wolf, a goat, and a cabbage that they need to bring across with them, similar to the first panel. If the wolf is left alone with the goat, however, the wolf will eat the goat; and if the goat and cabbage are alone, the goat will eat the cabbage. (The problem can be solved in seven trips.)

However, the comic quickly devolves into surrealism in the later panels as new characters show up, bringing deviations of the original "cabbage", "goat", and "wolf" that add extra layers of complexity to the riddle. [[White Hat]] brings extra wolves and cabbages. [[Black Hat]], in his traditional [[72:_Classhole|classhole]] style, brings {{w|cabbage moth}}s which will infest unsupervised cabbages with destructive larvae, and boat-destroying {{w|termite}}s. How he intends to bring them across the river (or even if he wants to) is unknown, but it brings to mind the parable of {{w|The Scorpion and the Frog}}, where the scorpion stings (out of instinct) the frog ferrying it across the river. [[Beret Guy]] arrives with a wolf who can operate a boat, who could perhaps serve as a second pilot to expedite the crossing, so long as he is not asked to ferry a goat, and also a goat who eats wolves, possibly in addition to the cabbages. This is unusual,{{cn}} as one would expect from Beret Guy's associates.

The last panel is a reference to the {{w|Trolley_Problem|Trolley Problem}}, a moral test that asks the participant whether they would passively let people in the way of an uncontrollable trolley die or actively divert the trolley to kill a single person standing on a branch of the tracks. The comic gives a twist here too: according to the title text, the characters must choose between stopping the trolley full of wolves with a cushion of cabbages (in which Black Hat's cabbage moths have laid eggs, which he implicitly argues are morally equivalent to "innocent children") or letting it crash into the river (at which point the wolf who can operate a boat will steal the boat to rescue the wolves from the trolley, which will delay the other characters from crossing the river).

The River Crossing puzzle was also mentioned in [[1134: Logic Boat]] and referenced in [[589: Designated Drivers]] and [[2684: Road Space Comparison]].

The Trolley Problem was also mentioned in [[1455: Trolley Problem]] and referenced in [[1938: Meltdown and Spectre]].

==Solving the problem==

Unlike typical Logic Boat problems the presence of multiple humans makes finding a solution almost trivial, however trying to determine the solution with the least number of trips could still make the somewhat challenging. Because the set of constraints are both ambiguous and incomplete, it requires the reader to make assumptions that, in turn, will lead to different solutions.

===Reasonable Assumptions===

The following assumptions can be made based on the setup of the problem or are necessary to avoid an unsolvable puzzle.

* '''Cueball is an observer.''' He is set up as an observer there to solve the problem, not pilot the boat or "watch" the cargo.
* '''The boat can only hold two items.''' This is standard in logic boat problems. Groups of insects count as one item.
* '''Black Hat and Beret Guy both want to cross the river with their cargo'''. Neither states that they wish to cross the river like Ponytail and White Hat, but it can be inferred from the setup of the scenario.
* '''The termites will destroy the boat ''after'' crossing.''' Otherwise the problem is unsolvable. This is similar to the {{w|Poncelet–Steiner theorem}}, which shows that any compass-and-straightedge construction can be completed with a "rusty compass", so long as the compass works at least once.
* '''The wolf-eating goat also eats cabbage.''' The wolf-eating constraint adds to the goat's existing constraints.
* '''The sailing wolf follows the command of an adjacent human.''' The alternatives require more assumptions for a solvable puzzle.
* '''The sailing wolf returns the trolley wolves to the near shore.''' The trolley wolves show no indication of wanting to cross the river.
* '''Stopping the trolley destroys all the cabbages.''' Otherwise the event does not affect the logic puzzle.
* '''The pack of wolves from the trolley will eat a human or wolf-eating goat left by themselves.''' Aligns with the spirit of the constraints.
** '''A wolf can protect a human from a pack of wolves'''. A human who is accompanied by one of the wolves who want to cross the river should not count as being "alone" for the purpose of getting eaten by the wolves from the trolley; otherwise, there is no way to get everyone across.

===The Trolley===

The trolley problem creates two versions of the puzzle, one where the cabbages are destroyed, the other where they are not and a wolf rescue takes place. The ethical issues associated with the trolley problem are independent from the logic of how to cross the river.

===Solutions===

* General

With four humans involved, the first trip across can bring an extra human who then can guard the cargo as it is brought across in arbitrary order with care being taken not to have predator and prey alone together at the end. The termites must be last cargo ferried across as they will destroy the boat.

* The Trolley is Stopped

The cabbages are destroyed. The second to last trip brings across the last human and the last trip brings across the termites.

* The Trolley is not Stopped

A pack of wolves is now on the near bank. The last human is brought across in the third to last trip, followed by the last wolf and lastly the termites.

===Missing Information===

No information is provided about whether or not the humans all get along with each other and this is left as a possible exercise for the reader given all of the characters' varying personality traits. However the sailing wolf would likely come in handy if certain humans (ex Black Hat, Beret Guy) cannot be left alone. It is also probable that certain characters might not serve in the capacity as a cargo guard.

It is also unclear if humans can leave with their cargo once all the cargo has been brought across. This could complicate matters if a far side "guard" leaves early.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball and Ponytail are standing on the bank of a river. There is a boat in the river. A goat and wolf are also on the riverbank, and Ponytail is holding a cabbage.]
:Ponytail: I need to cross the river. I have a wolf, a goat, and a cabbage.
:Cueball: Hmm.

:[White Hat appears, accompanied by two wolves and pulling a wagon full of cabbages.]
:Cueball: OK, here's what-
:White Hat: Hi, I also need to cross. I have two wolves and 100 cabbages.

:[Black Hat arrives, surrounded by a cloud of flying creatures and carrying a jar of bugs under his arm. Beret Guy follows with another wolf and goat on leashes.]
:Black Hat: I have 50 cabbage moths and 2,000 boat-destroying termites.
:Beret Guy: I have a wolf that can operate a boat, and a goat that eats wolves.

:[The fourth panel is a zoomed-out shot, where everything but the sky appears black.]

:[A trolley speeds in, leaving a trail of dust in its wake. A person is standing on the front, and many ears are barely visible above the seats.]

:Cueball: Hang on, I need to make a spreadsheet.
:Trolley operator: Look out!
:Trolley operator: My wolf-filled trolley is out of control and can only be stopped by a cushion of cabbages!

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Black Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Logic]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Food]]

1132: Frequentists vs. Bayesians

2025-08-18T22:41:59Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Correcting punctuation and capitalising tag. (Capitalising the proper names, while I'm here....)

{{comic
| number = 1132
| date = November 9, 2012
| title = Frequentists vs. Bayesians
| image = frequentists_vs_bayesians.png
| titletext = 'Detector! What would the Bayesian statistician say if I asked him whether the--' [roll] 'I AM A NEUTRINO DETECTOR, NOT A LABYRINTH GUARD. SERIOUSLY, DID YOUR BRAIN FALL OUT?' [roll] '... yes.'}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a joke about jumping to conclusions based on a simplistic understanding of probability. The "{{w|base rate fallacy}}" is a mistake where an unlikely explanation is dismissed, even though the alternative is even less likely. In the comic, a device tests for the (highly unlikely) event that the Sun has exploded. A degree of random error is introduced, by rolling two {{w|dice}} and lying if the result is double sixes. Double sixes are unlikely (1 in 36, or about 3% likely), so the statistician on the left dismisses it. The statistician on the right has (we assume) correctly reasoned that the Sun exploding is ''far more'' unlikely,{{Citation needed}} and so is willing to stake money on his interpretation.

The labels given to the two statisticians, in their panels and in the comic's title, are not particularly fair or accurate, a fact which [[Randall]] has acknowledged:<ref name="munroe-on-gelman">[http://web.archive.org/web/20130117080920/http://andrewgelman.com/2012/11/16808/#comment-109366 Comment by Randall Munroe] to "I don’t like this cartoon", blog post by Andrew Gelman in ''Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science''. Archived Jan 17 2013 by the Wayback Machine.</ref>
<blockquote>I seem to have stepped on a hornet’s nest, though, by adding “Frequentist” and “Bayesian” titles to the panels. This came as a surprise to me, in part because I actually added them as an afterthought, along with the final punchline. … The truth is, I genuinely didn’t realize Frequentists and Bayesians were actual camps of people—all of whom are now emailing me. I thought they were loosely-applied labels—perhaps just labels appropriated by the books I had happened to read recently—for the standard textbook approach we learned in science class versus an approach which more carefully incorporates the ideas of prior probabilities.</blockquote>

The "{{w|Frequentist inference|frequentist}}" statistician is applying the common standard of "{{w|P-value|p}}<0.05". In a scientific study, a result is presumed to provide strong evidence if, given that the {{w|null hypothesis}}, a default position that the observations are unrelated (in this case, that the Sun has ''not'' gone nova), there would be less than a 5% chance of observing a result as extreme. (The null hypothesis was also referenced in [[892: Null Hypothesis]].)

Since the likelihood of rolling double sixes is below this 5% threshold, the "frequentist" decides (by this rule of thumb) to accept the detector's output as correct. The "{{w|Bayesian statistics|Bayesian}}" statistician has, instead, applied at least a small measure of probabilistic reasoning ({{w|Bayesian inference}}) to determine that the unlikeliness of the detector lying is greatly outweighed by the unlikeliness of the Sun exploding. Therefore, he concludes that the Sun has ''not'' exploded and the detector is lying.

A real statistician (frequentist or Bayesian) would probably demand a lower ''p''-value before concluding that a test shows the Sun has exploded; physicists tend to use 5 sigma, or about 1 in 3.5 million, as the standard before declaring major results, like discovering new particles. This would be equivalent to rolling between eight and nine dice and getting all sixes, although this is still not "very good" compared to the actual expected likelihood of the Sun spontaneously going nova, as discussed below.

The line, "Bet you $50 it hasn't", is a reference to the approach of a leading Bayesian scholar, {{w|Bruno de Finetti}}, who made extensive use of bets in his examples and thought experiments. See {{w|Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)}} for more information on his work. In this case, however, the bet is also a joke because we would all be dead if the Sun exploded. If the Bayesian wins the bet, he gets money, and if he loses, they'll both be dead before money can be paid. This underlines the absurdity of the premise and emphasizes the need to consider context when examining probability.

It is also possible that the use of the Sun is a reference to Laplace's {{w|Sunrise problem}}.

The title text refers to a classic series of logic puzzles known as {{w|Knights and Knaves#Fork in the road|Knights and Knaves}}, where there are two guards in front of two exit doors, one of which is real and the other leads to death. One guard is a liar and the other tells the truth. The visitor doesn't know which is which, and is allowed to ask one question to one guard. The solution is to ask either guard what the other one would say is the real exit, then choose the opposite. Two such guards were featured in the 1986 Jim Henson movie ''{{w|Labyrinth (1986 film)|Labyrinth}}'', hence the mention of "A LABYRINTH GUARD" here. A labyrinth was also mentioned in [[246: Labyrinth Puzzle]].

===Further a less serious mathematical exploration===
As mentioned, this is an instance of the {{w|base rate fallacy}}. If we treat the "truth or lie" setup as simply modelling an inaccurate test, then it is also specifically an illustration of the {{w|false positive paradox}}: A test that is rarely wrong, but which tests for an event that is even rarer, will be more often wrong than right when it says that the event has occurred.

The test, in this case, is a neutrino detector. It relies on the fact that neutrinos can pass through the Earth, so a neutrino detector would detect neutrinos from the Sun at all times, day and night. The detector is stated to give false results ("lie") 1/36th of the time.

There is no record of any star ever spontaneously exploding—they always show signs of deterioration long before their explosion—so the probability is near zero. For the sake of a number, though, consider that the Sun's estimated lifespan is 10 billion years. Let's say the test is run every hour, twelve hours a day (at night time). This gives us a probability of the Sun exploding at one in 4.38×1013. Assuming this detector is otherwise reliable, when the detector reports a solar explosion, there are two possibilities:
# The Sun '''has''' exploded (one in 4.38×1013) and the detector '''is''' telling the truth (35 in 36). This event has a total probability of about 1/(4.38×1013) × 35/36 or about one in 4.50×1013
# The Sun '''hasn't''' exploded (4.38×1013 − 1 in 4.38×1013) and the detector '''is not''' telling the truth (1 in 36). This event has a total probability of about (4.38×1013 − 1) / 4.38×1013 × 1/36 or about one in 36.

Clearly the Sun exploding is not the most likely option. Indeed, Bayes' theorem can be used to find the probability that the Sun has exploded, given a result of "yes" and the prior probability given above:

: <math>
\begin{align}
P(\text{exploded}\,|\,\text{yes})&=\frac{P(\text{yes}\,|\,\text{exploded})P(\text{exploded})}{P(\text{yes})}\\
&=\frac{P(\text{exploded})(1-P(\text{lie}))}{P(\text{exploded})(1-P(\text{lie}))+P(\text{lie})(1-P(\text{exploded}))}\\
&\approx\frac1{1.25226\times10^{12}}
\end{align}
</math>

==Transcript==
:[Caption above the first panel:]
:<big>Did the sun just explode?</big>
:(It's night, so we're not sure)

:[Two Cueball-like guys stand on either side of a small table with a small black device on it. The device has white lines (ventilation) and two small antennas and a button on top. When the device speaks it uses in Westminster typeface. The Guy on the left, called Frequentist Statistician in the 2nd panel, points to the device. The guy on the right, called Bayesian Statistician in the 3rd panel, is just looking at the device. Above the spoken word from the device is a sound.]
:Frequentist Statistician: This neutrino detector measures whether the sun has gone nova.
:Bayesian Statistician: Then, it rolls two dice. If they both come up as six, it lies to us. Otherwise, it tells the truth.
:Frequentist Statistician: Let's try. ''Detector! Has the sun gone nova?''
:Sound:''Roll''
:Device: <big>YES.</big>

:[Two panels side by side are beneath the first panel. together they are broader than the top panel. Above each panel is a caption. In the left panel only the left statistician is shown with the device on the table. And in the right panel only the right statistician is shown with the device on the table. both are just looking at the device.]
:Frequentist Statistician:
:Frequentist Statistician: The probability of this result happening by chance is 1/36=0.027. Since p<0.05, I conclude that the sun has exploded.

:Bayesian Statistician:
:Bayesian Statistician: Bet you $50 it hasn't.

==Trivia==
* The Sun will never explode as a supernova, because it does not have enough mass to undergo core collapse and also does not have a companion star
*In the same blog comment as cited above<ref name="munroe-on-gelman"/>, Randall explains that he chose the "sun exploding" scenario as a more clearly absurd example than those usually used:
<blockquote>…I realized that in the common examples used to illustrate this sort of error, like the cancer screening/drug test false positive ones, the correct result is surprising or unintuitive. So I came up with the sun-explosion example, to illustrate a case where naïve application of that significance test can give a result that’s obviously nonsense.</blockquote>
*"Bayesian" statistics is named for Thomas Bayes, who studied conditional probability — the likelihood that one event is true when given information about some other related event. From {{w|Bayes Theorem|Wikipedia}}: "Bayesian interpretation expresses how a subjective degree of belief should rationally change to account for evidence".
* The "frequentist" says that 1/36 = 0.027. It's actually 0.02777…, which should round to 0.028.
* Using neutrino detectors to get an advance warning of a supernova is possible, and the {{w|Supernova Early Warning System}} does just this. The neutrinos arrive ahead of the photons, because they can escape from the core of the star before the supernova explosion reaches the mantle.

==References==
<references/>

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Multiple Cueballs]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]

Talk:3130: Predicament

2025-08-18T21:44:24Z

92.23.2.228:

3130: Predicament

2025-08-18T21:40:27Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ (And likely applies to resistive-sensing screens, too.) Thought about saying that the failure to get it to register a touch-detection might have played some part to using too much force, but too many words for that...

{{comic
| number = 3130
| date = August 18, 2025
| title = Predicament
| image = predicament_2x.png
| imagesize = 740x272px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = I dropped my phone while trying to search, and I tried to unlock it from up here, so can you also search for screen repair places?
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by someone on stilts. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

Someone on very tall stilts walks up to [[Cueball]] and requests that he google something for them. Cueball correctly guesses that they want to find out how to get down from stilts.

The title text explains that this person dropped their phone and tried to unlock it with the stilts, but ended up breaking their phone in the process. When someone is standing on stilts, their weight (and the weight of the stilts themselves) is distributed over the relatively small contact area between the stilts' bottoms and the surface they rest on. It would be very difficult to perform a precise task such as unlocking a phone on the ground, using the bottom of a stilt that one is standing on, without accidentally putting a lot of pressure on the phone's fragile screen. One would, in essence, need to balance on one stilt, putting almost all of the weight on it... and carefully and gently touch the phone with the other, supporting most of the weight of the free stilt with one's hand and arm, doing precise manipulations at the distance of the length of the stilt with a massive and awkward tool. This procedure clearly hasn't gone well.

It is also unlikely that a phone 'touchscreen' could even be operated by a stilt. Most work through {{w|capacitive sensing}}, and are unlikely to work with the stilt-ends unless specifically equipped with a cap of material with sufficiently similar dialectric qualities to human fingers.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

[Panel 1:]

[On the left a long stick enters the panel from near the top left. There are "tap tap" sounds where the stick hits the ground. Cueball is on the right, looking left towards the stick.]

[Panel 2:]

[There are now two long sticks closer to the middle of the panel. They cross near the top, and there are three taps near the bottom. Cueball is still looking at them.]

[Panel 3:]

[The two sticks are almost parallel now, a little further apart at the ground. Cueball is still looking at them.

Voice from above: Do you have your phone?

Cueball: Yeah.

[Panel 4:]

[The two sticks are parallel. Cueball is holding a cellphone in his right hand.]

Voice: Can you google --

Cueball: -- How to get down from stilts?

Voice: Yes please.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

Talk:3130: Predicament

2025-08-18T21:31:49Z

92.23.2.228:

Talk:149: Sandwich

2025-08-18T19:14:26Z

92.23.2.228: (Half-rewrote, before posting. Confused myself momentarily..)

Note that it is more effective to write "sudo !!" to redo the last command but with sudo added to it. {{unsigned|Agge.se}}

:Using <code>sudo !!</code> outputs the previous command with sudo into your bash (other shells as well) history, so to bash what you said was "sudo make me a sandwich" not "sudo !!". [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

<code>sudo</code> requires '''user''' password, not admin password, but you need to be in <code>sudoers</code> file. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 12:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

:How many people will know the difference? In a typical Ubuntu-family install with only one human user, root doesn't ''have'' a password, but the one user who does is a sudoer (and has to use <code>sudo</code> or <code>su</code> to act as root, rather than doing so starting at login). [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 06:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

"the user first must type their password" This is not accurate. It is the default, but many domains disable that requirement.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.92|173.245.52.92]] 06:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe the original comic actually read "Sudo bang bang" instead of "Sudo make me a sandwich". Here's a link to what I think is a copy of the [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15137461/what-is-sudo-bang-bang original]. I'm not sure which of the two is actually the original. {{unsigned ip|‎99.95.158.248}}
:The words "bang bang" (particularly the first B) look a bit fuzzy/pixelated compared to the rest of the text, which gives me the feeling that it was edited from this one, which is the original. [[User:Zowayix|Zowayix]] ([[User talk:Zowayix|talk]]) 23:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
::If you click on the image (on the Stack Overflow link), it leads you to http://justinsomnia.org/2006/09/sudo-bang-bang/, which says: 'This just occurred to me' [comic] 'Original comic from xkcd by Randall Munroe', implying it was indeed edited. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.14|141.101.99.14]] 20:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
:::Also, Randall doesn't make his Gs like that. You can see in the strip immediately previous. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.4|108.162.237.4]] 05:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
: On a different, but totally related note: [https://github.com/nvbn/thefuck Here] you can find an aptly named little program with which the charming conversation would be: "Make me a sandwich." - "What? Make it yourself." - "Fuck." - "Okay." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.135|162.158.85.135]] 08:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment: This conversation is an easter egg in Google Now on Android tablet. Using voice search to say "make me a sandwich" will give the reply "what? make it yourself", adding "sudo" will get the response "ok". I assume the Google now implementation came later and is based on xkcd. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.27}}
:Sadly, it doesn't exist in the new Google Assistant.
:Siri will also respond "okay" if you say "sudo make me a sandwich:", though she doesn't respond with the XKCD response to "make me a sandwich". [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.35|198.41.235.35]] 13:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC) (MSC)

This reworked for the Make utility:
<code><pre>
$ make sandwich
Must be root
$ sudo make sandwich
cc sandwich
mv sandwich /etc/sandwich
sandwich installed in /etc
$ _
</pre></code>
[[User:Alexbuzzbee|Alexbuzzbee]] ([[User talk:Alexbuzzbee|talk]]) 02:50, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

* It also reminds me the ''Star Trek: Voyager'' episode where Q tampered with the ship's replicators:
::Janeway: "Coffee, black."
::Replicator: "Make it yourself."
(But she didn't try "Sudo coffee, black.") - [[User:Mike Rosoft|Mike Rosoft]] ([[User talk:Mike Rosoft|talk]]) 18:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

* This forfells the advent of Alexa and the other personal home assistants. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.50|162.158.155.50]] 20:19, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

* I wonder whether Cueball pronounces "sudo" the right way (because surely he knows the right way) or the wrong way (engaging his hobby, or matching the expectations of the friend.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.89|172.68.142.89]] 16:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

If the pronunciation of <code>sudo</code> is "soo doo" (because "do" is a word), then should it actually be pronounced "ess yoo doo" — pronouncing "s" and "u" separately (because "su" is an initialism of "super user"/"substitute user")? (Is the <code>su</code> command pronounced "soo" or "ess yoo"?) -- [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 14:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

could this also be citing the fact that the sudo project's logo is a sandwich? [[User:Bb777|me, hi]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 13:53, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
:No. It's actually the exact {{w|Sudo#History|opposite way round}}. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 19:12, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Talk:149: Sandwich

2025-08-18T19:12:45Z

92.23.2.228:

Note that it is more effective to write "sudo !!" to redo the last command but with sudo added to it. {{unsigned|Agge.se}}

:Using <code>sudo !!</code> outputs the previous command with sudo into your bash (other shells as well) history, so to bash what you said was "sudo make me a sandwich" not "sudo !!". [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 16:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

<code>sudo</code> requires '''user''' password, not admin password, but you need to be in <code>sudoers</code> file. --[[User:JakubNarebski|JakubNarebski]] ([[User talk:JakubNarebski|talk]]) 12:14, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

:How many people will know the difference? In a typical Ubuntu-family install with only one human user, root doesn't ''have'' a password, but the one user who does is a sudoer (and has to use <code>sudo</code> or <code>su</code> to act as root, rather than doing so starting at login). [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 06:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

"the user first must type their password" This is not accurate. It is the default, but many domains disable that requirement.
[[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.92|173.245.52.92]] 06:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe the original comic actually read "Sudo bang bang" instead of "Sudo make me a sandwich". Here's a link to what I think is a copy of the [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15137461/what-is-sudo-bang-bang original]. I'm not sure which of the two is actually the original. {{unsigned ip|‎99.95.158.248}}
:The words "bang bang" (particularly the first B) look a bit fuzzy/pixelated compared to the rest of the text, which gives me the feeling that it was edited from this one, which is the original. [[User:Zowayix|Zowayix]] ([[User talk:Zowayix|talk]]) 23:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
::If you click on the image (on the Stack Overflow link), it leads you to http://justinsomnia.org/2006/09/sudo-bang-bang/, which says: 'This just occurred to me' [comic] 'Original comic from xkcd by Randall Munroe', implying it was indeed edited. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.14|141.101.99.14]] 20:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
:::Also, Randall doesn't make his Gs like that. You can see in the strip immediately previous. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.4|108.162.237.4]] 05:16, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
: On a different, but totally related note: [https://github.com/nvbn/thefuck Here] you can find an aptly named little program with which the charming conversation would be: "Make me a sandwich." - "What? Make it yourself." - "Fuck." - "Okay." [[Special:Contributions/162.158.85.135|162.158.85.135]] 08:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment: This conversation is an easter egg in Google Now on Android tablet. Using voice search to say "make me a sandwich" will give the reply "what? make it yourself", adding "sudo" will get the response "ok". I assume the Google now implementation came later and is based on xkcd. {{unsigned ip|141.101.99.27}}
:Sadly, it doesn't exist in the new Google Assistant.
:Siri will also respond "okay" if you say "sudo make me a sandwich:", though she doesn't respond with the XKCD response to "make me a sandwich". [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.35|198.41.235.35]] 13:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC) (MSC)

This reworked for the Make utility:
<code><pre>
$ make sandwich
Must be root
$ sudo make sandwich
cc sandwich
mv sandwich /etc/sandwich
sandwich installed in /etc
$ _
</pre></code>
[[User:Alexbuzzbee|Alexbuzzbee]] ([[User talk:Alexbuzzbee|talk]]) 02:50, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

* It also reminds me the ''Star Trek: Voyager'' episode where Q tampered with the ship's replicators:
::Janeway: "Coffee, black."
::Replicator: "Make it yourself."
(But she didn't try "Sudo coffee, black.") - [[User:Mike Rosoft|Mike Rosoft]] ([[User talk:Mike Rosoft|talk]]) 18:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

* This forfells the advent of Alexa and the other personal home assistants. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.155.50|162.158.155.50]] 20:19, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

* I wonder whether Cueball pronounces "sudo" the right way (because surely he knows the right way) or the wrong way (engaging his hobby, or matching the expectations of the friend.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.142.89|172.68.142.89]] 16:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

If the pronunciation of <code>sudo</code> is "soo doo" (because "do" is a word), then should it actually be pronounced "ess yoo doo" — pronouncing "s" and "u" separately (because "su" is an initialism of "super user"/"substitute user")? (Is the <code>su</code> command pronounced "soo" or "ess yoo"?) -- [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 14:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

could this also be citing the fact that the sudo project's logo is a sandwich? [[User:Bb777|me, hi]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 13:53, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
:No. It's actually the exact opposite {{w|Sudo#History|the other way round}}. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 19:12, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Talk:1081: Argument Victory

2025-08-18T19:09:58Z

92.23.2.228:

I also think it could be a joke on the "Guess some people prefer to stay asleep." line ? [[Special:Contributions/174.93.164.151|174.93.164.151]] 18:30, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

:Conspiracy theories are typically considered (especially by non-conspiracy-theorists) to make one sleepless/have nightmares, due to their often frightening nature.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.130|141.101.98.130]] 19:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

:What the conspiracy theorist is saying is an idiomatic expression. Being "asleep" here means that the theorist's opponent has not yet opened his mind to the truth, and is willing to accept propaganda full of lies. Kind of like in The Matrix or something. (Disclaimer, I've never watched it, just read about it.) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.106|108.162.216.106]] 21:12, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I still don't understand the title text. I would think that the side that thinks "anyone who's in power has any plan at all" would be the conspiracy theorists, but how is that comforting? [[Special:Contributions/98.66.41.122|98.66.41.122]] 14:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

:I think he wants to say that our political leaders don't really seem to overlook our world's machinery (as conspiracy theorists assume), and that he finds this rather frightening. --[[User:Kronf|Kronf]] ([[User talk:Kronf|talk]]) 16:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

:No, the opposite. The conspiracy theorists believe there is a plan. We suspect the opposite because we are rational and see no good evidence. [[User:Nonceexkcd|Nonceexkcd]] ([[User talk:Nonceexkcd|talk]]) 21:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

::That's what I tried to say. --[[User:Kronf|Kronf]] ([[User talk:Kronf|talk]]) 16:02, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

:I think of it as a joke, based around the stereotype of politicians having either terrible plans/policies or none at all. He finds it more comforting for them to have ''any'' plan, even if it is a conspiracy. It could be thought of as "at least they have a plan and control, instead of no plan and chaos". [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.155|108.162.238.155]] 09:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

To clarify, he finds the fact that if conspiracy theorists are right, somebody is ruling the world and by extension, looking over it and making sure it doesn't fall apart on them, as opposed to it being a chaotic unsupervised mess. {{unsigned ip|71.230.192.134}}

Really? Combs Hair Down? Surely there's a better name for this person... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.222|141.101.98.222]] 07:13, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
:Conspiracy Theorist? -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 04:10, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
::Combspiracy Theorist? --[[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 13:44, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

"It's unnerving to think there are gangs of giant lizards controlling the whole of mankind from the shadows, but is that less worrying than the possibility that we live in a random universe where unthinking forces could opt to snuff us out without cause or reason?" [https://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/sep/05/conspiracy-theories-science-belief-secret-plots Conspiracy theories: the science behind belief in secret plots]

Also one of Alan Moore's most famous quotes: "The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic. The truth is, that it is not the Jewish banking conspiracy or the grey aliens or the 12 foot reptiloids from another dimension that are in control. The truth is more frightening, nobody is in control. The world is rudderless." [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Moore Wikiquote:Alan Moore] [[User:AmbroseChapel|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel|talk]]) 03:33, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

It's just as easy to get a .org or .com website as a .net or .xyz; the extension is irrelevant if it's not .gov or .edu or some other institution's official website. This is a common myth that just because a website ends in .org, people think it's a legitimate website. I've got several myself for only a few dollars a year.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.170|172.69.22.170]] 15:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

also, he destroyed the phone! [[User:Bb777|me, hi]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 13:47, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
:No reason to believe that... [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 19:09, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Talk:3084: Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object

2025-08-17T23:34:02Z

92.23.2.228:

lol, i remember this explanation from a minutephysics video. however, the version of the problem i heard, which is actually paradoxical, is "what happens when an immovable object meets an '''irresistible''' force?" [[User:Not without text|Not without text]] ([[User talk:Not without text|talk]]) 00:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:That was also literally my first thought. [[169]], anyone? --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 05:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
::How do connect this comic with [[169: Words that End in GRY]]? I see no connection! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:43, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Communicating poorly and then acting smug. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 11:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
:The MinutePhysics video: [https://nebula.tv/videos/minute-physics-immovable-object-vs-unstoppable-force-which-wins/ on Nebula] or [https://youtu.be/9eKc5kgPVrA on YouTube] --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 09:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Come on, it's just an arrow made of W- bosons, right? [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 03:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Is there no joke here? Is it just the solution? [[User:Broseph|Broseph]] ([[User talk:Broseph|talk]]) 06:52, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I remember an explanation by Isaac Asimov in one of his books which was like "by definition, an immovable object will not move at all under any force in the universe, and an unstoppable force will move all of the objects in this way" and then explained how the definitions conflicted each other and as such prevented both from being able to register for the hypothetical at the same time [[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.161|172.64.236.161]] 06:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

In the first MMO games, collision was a big problem. A player could block a doorway, and nobody else could go through. It was even worse if the player had "follower" characters or pets.
One solution was to have characters automatically "push" stationary characters out of the way, but that caused other problems. Modern MMO's such as World of Warcraft simply allow characters to pass through each other, as depicted in this xkcd comic. Our eyes fool us into "seeing" that two characters somehow slid past each other. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.228.132|172.68.228.132]] 07:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Our eyes, or the programmers? I don't have that much experience with MMO's but they probably do render it in specific way to make that effect. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::It's been a few years since I played WoW, but at that time there wasn't anything hiding the fact that the characters were clipping through each other. although I'm not sure what the other poster was talking about being fooled "into 'seeing' that two characters somehow slid past each other" since to me it always looked like two characters passed right through each other.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.111|172.70.126.111]] 20:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

When the two things pass through each other, at the instant where they both occupy exactly the same space, is there one object or two? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.159|162.158.216.159]] 08:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Given that force is not an object, one. Just like there was when they weren't colocated. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.220|172.69.43.220]] 08:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
::OK, but what about the 'unstoppable force carrying particles' in the title text? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.204|172.69.194.204]] 19:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I understand it as if a particle interacting with the object counts as 'stopping', in which case an unstoppable force-carrying particle wont have any effect. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.120.157|162.158.120.157]] 20:40, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Two, if you're counting particles as "objects". At the level of particle interactions, two particles aren't merely distinguished by their spatial extent, but also by all their other "quantum numbers" -- charge, flavor, and others. You can absolutely have two particles, even two fermions, that have exactly the same wavefunction in space, but are distinguished by differing in other ways. (And in practice, something like this would be a fermion and a boson anyway.) [[User:Linkhyrule5|Linkhyrule5]] ([[User talk:Linkhyrule5|talk]]) 06:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

The force could simply go around the object. The object hasn't moved, and the force wasn't stopped. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 11:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Redirecting would imply the force could be redirected, allowing us to trap it inside a closed loop, effectively stopping it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.57.132|172.70.57.132]] 15:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

This is like the Chinese saying the spear and the shield. Using this comic, I guess spear wins [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 14:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Gonna be honest, I think this is my least favorite comic of the last 500 or so. It's a solution already given by minutephysics, except with all the perspective about reference frames, and what people actually mean with these terms replaced by a caption with a superiority complex. I suppose it gets pretty hard 3000 comics in, but c'mon.
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.83|172.68.35.83]] 19:18, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:''--Comment by [[User:Darth Vader|Darth Vader]] ([[User talk:Darth Vader|talk]]) 22:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC) deleted--''
:: Ok, as we're giving personal opinions, I can't let it stand. Some might not exactly be total belly-laughs, but I think they each still have something to them and I prefer a mix of tones (and a wider spatter of focuses and treatments) to them all being exactly the same aspect of 'high-humour'. Not that I'd care to rank them, anyway, but I'm nowhere near ready to go off and make disparaging comments as if this site was bitchaboutxkcd.com, or whatever.
:: I won't try to tell you what to think, yourself, though maybe you should just roll with it. If you really don't like a comic, there'll be another along in two or three days. That might be even 'worse', as well as 'better', but then you can be even more unchill about ''that''. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.82|141.101.98.82]] 22:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

All forces are irresistable. No objects are immovable. If any force acts on any object, the object moves (or deforms). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.84.145|172.68.84.145]] 22:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Can we not say that Dark Matter, if that's what we imagine it might be, entirely resists the electromagnetic force? (It's one of my possible interpretations of the comic, though without enough hint that it was intended to have me annotate the Explanation accordingly.)
:That said, it's ''unstoppable'' force (and there's are no Cavorite-like forceproof barriers), and it's rather that ''immovable'' objects are awkward to imagine under Relativity and there being no actual preferable frame of reference in the first place. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.113|172.69.195.113]] 22:50, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I would say that, since a force is mass*acceleration, the force cannot yet be stated while passing through the immovable object, because the object have to accelerate to calculate the force. Therefore, the "force" is only potential or kinetic energy at this point.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.127.25|162.158.127.25]] 12:54, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I would say that nothing happens. If you think of Pressure and immoveable object: An infinite force would acting on an immoveable (think infinite mass) object would lead to no movement at all.
Well, actually a black hole would be created, swallowing up the object and the force. Since the object's further behavior now cannot be seen from outside mass could be reduced anf the black hole could simply evaporate.
Result: Force and objects actual mass would simply be converted into energy, representing a bomb. [[Special:Contributions/104.23.187.224|104.23.187.224]] 16:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Did someone pull out ChatGPT again for this explanation? The claim that the humor derives from the contrast between the casual meaning of "force" and its meaning in physics is ridiculous and patently false. A "force" in physics doesn't have a physical position to begin with and so it can't "pass through" anything. At this point I really feel like there should be some kind of policy on writing explanations using LLMs like ChatGPT because it almost never adds anything of value and it just complicates the explanation and makes the process of ''real'' people digging into the actual meaning and themes more difficult.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.223|172.71.102.223]] 18:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:Looking at what it replaced, it was an improvement, if not described as well as I think it should be. I believe it means to talk of the flux from a point-originated field (e.g. the most common fields normally deplete by inverse-square rule, all the way to infinity, from the point(s) of origin, though nuclear forces are... different).
:Given the depiction of the "unstoppable force" as actually 'moving', it has to be looked at as some kind of propagating pulse of 'forceness', albeit one that does not interact with the object seen as in its path (which would therefore neither react to the 'force' nor attenuate its potential effects). But that might need to be said in similarly short fashion (if my interpretation is even agreed with). Good luck! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.52|172.70.162.52]] 20:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:Agree! The physical explanation of force is plainly wrong in the explanation text. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.207|172.68.110.207]] 23:18, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Could the objects be ''in front'' of each other instead of colliding? {{unsigned|Dardafus1|18:00, 5 May 2025}}
:Not both at the same time... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.224.82|172.69.224.82]] 19:49, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I contemplated this years ago while watching a {{w|Newton's cradle}}, and I came to the conclusion that the irresistible force would transform into an immovable object, and the immovable object would transform into an irresistible force. But honestly, a variation of what he proposes also makes sense, that the immovable object would conduct the irresistible force and retransmit it out the other side. The {{w|Black box}} view of the interaction would be the same either way. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 20:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:Except an '''irresistible''' force is different from an unstoppable one: if the force is irresistible, the force must have an effect on the object. I guess I could see how retransmitting the force would be a type of effect, but it's a bit of a stretch. [[User:Not without text|Not without text]] ([[User talk:Not without text|talk]]) 14:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Basically, these Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object there are '''''incorporeal'''''; they don't interact with anything. Like Neutrinos; any material object phases though them. As such, they are practically useless and pathetically weak. So i could try to predict, what happens when two '''''corporeal''''' Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object collide:
# By '''''corporeal''''', i mean: they interact with objects, and can't "phase through". If they collide with something, they crush and displace objects. And no matter how much you throw at them, they don't get damaged and don't get displaced. As such, they're infinitely durable, infinitely strong, and therefore infinitely massive. All that is assuming that they're '''absolutely, 100%''' Unstoppable and Immovable (and not merely "very strong but finite").
# They collide with each other. They try to displace each other, but can't because they're infinitely massive. They try to crush each other, but can't because they're infinitely durable. Since efficiency of this process is not 100% and involves 2 infinitely strong objects, the waste energy (e.g. heat, sound, etc) and object's gravity ends up destroying the entire Universe, a-la [https://what-if.xkcd.com/140/ Proton Moon, Electron Earth].
# As to what happens to Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object: this boils down into "What happens if two infinitely strong objects try to push each other in opposite directions". Both of them have same power (infinite), same mass (infinite), same energy (infinite). In turn, this boils down to "Infinity minus Infinity"; the "(+∞) + (-∞)", "(+∞) / (+∞)" and "(-∞) / (-∞)" are undefined, like "x / 0" is. Therefore, formulas for calculating collision of finite objects don't apply; instead, something incomprehensible happens - likely ripping apart Laws Of Physics themselves and crashing The Universe.

Correct me if i made mistakes. --[[User:SMGmsgsgd|SMGmsgsgd]] ([[User talk:SMGmsgsgd|talk]]) 09:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
:In simpler terms: Unstoppable Force vs Immovable Object, if both of them are '''''infinitely strong and corporeal''''' - is 1) meaningless as it boils to "(+∞) + (-∞)" (Infinity minus Infinity) and is undefined, and 2) irrelevant since infinitely many waste energy from this destroys entire Universe, so it's impossible to look and determine who ultimately "won". --[[User:SMGmsgsgd|SMGmsgsgd]] ([[User talk:SMGmsgsgd|talk]]) 11:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
::Technically, that's more like two unstoppable things ''meeting from opposite directions''. The difference between something unstoppable and something unmovable might be better looked at in terms of momentum (unstoppable may be finite speed but infinite mass, unmovable is technically zero speed but still infinite mass) in which the infinities apply to the scalar elements and ''-∞'' makes no sense as an element. Though ''∞ - ∞'' may indeed come out of the comparison, not ''(+∞) + (-∞)'', and transfinite mathematics are likely to care a lot more that these are ''not'' equivalents, we're also into the realms of it being non-commutative ''and'' not reducing to "(+x) + (-x), ∴ = 0".
::By another treatment, the effect upon the unstoppable object is infinite (the force/dynamic-momentum/whatever of the immovable one) and the one upon the immovable object is infinite (the resistance/static-momentum/whatever of the unstoppable one) resulting in 'infinity-times-two' (whatever that means!) total disruption, compared merely with the 'infinity-esque' quantity of disruption if either an unstoppable item were to hit a movable one or an immovable one is hit by something that is stoppable.
::You're already in trouble (at the very least mathematical, possibly also as an incautious observer, within the technically infinite range of all secondary effects) if ''either'' element of the problem is infinitely anything... having them both being infinite (including in direct opposition, say two infinitely unstoppable items colliding, or even a glancing blow) isn't ''much'' worse, as far as how infinities go (though something that produces an answer involving ∞×∞ at some point ''could'' be considered to be far more ...interesting). That's once you get over the fact that you're dealing with mathematics involving some definition of ''ω'' or even ''ε'', and have to deal with those appropriately. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:35, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
:::1) So, what is difference between ''(+∞) + (-∞)'' and ''∞ - ∞''? 2) if they're commutative, then what's the meaning of "(+x) + (-x), ∴ = 0" result? Both objects annihilating each-other into energy (impossible - they're infinitely durable)? Object's speed changing to arithmetic mean of their speeds, with regard to elasticity (impossible - they're immovable)? 3) if they're non-commutative, then what happens? --[[User:SMGmsgsgd|SMGmsgsgd]] ([[User talk:SMGmsgsgd|talk]]) 20:00, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
::::You need to start by defining your infinities, and how they work, a lot better than "just being infinity" to get any definite idea of what any of those issues mean. What positive infinite plus negative infinity adds up to can be... tricky. As can doing something like ''p=mv'' for infinite mass but zero velocity. (Anything times zero is zero, yet anything times infinity is infinity? Actually, ''p'' could end up as anything, in the end. Depends upon how you look at it.) And I absolutely do not think that anything so definitially extreme will just cancel itself out. This is, of course, part of the problem being posited by the UF+IO idea. Where not mutually and fully intangible to each other, of course. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 23:34, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

3129: Archaeology Research

2025-08-16T22:43:39Z

92.23.2.228: Undo revision 384342 by 2604:3D08:3380:1AF0:9D9B:8741:8C3D:ED33 (talk) Better as was. Presents his 'discovery', emphasises connection.

{{comic
| number = 3129
| date = August 15, 2025
| title = Archaeology Research
| image = archaeology_research_2x.png
| imagesize = 381x433px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The academic archaeology establishment is suppressing my breakthroughs because of the disruption it would bring to their prepared-core flake-based toolmaking industry.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|
*This page was created a long time ago and improved recently. Don’t remove this notice too soon.
* The actual joke (he has accidentally discovered something that was already known) is buried 3 paragraphs deep, it should also be mentioned in the lede.}}

In this comic, [[Cueball]] is presenting an improvement over the stone {{w|arrowhead}}s used by early humans. Stone arrowheads are produced by {{w|Knapping|shaping flint}} by expertly knocking flakes off a suitable raw piece of stone. By contrast, once {{w|Copper extraction#History|the use of metals}} is developed, a far more scalable industry can eventually cast smooth copper arrowheads as depicted in Cueball’s presentation.

Metalworking requires some knowledge of ores and often (depending upon the metal) how to maintain and control high temperatures. The era of mass-produced metal objects heralded the waning of the {{w|Stone Age}} and eventually led to the {{w|Bronze Age}}, by way of the copper-using {{w|Chalcolithic}}, in some parts of the world. Once copper arrowheads were produced, in any given region, the practice of flint arrowheads largely died out.

It seems that Cueball was tasked to look at details of active {{w|Paleolithic}} culture (the "Old Stone Age"), in the era that extended until not quite 10,000 BCE, but has accidentally 'discovered' the developments (from around 6,500 BCE to 5,000 BCE) that actually superseded the practices that he was supposed to be studying, initially with lumps of copper nuggets being taken and cold-hammered into awls, chisels, ornaments and spear heads, later learning to use heat to soften it and after that to be able to melt and cast it.

The caption below the comic tells us that Cueball has based his entire {{w|dissertation}} on the false proposition that an archaeologist's job is to recreate history rather than revealing it. This would be disastrous for Cueball, as dissertations take a large amount of time and effort to complete, and he may have used the effort to effectively reengineer several thousand years of human development, leading away from the original subject.

The title text claims that his 'discoveries' are unappreciated ''not'' because they are useless (in a completely different context, they might be an exciting academic pursuit), but because the academic 'establishment' has a stranglehold on the arrowhead industry and too many vested interests in flint-knapping to allow the {{w|disruptive innovation}} that this new change to copper weaponry might herald. This is a humorous mashup of two classes of conspiracy theories, those of academia suppressing "the TRUTH" (according to pseudo-historians) and of oil, pharmaceutical, or other industries suppressing "free energy" or other such "innovations".

In addition, {{w|Industry (archaeology)|"industry"}} is a term used in archaeology to describe specific types of tools made with the same methods- Cueball's technique would, technically, be its own new industry.



==Transcript==
:[Cueball stands in front of a roll-down projector screen, pointing to it behind him as he looks forward. The screen depicts two arrowheads: On the left is an arrowhead hewn from stone with the subtitle "Stone (traditional)". On the right is a smoother arrowhead with the subtitle "Copper (my method)"]
:Cueball: In the process of analyzing Paleolithic stone toolmaking, I've stumbled on an improved technique for producing points and blades.
:Cueball: Instead of stone, my method is based on the heating and shaping of copper ore...

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Too late, I realized that my entire archaeology dissertation had been based on a colossal misunderstanding.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]

Talk:3084: Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object

2025-08-16T17:38:04Z

92.23.2.228:

Talk:3084: Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object

2025-08-16T17:35:04Z

92.23.2.228:

lol, i remember this explanation from a minutephysics video. however, the version of the problem i heard, which is actually paradoxical, is "what happens when an immovable object meets an '''irresistible''' force?" [[User:Not without text|Not without text]] ([[User talk:Not without text|talk]]) 00:03, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:That was also literally my first thought. [[169]], anyone? --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 05:37, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
::How do connect this comic with [[169: Words that End in GRY]]? I see no connection! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 16:43, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:::Communicating poorly and then acting smug. --[[User:Coconut Galaxy|Coconut Galaxy]] ([[User talk:Coconut Galaxy|talk]]) 11:52, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
:The MinutePhysics video: [https://nebula.tv/videos/minute-physics-immovable-object-vs-unstoppable-force-which-wins/ on Nebula] or [https://youtu.be/9eKc5kgPVrA on YouTube] --[[User:NeatNit|NeatNit]] ([[User talk:NeatNit|talk]]) 09:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Come on, it's just an arrow made of W- bosons, right? [[User:TheTrainsKid|TheTrainsKid]] ([[User talk:TheTrainsKid|talk]]) 03:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Is there no joke here? Is it just the solution? [[User:Broseph|Broseph]] ([[User talk:Broseph|talk]]) 06:52, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I remember an explanation by Isaac Asimov in one of his books which was like "by definition, an immovable object will not move at all under any force in the universe, and an unstoppable force will move all of the objects in this way" and then explained how the definitions conflicted each other and as such prevented both from being able to register for the hypothetical at the same time [[Special:Contributions/172.64.236.161|172.64.236.161]] 06:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

In the first MMO games, collision was a big problem. A player could block a doorway, and nobody else could go through. It was even worse if the player had "follower" characters or pets.
One solution was to have characters automatically "push" stationary characters out of the way, but that caused other problems. Modern MMO's such as World of Warcraft simply allow characters to pass through each other, as depicted in this xkcd comic. Our eyes fool us into "seeing" that two characters somehow slid past each other. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.228.132|172.68.228.132]] 07:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Our eyes, or the programmers? I don't have that much experience with MMO's but they probably do render it in specific way to make that effect. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 02:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
::It's been a few years since I played WoW, but at that time there wasn't anything hiding the fact that the characters were clipping through each other. although I'm not sure what the other poster was talking about being fooled "into 'seeing' that two characters somehow slid past each other" since to me it always looked like two characters passed right through each other.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.126.111|172.70.126.111]] 20:31, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

When the two things pass through each other, at the instant where they both occupy exactly the same space, is there one object or two? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.159|162.158.216.159]] 08:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Given that force is not an object, one. Just like there was when they weren't colocated. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.43.220|172.69.43.220]] 08:29, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
::OK, but what about the 'unstoppable force carrying particles' in the title text? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.204|172.69.194.204]] 19:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:::I understand it as if a particle interacting with the object counts as 'stopping', in which case an unstoppable force-carrying particle wont have any effect. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.120.157|162.158.120.157]] 20:40, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Two, if you're counting particles as "objects". At the level of particle interactions, two particles aren't merely distinguished by their spatial extent, but also by all their other "quantum numbers" -- charge, flavor, and others. You can absolutely have two particles, even two fermions, that have exactly the same wavefunction in space, but are distinguished by differing in other ways. (And in practice, something like this would be a fermion and a boson anyway.) [[User:Linkhyrule5|Linkhyrule5]] ([[User talk:Linkhyrule5|talk]]) 06:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

The force could simply go around the object. The object hasn't moved, and the force wasn't stopped. [[User:Rtanenbaum|Rtanenbaum]] ([[User talk:Rtanenbaum|talk]]) 11:17, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Redirecting would imply the force could be redirected, allowing us to trap it inside a closed loop, effectively stopping it. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.57.132|172.70.57.132]] 15:38, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

This is like the Chinese saying the spear and the shield. Using this comic, I guess spear wins [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 14:02, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Gonna be honest, I think this is my least favorite comic of the last 500 or so. It's a solution already given by minutephysics, except with all the perspective about reference frames, and what people actually mean with these terms replaced by a caption with a superiority complex. I suppose it gets pretty hard 3000 comics in, but c'mon.
[[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.83|172.68.35.83]] 19:18, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:''--Comment by [[User:Darth Vader|Darth Vader]] ([[User talk:Darth Vader|talk]]) 22:07, 3 May 2025 (UTC) deleted--''
:: Ok, as we're giving personal opinions, I can't let it stand. Some might not exactly be total belly-laughs, but I think they each still have something to them and I prefer a mix of tones (and a wider spatter of focuses and treatments) to them all being exactly the same aspect of 'high-humour'. Not that I'd care to rank them, anyway, but I'm nowhere near ready to go off and make disparaging comments as if this site was bitchaboutxkcd.com, or whatever.
:: I won't try to tell you what to think, yourself, though maybe you should just roll with it. If you really don't like a comic, there'll be another along in two or three days. That might be even 'worse', as well as 'better', but then you can be even more unchill about ''that''. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.82|141.101.98.82]] 22:45, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

All forces are irresistable. No objects are immovable. If any force acts on any object, the object moves (or deforms). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.84.145|172.68.84.145]] 22:22, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
:Can we not say that Dark Matter, if that's what we imagine it might be, entirely resists the electromagnetic force? (It's one of my possible interpretations of the comic, though without enough hint that it was intended to have me annotate the Explanation accordingly.)
:That said, it's ''unstoppable'' force (and there's are no Cavorite-like forceproof barriers), and it's rather that ''immovable'' objects are awkward to imagine under Relativity and there being no actual preferable frame of reference in the first place. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.113|172.69.195.113]] 22:50, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

I would say that, since a force is mass*acceleration, the force cannot yet be stated while passing through the immovable object, because the object have to accelerate to calculate the force. Therefore, the "force" is only potential or kinetic energy at this point.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.127.25|162.158.127.25]] 12:54, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I would say that nothing happens. If you think of Pressure and immoveable object: An infinite force would acting on an immoveable (think infinite mass) object would lead to no movement at all.
Well, actually a black hole would be created, swallowing up the object and the force. Since the object's further behavior now cannot be seen from outside mass could be reduced anf the black hole could simply evaporate.
Result: Force and objects actual mass would simply be converted into energy, representing a bomb. [[Special:Contributions/104.23.187.224|104.23.187.224]] 16:42, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Did someone pull out ChatGPT again for this explanation? The claim that the humor derives from the contrast between the casual meaning of "force" and its meaning in physics is ridiculous and patently false. A "force" in physics doesn't have a physical position to begin with and so it can't "pass through" anything. At this point I really feel like there should be some kind of policy on writing explanations using LLMs like ChatGPT because it almost never adds anything of value and it just complicates the explanation and makes the process of ''real'' people digging into the actual meaning and themes more difficult.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.223|172.71.102.223]] 18:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:Looking at what it replaced, it was an improvement, if not described as well as I think it should be. I believe it means to talk of the flux from a point-originated field (e.g. the most common fields normally deplete by inverse-square rule, all the way to infinity, from the point(s) of origin, though nuclear forces are... different).
:Given the depiction of the "unstoppable force" as actually 'moving', it has to be looked at as some kind of propagating pulse of 'forceness', albeit one that does not interact with the object seen as in its path (which would therefore neither react to the 'force' nor attenuate its potential effects). But that might need to be said in similarly short fashion (if my interpretation is even agreed with). Good luck! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.52|172.70.162.52]] 20:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
:Agree! The physical explanation of force is plainly wrong in the explanation text. Sebastian --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.207|172.68.110.207]] 23:18, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Could the objects be ''in front'' of each other instead of colliding? {{unsigned|Dardafus1|18:00, 5 May 2025}}
:Not both at the same time... [[Special:Contributions/172.69.224.82|172.69.224.82]] 19:49, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

I contemplated this years ago while watching a {{w|Newton's cradle}}, and I came to the conclusion that the irresistible force would transform into an immovable object, and the immovable object would transform into an irresistible force. But honestly, a variation of what he proposes also makes sense, that the immovable object would conduct the irresistible force and retransmit it out the other side. The {{w|Black box}} view of the interaction would be the same either way. [[User:SammyChips|SammyChips]] ([[User talk:SammyChips|talk]]) 20:07, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
:Except an '''irresistible''' force is different from an unstoppable one: if the force is irresistible, the force must have an effect on the object. I guess I could see how retransmitting the force would be a type of effect, but it's a bit of a stretch. [[User:Not without text|Not without text]] ([[User talk:Not without text|talk]]) 14:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Basically, these Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object there are '''''incorporeal'''''; they don't interact with anything. Like Neutrinos; any material object phases though them. As such, they are practically useless and pathetically weak. So i could try to predict, what happens when two '''''corporeal''''' Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object collide:
# By '''''corporeal''''', i mean: they interact with objects, and can't "phase through". If they collide with something, they crush and displace objects. And no matter how much you throw at them, they don't get damaged and don't get displaced. As such, they're infinitely durable, infinitely strong, and therefore infinitely massive. All that is assuming that they're '''absolutely, 100%''' Unstoppable and Immovable (and not merely "very strong but finite").
# They collide with each other. They try to displace each other, but can't because they're infinitely massive. They try to crush each other, but can't because they're infinitely durable. Since efficiency of this process is not 100% and involves 2 infinitely strong objects, the waste energy (e.g. heat, sound, etc) and object's gravity ends up destroying the entire Universe, a-la [https://what-if.xkcd.com/140/ Proton Moon, Electron Earth].
# As to what happens to Unstoppable Force and Immovable Object: this boils down into "What happens if two infinitely strong objects try to push each other in opposite directions". Both of them have same power (infinite), same mass (infinite), same energy (infinite). In turn, this boils down to "Infinity minus Infinity"; the "(+∞) + (-∞)", "(+∞) / (+∞)" and "(-∞) / (-∞)" are undefined, like "x / 0" is. Therefore, formulas for calculating collision of finite objects don't apply; instead, something incomprehensible happens - likely ripping apart Laws Of Physics themselves and crashing The Universe.

Correct me if i made mistakes. --[[User:SMGmsgsgd|SMGmsgsgd]] ([[User talk:SMGmsgsgd|talk]]) 09:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
:In simpler terms: Unstoppable Force vs Immovable Object, if both of them are '''''infinitely strong and corporeal''''' - is 1) meaningless as it boils to "(+∞) + (-∞)" (Infinity minus Infinity) and is undefined, and 2) irrelevant since infinitely many waste energy from this destroys entire Universe, so it's impossible to look and determine who ultimately "won". --[[User:SMGmsgsgd|SMGmsgsgd]] ([[User talk:SMGmsgsgd|talk]]) 11:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
::Technically, that's more like two unstoppable things ''meeting from opposite directions''. The difference between something unstoppable and something unmovable might be better looked at in terms of momentum (unstoppable may be finite speed but infinite mass, unmovable is technically zero speed but still infinite mass) in which the infinities apply to the scalar elements and ''-∞'' makes no sense as an element. Though ''∞ - ∞'' may indeed come out of the comparison, not ''(+∞) + (-∞)'', and transfinite mathematics are likely to care a lot more that these are ''not'' equivalents, we're also into the realms of it being non-commutative ''and'' not reducing to "(+x) + (-x), ∴ = 0".
::By another treatment, the effect upon the unstoppable object is infinite (the force/dynamic-momentum/whatever of the immovable one) and the one upon the immovable object is infinite (the resistance/static-momentum/whatever of the unstoppable one) resulting in 'infinity-times-two' (whatever that means!) total disruption, compared merely with the 'infinity-esque' quantity of disruption if either an unstoppable item were to hit a movable one or an immovable one is hit by something that is stoppable.
::You're already in trouble (at the very least mathematical, possibly also as an incautious observer, within the technically infinite range of all secondary effects) if ''either'' element of the problem is infinitely anything... having them both being infinite (including in direct opposition, say two infinitely unstoppable items colliding, or even a glancing blow) isn't ''much'' worse, as far as how infinities go (though something that produces an answer involving ∞&mult;∞ at some point ''could'' be considered to be far more ...interesting). That's once you get over the fact that you're dealing with mathematics involving some definition of ''ω'' or even ''ε'', and have to deal with those appropriately. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:35, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

3129: Archaeology Research

2025-08-15T19:06:05Z

92.23.2.228: Integrated other changes, as promised.

{{comic
| number = 3129
| date = August 15, 2025
| title = Archaeology Research
| image = archaeology_research_2x.png
| imagesize = 381x433px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The academic archaeology establishment is suppressing my breakthroughs because of the disruption it would bring to their prepared-core flake-based toolmaking industry.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created a long time ago and improved recently. Don’t remove this notice too soon.}}

In this comic, [[Cueball]] is presenting an improvement over the stone {{w|arrowhead}}s used by early humans. Stone arrowheads are produced by {{w|Knapping|shaping flint}} by expertly knocking flakes off a suitable raw piece of stone. By contrast, once {{w|Copper extraction#History|the use of metals}} is developed, a far more scalable industry can eventually cast smooth copper arrowheads as depicted in Cueball’s presentation.

Metalworking requires some knowledge of ores and often (depending upon the metal) how to maintain and control high temperatures. The era of mass-produced metal objects heralded the waning of the {{w|Stone Age}} and eventually led to the {{w|Bronze Age}}, by way of the copper-using {{w|Chalcolithic}}, in some parts of the world. Once copper arrowheads were produced, in any given region, the practice of flint arrowheads largely died out.

It seems that Cueball was tasked to look at details of active {{w|Paleolithic}} culture (the "Old Stone Age"), in the era that extended until not quite 10,000 BCE, but has accidentally 'discovered' the developments that actually (from around 6,500 BCE to 5,000 BCE) superceded the practices that he was supposed to be studying, initially with lumps of copper nuggets being taken and cold-hammered into into awls, chisels, ornaments and spear heads, later learning to use heat to soften it and after that to be able to melt and cast it.

The caption below the comic tells us that Cueball has based his entire {{w|dissertation} on the false preposition that an archaeologist's job is to recreate history rather than revealing it. This would be disastrous for Cueball, as dissertations take a large amount of time and effort to complete, and he may have used the effort to effectively reengineer several thousand years of human development, leading away from the original subject.

The title text claims that his 'discoveries' are unappreciated ''not'' because they are useless (in a completely context, they might be an exciting academic pursuit), but because the academic 'establishment' has a strangehold on the arrowhead industry and too many vested interests in flint-knapping to allow the {{w|disruptive innovation}} that this new change to copper weaponry might herald. 

==Transcript==
:[Cueball stands in front of a roll-down projector screen, pointing to it behind him as he looks forward. The screen depicts two arrowheads: On the left is an arrowhead hewn from stone with the subtitle "Stone (traditional)". On the right is a smoother arrowhead with the subtitle "Copper (my method)"]
:Cueball: In the process of analyzing Paleolithic stone toolmaking, I've stumbled on an improved technique for producing points and blades.
:Cueball: Instead of stone, my method is based on the heating and shaping of copper ore...

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Too late, I realized that my entire archaeology dissertation had been based on a colossal misunderstanding.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
8

3129: Archaeology Research

2025-08-15T19:02:54Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Hit an edit-conflict... *looks* like everything added is in what I put, but wil check momentarily...

{{comic
| number = 3129
| date = August 15, 2025
| title = Archaeology Research
| image = archaeology_research_2x.png
| imagesize = 381x433px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = The academic archaeology establishment is suppressing my breakthroughs because of the disruption it would bring to their prepared-core flake-based toolmaking industry.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created a long time ago and improved recently. Don’t remove this notice too soon.}}

In this comic, [[Cueball]] is presenting an improvement over the stone {{w|arrowhead}}s used by early humans. Stone arrowheads are produced by {{w|Knapping|shaping flint}} by expertly knocking flakes off a suitable raw piece of stone. By contrast, once {{w|Copper extraction#History|the use of metals}} is developed, a far more scalable industry can eventually cast smooth copper arrowheads as depicted in Cueball’s presentation.

Metalworking requires some knowledge of ores and often (depending upon the metal) how to maintain and control high temperatures. The era of mass-produced metal objects heralded the waning of the {{w|Stone Age}} and eventually led to the {{w|Bronze Age}}, by way of the copper-using {{w|Chalcolithic}}, in some parts of the world. Once copper arrowheads were produced, in any given region, the practice of flint arrowheads largely died out.

It seems that Cueball was tasked to look at details of active {{w|Paleolithic}} culture (the "Old Stone Age"), in the era that extended until not quite 10,000 BCE, but has accidentally 'discovered' the developments that actually (from around 6,500 BCE to 5,000 BCE) superceded the practices that he was supposed to be studying.

The caption below the comic tells us that Cueball has based his entire dissertation on the false premonition that an archaeologist's job is to recreate history rather than revealing it. This would be disastrous for Cueball, as dissertations take a large amount of time and effort to complete, and he may have used the effort to effectively reengineer several thousand years of human development, leading away from the original subject.

The title text claims that his 'discoveries' are unappreciated ''not'' because they are useless (in a completely context, they might be an exciting academic pursuit), but because the academic 'establishment' has a strangehold on the arrowhead industry and too many vested interests in flint-knapping to allow the {{w|disruptive innovation}} that this new change to copper weaponry might herald. 

==Transcript==
:[Cueball stands in front of a roll-down projector screen, pointing to it behind him as he looks forward. The screen depicts two arrowheads: On the left is an arrowhead hewn from stone with the subtitle "Stone (traditional)". On the right is a smoother arrowhead with the subtitle "Copper (my method)"]
:Cueball: In the process of analyzing Paleolithic stone toolmaking, I've stumbled on an improved technique for producing points and blades.
:Cueball: Instead of stone, my method is based on the heating and shaping of copper ore...

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Too late, I realized that my entire archaeology dissertation had been based on a colossal misunderstanding.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
8

Talk:3129: Archaeology Research

2025-08-15T18:18:41Z

92.23.2.228:

? [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 14:44, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
: Cueball has misunderstood the purpose of archaeology as being to study things in order to devise improved versions of them. As a result, he has ended up 'inventing' Bronze Age technology. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:13, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
:: And in the title text, he imagines the reason everyone dismisses it is because 'Big Knap' is conspiring to stop him destroying their profits. [[Special:Contributions/82.13.184.33|82.13.184.33]] 15:27, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
: I think the joke is misunderstanding "archaeology research" to mean doing research to extend ancient technology. [[Special:Contributions/2601:18E:C380:4FC0:D4F5:8EE1:51F6:82AF|2601:18E:C380:4FC0:D4F5:8EE1:51F6:82AF]] 15:12, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

It's the kind of research project I can easily imagine my university Classics prof, Trevor Hodge, being on board with. He was very keen on students trying to reproduce ancient tech for themselves, with an eye towards them appreciating the challenges involved and that those people were intelligent and knowledgeable. One of his grad students was an acquaintance of mine, doing a thesis along the lines of "The Two-Bladed Bronze Axe in the Aegean: Tool or Weapon?", and I'd be astonished if the project didn't include constructing one. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 14:47, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Possibly referencing new copper tools in Minecraft? [[Special:Contributions/104.28.205.246|104.28.205.246]] 15:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

My understanding of the joke is that archaeology enthusiasts are obsessed with using traditional tools. Consequently, Cueball revealing there are other methods of manufacturing tools, would disrupt the entire archaeology enthusiasts community and the surrounding industry. In retrospect, I am probably wrong. [[User:Aqua-chestnut|Aqua-chestnut]] ([[User talk:Aqua-chestnut|talk]]) 16:07, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
: Alternatively, the joke might be that the event is taking place in the Paleolithic age, and Cueball's discovery of copper would advance it to the Neolithic, consequently disrupting the Paleolithic economy. In retrospect, this is also wrong because copper first appeared in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_historic_inventions#Neolithic_and_Late_Mesolithic 5000 BC according to Wikipedia] [[User:Aqua-chestnut|Aqua-chestnut]] ([[User talk:Aqua-chestnut|talk]]) 16:18, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

My own take on this is that, as a Practical Archaeologist, he's actually gone to live the life of a stone-age toolmaker (a [https://www.butserancientfarm.co.uk/ thing that some people do]) to rediscover the and test theories about the culture of that era. But, obviously some of the ''real'' stone-agers may have been transitioning into early metal-working and the were at the cusp of the bronze-age. His back-to-basics attempt at recreating their lives has ''accidentally'' strayed into independently re-inventing the stage ''after'' the era that he had intended (or been asked) to study, thus instead [[2949: Network Configuration|reinventing human history]]. - Of course, this would also be rather interesting to know about (perhaps help understand the rather fuzzy changeover that happened in our own real history), but missed the point of the original target of study which was more the nature of the mature stone-implement industry than its decline and replacement by waves of 'new-tech' metal-working. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.238.109|82.132.238.109]] 16:37, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

The reference at the end to industry suggests to me that this is commentary on ways that some industries suppress better technology in order to maintain profits. There’s a well documented case of Colgate suppressing technology that would significantly reduce cavities because it would eat into their own premium toothpaste market. Arguably, the same thing is going on right now with the fossil fuel industry (for example, the resistance to widespread adoption of heat pumps for heating in the United States). It’s silly to think that archaeologists might do so to protect industry interests. Why isn’t it silly that we allow corporations to do the same thing? {{unsigned ip|2a04:4e41:5c01:6100::40d3:2100|17:01, 15 August 2025}}

3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-15T00:26:12Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3128
| date = August 13, 2025
| title = Thread Meeting
| image = thread_meeting_2x.png
| imagesize = 399x425px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Hey, so did you ever finish your video series about Cassie and the caterpillar morph? I loved the first three, but never ... no, sorry, I get it, this isn't the place. Sorry! Sorry.
}}

==Explanation==
Many people have different sets of acquaintances from different parts of their lives, and there's not much overlap. For instance, they have colleagues at work and friends from different hobbies. People encountered in online forums are often very separate, since they may be anywhere in the world and even have quite differently eclectic tastes that they never mention. People find it surprising when there are overlaps in unrelated spheres.

In this comic, NorthLakeKayak and AntaresMike are two participants in an online thread (presumably about boating, or maybe specifically kayaking). NorthLakeKayak recognizes the username AntaresMike as also used by someone he remembers from a different forum about {{w|Animorphs}}, and apparently not a likely username to have [[1963: Namespace Land Rush|been independently claimed]] by someone else.

As children, the most striking example of this type of compartmentalization is that {{tvtropes|TeachersOutOfSchool|we think of teachers as only existing in school}}. They're actually people with real lives (as also referenced in [[2808: Daytime Firefly]]), but we find it extremely weird when we encounter them in some mundane place outside school, like at a restaurant or store. The comic makes the point that encountering the same person in two unrelated online forums is analogous to this.

Very often, the culture/rules of a particular forum will encourage relevence to the forum's ''{{w|raison d'etre}}'', at least in its main threads, and fellow users will get to know all about their on-topic obsessions but usually only see hints of other individuals' alternate pastimes and hobbies. In the title text, NorthLakeKayak starts to go drastically '{{w|off topic}}', presumably within the same conversation supposed to be discussing kayaks, and starts to {{w|Self-censorship|self-censor}} what he says, with apologies to the wider readership. And, perhaps, also to his fellow Animorph-appreciator, who may not appreciate being 'outed'/low-level-'{{w|doxing|doxed}}', even assuming they ''are'' indeed the same person; there's no indication that they have confirmed themselves as being the same AntaresMike, and not just another 'Mike' who opted to choose the exact same name from whatever independent association they choose to have with '{{w|Antares (disambiguation)|Antares}}'.

The title text extends the book by talking about a book series that was written by a person seen outside their usual position (maybe a book convention). And then it gets weird, because what the author is into is not related to the book. Also, this is probably a reference to the Animorphs book by K. A. Applegate.

If the forum has a {{w|Private Messaging}} feature, this off-topic personal discussion could be taken there. Conceivably, the message from the title text ''was'' taken 'off-thread', but the author still finds their own excited tendency to blur the boundaries between subject matter embarassing.

We have not yet been shown any response from the kayak-forum AnteresMike, such that NorthLakeKayak may have been asynchonously conducting his whole side of the conversation without yet having confirmed that AntaresMike, here about the kayaks, was indeed the other AntaresMike, on the Animorph forum. Nor whether they'd be happy to be identified as the same person. Additionally, NorthLakeKayak need not have used the same name on the Animorphs site, and AnteresMike might be reluctant to engage; either because they don't actually know who NorthLakeKayak was, in their other domain of interest, or because they ''do'' know who they were, and any perceived connection from those times is really only a one-way 'friendship'.

==Transcript==
:[A portion of a thread in an online forum is shown. It has one post and a reply to that post.]

:[First post:]
:[Stylized A avatar] '''AntaresMike'''
:[To the right of AntaresMike's username are a grayed-out star, plus sign in a circle, and illegible text in a box.]
:You could also check out this kayak model. I attached a motor to mine, and it's a little but of a kludge but it works great.
:[Below the first post are grayed-out icons of a word balloon, two links from a chain, an arrow, and illegible text.]

:[Reply (indented with a line connecting from AntaresMike's reply to NorthLakeKayak's):]
:[Cueball picture avatar] '''NorthLakeKayak'''
:[To the right of NorthLakeKayak's username are a grayed-out plus sign in a circle, and illegible text in a box.]
:Oh, hey, AntaresMike! I know you!
:Honestly I didn't realize you existed outside of the Animorphs fandom. I haven't seen you in forever!
:Uh. So. How are you doing?
:Kayaking, I guess.
:Anyway yeah that model is great.
:[Below the reply are grayed-out icons of a word balloon, two links from a chain, an arrow, and illegible text.]

:[Bottom caption:]
:Running into someone on a thread who you know from a totally different part of the Internet feels weirdly like running into your teacher in a store.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Animorphs]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

3095: Archaea

2025-08-15T00:22:53Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Makes no sense. Might as well say that they're more intelligent than us just because there are a lot more of them to crowdsource ideas. Or due to being 'a species for longer', so have seen it all before...

{{comic
| number = 3095
| date = May 28, 2025
| title = Archaea
| image = archaea_2x.png
| imagesize = 404x412px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Under the two-domain system, anyone who punches you is technically an Archaean pathogen.
}}

==Explanation==
{{w|Archaea}} is one of the three main lineages (domains) of free-living lifeforms. The other two are {{w|Bacteria}} and {{w|Eukaryote|Eukaryota}}. Organisms within Archaea and Bacteria are {{w|Prokaryote|prokaryotes}}. The bacterial and eukaryotic domains each contain numerous species that cause human disease (are pathogens). However, to date, no species of Archaea has been unequivocally shown to be a human pathogen. Whether such pathogens exist, and if they do, why they are rare and have low impact, are [https://microbiologysociety.org/blog/why-dont-archaea-cause-disease.html matters of debate].

The joke in this comic is that one or more strains of Archaea, being cultivated in a laboratory, overheard a conversation among three human scientists (represented by [[Cueball]], [[Megan]], and [[White Hat]]). Perhaps taking offense at Megan's disparaging comments, the eavesdropping culture resolves to become a human pathogen. The caption reports this as "bad news" for humanity. It may turn out that they always had the ''potential'' to harm humans, but had never tried to (for any number of reasons).

Most of the species of Archaea that were known, at the time that the domain was recognized and for some time thereafter, were {{w|Methanogen|methanogens}}, cells that require anaerobic conditions for life and emit methane as a byproduct, or {{w|Methanotroph|methanotrophs}}, cells that use methane (also anaerobically) as a carbon source ("food"). Methanogens and methanotrophs are common in the guts of humans and other animals, therefore have proximity to human cells and opportunity to infect them — hence (the inappropriate anthropomorphism aside) their indignance at Megan's comment, especially since neither group contains methane "breathers". Archaea are now known from many different environments, including aerobic ones, so do not have the limited metabolic options that one might assume that they do from Megan's statement. Megan calls them "gross methane breathers" and believes they are too weird and incompetent. If the Archaea could actually understand this, no wonder they became offended and would like to prove what they could do to us.

"Archaea has" in the caption is a debatable grammar, as it denotes that a lineage (a branch of a phylogenetic tree) has become pathogenic. "Archaeans have" could have been better, but contrast with statements using "humanity is", compared with "humanity are" for the linguistic and contextual complications involved.

The title text alludes to the hypothesis that the domain Eukaryota arose from within the domain Archaea, allowing for a {{w|two-domain system}} which classifies everything into Bacteria and Archaea, with Eukaryota being included as a sub-division of Archaea. Since humans belong within Eukaryota (i.e. being not Bacteria), by extension they would belong to the Archaea split. A human attacker of another human could therefore be considered both a pathogen and an archaeon. The same would be true of an attack by any other animal, as well as an infection caused by a fungus or protist.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball, Megan, and White Hat are standing in a lab in front of a root-like phylogeny diagram, looking at it. Behind them is a desk with a microscope on it. There is a pile of items behind it and one item in front. From the plate on the microscope where the sample is, there is a star burst and a line going up to the text said by the sample.]
:Cueball: It's weird how, despite being one of the main branches of the tree of life, no Archaea species are known to cause disease in humans.
:Megan: Personally, I think it's because those gross methane breathers are too weird and incompetent to figure out how to hurt us even if they wanted to.
:Archaea sample: ''Hey!''

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Bad news: After overhearing a conversation in our lab, Archaea has finally started harming humans.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Biology]]

3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-14T23:52:10Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3128
| date = August 13, 2025
| title = Thread Meeting
| image = thread_meeting_2x.png
| imagesize = 399x425px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Hey, so did you ever finish your video series about Cassie and the caterpillar morph? I loved the first three, but never ... no, sorry, I get it, this isn't the place. Sorry! Sorry.
}}

==Explanation==
Many people have different sets of acquaintances from different parts of their lives, and there's not much overlap. For instance, they have colleagues at work and friends from different hobbies. People encountered in online forums are often very separate, since they may be anywhere in the world and even have quite differently eclectic tastes that they never mention. People find it surprising when there are overlaps in unrelated spheres.

In this comic, NorthLakeKayak and AntaresMike are two participants in an online thread (presumably about boating, or maybe specifically kayaking). NorthLakeKayak recognizes the username AntaresMike as also used by someone he remembers from a different forum about {{w|Animorphs}}, and apparently not a likely username to have [[1963: Namespace Land Rush|been independently claimed]] by someone else.

As children, the most striking example of this type of compartmentalization is that {{tvtropes|TeachersOutOfSchool|we think of teachers as only existing in school}}. They're actually people with real lives (as also referenced in [[2808: Daytime Firefly]]), but we find it extremely weird when we encounter them in some mundane place outside school, like at a restaurant or store. The comic makes the point that encountering the same person in two unrelated online forums is analogous to this.

Very often, the culture/rules of a particular forum will encourage relevence to the forum's ''{{w|raison d'etre}}'', at least in its main threads, and fellow users will get to know all about their on-topic obsessions but usually only see hints of other individuals' alternate pastimes and hobbies. In the title text, NorthLakeKayak starts to go drastically '{{w|off topic}}', presumably within the same conversation supposed to be discussing kayaks, and starts to {{w|Self-censorship|self-censor}} what he says, with apologies to the wider readership. And, perhaps, also to his fellow Animorph-appreciator, who may not appreciate being 'outed'/low-level-'{{w|doxing|doxed}}', even assuming they ''are'' indeed the same person; there's no indication that they have confirmed themselves as being the same AntaresMike, and not just another 'Mike' who opted to choose the exact same name from whatever independent association they choose to have with '{{w|Antares (disambiguation)|Antares}}'.

The title text extends the book by talking about a book series that was written by a person seen outside their usual position (maybe a book convention). And then it gets weird, because what the author is into is not related to the book. Also, this is probably a reference to the Animorphs book by K. A. Applegate.

If the forum has a {{w|Private Messaging}} feature, this off-topic personal discussion could be taken there. Conceivably, the message from the title text ''was'' taken 'off-thread', but the author still finds their own excited tendency to blur the boundaries between subject matter embarassing.

We have not yet been shown any response from the kayak-forum AnteresMike, such that NorthLakeKayak may have been asynchonously conducting his whole side of the conversation without yet having confirmed that AntaresMike, here about the kayaks, was indeed the other AntaresMike, on the Animorph forum. Nor whether they'd be happy to be identified as the same person. Additionally, NorthLakeKayak need not have used the same name on the Animorphs site, and AnteresMike might be reluctant to engage; either because they don't know actually know who NorthLakeKayak was, in their other domain of interest, or because they ''do'' know who they were, and any perceived connection from those times is really only a one-way 'friendship'.

==Transcript==
:[A portion of a thread in an online forum is shown. It has one post and a reply to that post.]

:[First post:]
:[Stylized A avatar] '''AntaresMike'''
:[To the right of AntaresMike's username are a grayed-out star, plus sign in a circle, and illegible text in a box.]
:You could also check out this kayak model. I attached a motor to mine, and it's a little but of a kludge but it works great.
:[Below the first post are grayed-out icons of a word balloon, two links from a chain, an arrow, and illegible text.]

:[Reply (indented with a line connecting from AntaresMike's reply to NorthLakeKayak's):]
:[Cueball picture avatar] '''NorthLakeKayak'''
:[To the right of NorthLakeKayak's username are a grayed-out plus sign in a circle, and illegible text in a box.]
:Oh, hey, AntaresMike! I know you!
:Honestly I didn't realize you existed outside of the Animorphs fandom. I haven't seen you in forever!
:Uh. So. How are you doing?
:Kayaking, I guess.
:Anyway yeah that model is great.
:[Below the reply are grayed-out icons of a word balloon, two links from a chain, an arrow, and illegible text.]

:[Bottom caption:]
:Running into someone on a thread who you know from a totally different part of the Internet feels weirdly like running into your teacher in a store.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Animorphs]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-14T23:50:26Z

92.23.2.228: Put new "title text" info immediately after the existing "title text" info. Corrected grammar/spelling. (As best I understand the intent, didn't understand the book-convention aspect at all; a shorter paragraph, but more rambling!) Added to the PMing bit.

{{comic
| number = 3128
| date = August 13, 2025
| title = Thread Meeting
| image = thread_meeting_2x.png
| imagesize = 399x425px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Hey, so did you ever finish your video series about Cassie and the caterpillar morph? I loved the first three, but never ... no, sorry, I get it, this isn't the place. Sorry! Sorry.
}}

==Explanation==
Many people have different sets of acquaintances from different parts of their lives, and there's not much overlap. For instance, they have colleagues at work and friends from different hobbies. People encountered in online forums are often very separate, since they may be anywhere in the world and even have quite differently eclectic tastes that they never mention. People find it surprising when there are overlaps in unrelated spheres.

In this comic, NorthLakeKayak and AntaresMike are two participants in an online thread (presumably about boating, or maybe specifically kayaking). NorthLakeKayak recognizes the username AntaresMike as also used by someone he remembers from a different forum about {{w|Animorphs}}, and apparently not a likely username to have [[1963: Namespace Land Rush|been independently claimed]] by someone else.

As children, the most striking example of this type of compartmentalization is that {{tvtropes|TeachersOutOfSchool|we think of teachers as only existing in school}}. They're actually people with real lives (as also referenced in [[2808: Daytime Firefly]]), but we find it extremely weird when we encounter them in some mundane place outside school, like at a restaurant or store. The comic makes the point that encountering the same person in two unrelated online forums is analogous to this.

Very often, the culture/rules of a particular forum will encourage relevence to the forum's ''{{w|raison d'etre}}'', at least in its main threads, and fellow users will get to know all about their on-topic obsessions but usually only see hints of other individuals' alternate pastimes and hobbies. In the title text, NorthLakeKayak starts to go drastically '{{w|off topic}}', presumably within the same conversation supposed to be discussing kayaks, and starts to {{w|Self-censorship|self-censor}} what he says, with apologies to the wider readership. And, perhaps, also to his fellow Animorph-appreciator, who may not appreciate being 'outed'/low-level-'{{w|doxing|doxed}}', even assuming they ''are'' indeed the same person; there's no indication that they have confirmed themselves as being the same AntaresMike, and not just another 'Mike' who opted to choose the exact same name from whatever independent association they choose to have with '{{w|Antares (disambiguation)|Antares}}'.

The title text extends the book by talking about a book series that was written by a person seen outside their usual position (maybe a book convention). And then it gets weird, because what the author is into is not related to the book. Also, this is probably a reference to the Animorphs book by K. A. Applegate.

If the forum has a {{w|Private Messaging}} feature, this off-topic personal discussion could be taken there. Conceivably, the message from the title text ''was'' taken 'off-thread', but the author still finds their own excited tendency to blur the boundaries between subject matter embarassing.

We have not yet been shown any response from the kayak-forum AnteresMike, such that NorthLakeKayak may have been asynchonously conducting his whole side of the conversation without yet having confirmed that AntaresMike, here about the kayaks, was indeed the other AntaresMike, on the Animorph forum. Nor whether they'd be happy to be identified as the same person. Additionally, NorthLakeKayak need not have used the same name on the Animorphs site, and AnteresMike might be reluctant to engage; either because they don't know actualy who NorthLakeKayak was, in their other domain, or because they ''do'' know who they were, and any perceived connection from those times is really only a one-way 'friendship'.

==Transcript==
:[A portion of a thread in an online forum is shown. It has one post and a reply to that post.]

:[First post:]
:[Stylized A avatar] '''AntaresMike'''
:[To the right of AntaresMike's username are a grayed-out star, plus sign in a circle, and illegible text in a box.]
:You could also check out this kayak model. I attached a motor to mine, and it's a little but of a kludge but it works great.
:[Below the first post are grayed-out icons of a word balloon, two links from a chain, an arrow, and illegible text.]

:[Reply (indented with a line connecting from AntaresMike's reply to NorthLakeKayak's):]
:[Cueball picture avatar] '''NorthLakeKayak'''
:[To the right of NorthLakeKayak's username are a grayed-out plus sign in a circle, and illegible text in a box.]
:Oh, hey, AntaresMike! I know you!
:Honestly I didn't realize you existed outside of the Animorphs fandom. I haven't seen you in forever!
:Uh. So. How are you doing?
:Kayaking, I guess.
:Anyway yeah that model is great.
:[Below the reply are grayed-out icons of a word balloon, two links from a chain, an arrow, and illegible text.]

:[Bottom caption:]
:Running into someone on a thread who you know from a totally different part of the Internet feels weirdly like running into your teacher in a store.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Animorphs]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

3028: D&D Roll

2025-08-14T20:09:28Z

92.23.2.228: Undo revision 384178 by Revolutionary girl euclid (talk) No. No that isn't how it was, or is.

{{comic
| number = 3028
| date = December 23, 2024
| title = D&D Roll
| image = dnd_roll_2x.png
| imagesize = 312x313px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Under some circumstances, if you throw a D8 and then a D12 at an enemy, thanks to the D8's greater pointiness you actually have to roll a D12 and D8 respectively to determine damage.
}}

==Explanation==
This comic is a scene from a tabletop roleplaying game, probably {{w|Dungeons & Dragons}}. In [[3015: D&D Combinatorics]], the same people, [[Cueball]], [[Megan]], [[Ponytail]], [[White Hat]] and [[Knit Cap]], are seated playing D&D in the same seats, where Cueball seems to represent [[Randall]].

Here Cueball announces "I roll D20... 18," referring to rolling a 20-sided die and getting the relatively high score of 18, presumably while in a fight with a {{w|kobold (Dungeons & Dragons)|kobold}} (a small reptilian humanoid creature in D&D.) The {{w|gamemaster|Dungeon Master}} (DM, or game master), Ponytail, responds that the kobold is unaffected, but suggests using a sword instead, pointing out the absurdity of trying to defeat an enemy by rolling dice at them. (Ponytail was also the dungeon master in the previous D&D comic).

Cueball made the mistake of assuming that Ponytail would understand which of his weapons or other {{w|melee}} attacks he intended to use, but she had no way of knowing that, so she decided to gently tease him about the omission. This is a common mistake, and being gently made fun of is a common result. The player will usually be allowed to state the specific attack intended and roll again.{{acn}} It could also have to do with the idea that some people forget D&D is a roleplaying game and just roll dice without explaining, for example, ''how'' they charm the shopkeeper.

However, the possibility exists that the players' characters have actual dice, such as those which were role-played as being produced in [[244: Tabletop Roleplaying]]. The title text suggests that if you literally threw dice as weapons, an eight-sided die (D8) would do more damage than a twelve-sided die (D12) because of its {{w|Dice#Common variations|pointier shape}}, so ironically, you might need to roll the D12 to determine the D8's damage and vice versa, in "some circumstances." As per the Background below, those circumstances are considerably slight. The effectiveness of the [[2626: d65536|d65536]] in this context has yet to be determined.

===Background===
When attacking an enemy in D&D, regardless of the weapon used, the attack starts with a d20 roll to see if it lands a solid hit. If a sufficiently high (or in the earliest editions, sufficiently low) number is rolled, the attack hits, and then further dice (chosen depending on the weapon's form and any magic it might possess) are rolled to determine damage. Before any dice can be rolled at all, however, the player must declare which enemy they are attacking and what with. This is trivial if the attacking character always uses the same weapon and is facing a single enemy, but becomes an important question if the fight is more complex. Consider a case where there are two kobolds present, one wearing plate armor while the other has only a loincloth on (the armor requiring a better d20 roll to defeat), and the player carries both a greatsword (dealing heavy general damage) and the magical "Icepick of Instant Kobold Death" (normally ignored but in this case very useful) and also has magic item that can shoot a destructive [https://5e.d20srd.org/srd/spells/scorchingRay.htm ''Scorching Ray'']. There are also certain weapons that deal subpar damage on a typical attack, but trigger a powerful extra effect on a very good roll such as 18, making it even more important to specify which weapon one is using before making the roll. A cheating player might roll first, and then decide which weapon they were using and on which target. This could also be used to avoid wasting a weapon (or [[3015: D&D Combinatorics|particular ammunition]]) with limited uses.

By D&D 5 rules, a stone hurled from a sling does [https://5e.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#simpleWeapons 1d4 bludgeoning damage]. A sling bullet typically weighs [https://5e.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/equipment.htm#tableAdventuringGear 3/40 pound (1.2 oz, 35 g)], a plausible weight for a normal-sized die made of a moderately dense material. Presumably, an object of similar weight that's thrown "by hand" rather than with a sling would do less damage, though a heavier object might do similar damage (albeit with less range). The D&D 3.5 spell [https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicStone.htm ''Magic Stone''] enhances ordinary small stones so they do 1d6+1 damage when hurled, or 2d6+2 when striking undead creatures. So depending on the setup, a D&D character throwing a die at an enemy could theoretically cause considerable harm, but would normally be much better served with an intentionally crafted weapon.

Alternately, DMs may take umbrage at a player's presumption to roll dice for actions before being asked to, and this could be interpreted as a chiding. Sometimes rolls are not necessary in cases where success is automatic (the kobold is effectively helpless) or impossible (the kobold is magically immune to physical attacks), although it should be the DM's own choice whether to still test for a meaningful critical [https://rpgmuseum.fandom.com/wiki/Critical_failure failure] or [https://rpgmuseum.fandom.com/wiki/Critical_hit success], despite it being an apparently foregone conclusion of either kind. There are also other circumstances where the required dice is(/are) different ''in this instance'' from that which the player may assume. From a practical perspective, if the performed rolling of the dice is not required (or correctly composed) for the DM's purposes, they can choose to ignore it and/or ask for some other roll(s) to be made. It may then be the player that might be most upset by having rolled a 'good' roll that has been 'wasted', on the principle that they would have liked it to have it happen later, when it actually mattered, despite this being statistically irrelevant, assuming that the DM doesn't keep any such details mysteriously hidden.

==Transcript==
:[Cueball, Megan, Ponytail, White Hat, and Knit Cap are sitting around a table in a tabletop gaming session. Both Cueball and Knit Cap are sitting in office chairs at the ends of the table, with Cueball leaning forward and holding his hand above the table and Knit Cap leaning back on her arm. Behind the table, Megan sits to the left of Ponytail and White Hat to the right. They are both looking at Ponytail, while Ponytail is looking at Cueball. Objects such as dice, miniatures, a map, and papers are on the table.]
:Cueball: I roll D20... 18.
:Ponytail: The kobold is unaffected.
:Ponytail: Honestly, I don't know why you thought dice would help. You should probably try a sword or something instead.

==Trivia==
{{incomplete|The trivia section is incomplete. Add the missing info from '''[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Talk:3015:_D%26D_Combinatorics#help this talk page section].''' See also the [[3015: D&D Combinatorics#Trivia|trivia section of the comic 3015: D&D Combinatorics]].}}

When this comic was first released, its title was mistakenly displayed as "xkcd: D Roll" instead of "xkcd: D&D Roll." This was likely due to a technical error in how the ampersand character (“&”) was processed by the system that generated the title. It seems the software may have misinterpreted "&D" as the beginning of an HTML character entity, even though "&D" is not a valid one.

Whatever the precise problem, a similar error also [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests#RSS_Feed_Broken|broke the RSS feed]] (just of this wiki or also xkcd's?), an issue that can only be fixed by [[User:Jeff]], who has been inactive since July 2023.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Knit Cap]]
[[Category:Dungeons & Dragons]]

3015: D&D Combinatorics

2025-08-14T20:02:03Z

92.23.2.228: Undo revision 384177 by Unexplainedthing (talk) Several of these 'updated facts' are just plain wrong, and the rest seem to misunderstand things enough to not be properly right.

{{comic
| number = 3015
| date = November 22, 2024
| title = D&D Combinatorics
| image = dnd_combinatorics_2x.png
| imagesize = 328x446px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Look, you can't complain about this after giving us so many scenarios involving N locked chests and M unlabeled keys.
}}

==Explanation==

{{w|Dungeons and Dragons}} (D&D) is a {{w|tabletop role-playing game}} that usually has a "Dungeon Master" (narrator) that takes a team of players through scenarios where they attack monsters and go on quests.

Often, there will be semi-random events: e.g., when attacking a monster, often a player will roll a die and deal damage based on the result. D&D uses a variety of dice, from regular d6 (6-sided, cubic dice) to other {{w|Dice#Common_variations|polyhedral dice}}, with the number of faces denoted by XdY (e.g., 3d10 is a rolling of 3 10-sided dice, which each have numbers from 1 to 10 on it). Common sets include: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, and occasionally d100 (typically not, however, the [[2626:_d65536|d65536]]).{{cn}}

With these, you can simulate events with a wide variety of denominators. In this case, Cueball gives a {{w|combinatorics|combinatorial}} problem:

* There are 10 arrows.
* 5 arrows are cursed.
* You randomly take two.
* What are the odds that neither of them are cursed?

Calculating using {{w|binomial coefficients}}, there are "10 choose 2" (45) ways to choose two arrows, of which there are "5 choose 2" (10) ways to choose 2 arrows that are non-cursed. As a result, the odds of taking all non-cursed arrows is 10/45, which simplifies to 2/9.

To see this in a different way, the probability of choosing one non-cursed arrow is 5/10, which then must be multiplied by the probability of choosing the second non-cursed arrow, which is now 4/9, giving 20/90 or 2/9, the same result as before.

The Dungeon Master (DM) in this case [[356: Nerd Sniping|has to]] map that probability into rolling multiple dice, whose sums are also not evenly distributed: i.e. if rolling 3d6 (3 six-sided dice) and a d4 (1 four-sided die), the sums can range from 4 to 22. It's pretty hard to do this in one's head, but it does happen that the odds of rolling 16 or more with this combination is 2/9, matching the probability that we want to simulate. Here's a table of all the 6*6*6*4=864 possible outcomes -

{| class="wikitable"
|+ All possible combinations of rolls for 3d6 + 1d4
|-
!Total!!4!!5!!6!!7!!8!!9!!10!!11!!12!!13!!14!!15!!16!!17!!18!!19!!20!!21!!22
|-
|Ways to roll it||1||4||10||20||34||52||71||88||100||104||100||88
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''71'' '''
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''52'' '''
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''34'' '''
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''20'' '''
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''10'' '''
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''4'' '''
| style="background:#ffffcc;" | ''' ''1'' '''
|}

71+52+34+20+10+4+1 = 192

192/864 = 2/9, which matches the desired probability from earlier. The table of outcomes can either be bruteforced with a program, or can be derived using generating functions.

The caption elaborates that the DM has a degree in the relevant field, and is unable to resist applying this to the D&D game when the opportunity arises - opportunities that Cueball eagerly provides for this very reason.

There are several much easier ways of implementing this operation, without coming up with a more complex solution:
#Do not even attempt to abstract the chances with dice-rolls. Literally present 10 similar-looking arrows, or other objects that are taken to represent arrows (face-down playing cards, for example), where the assigned information of whether each one is cursed initially hidden away from Cueball, and then just let Cueball pick any two. This approach would more likely be used if the D&D gameplay were {{w|Live action role-playing game|live-action}} as opposed to {{w|Tabletop role-playing game|tabletop}} (though is still possible in tabletop).
#Even just with D&D dice, the DM could ask Cueball to roll a 1d10 for the first arrow, and then again for the second, re-rolling the second so long as Cueball gets the same number as before (which emulates the same sort of process, but with a non-zero chance of having to make and reject an arbitrary number of extra dice-rolls). One could specify that 1-5 represents the cursed arrows and 6-10 represents the non-cursed arrows, following the convention that lower rolls are bad in D&D.
#Similarly, the player could be asked to roll a d20, with a score of 15 or 16 requiring a re-roll and 17–20 being successful choices. This would give a 4/18 chance, i.e., 2/9 for a successful roll on the first (and any subsequent) rolls. As with option 2, there would be a 1/10 chance of having to make and reject at least one extra dice-roll.
#If understanding the actual odds, but wishing to keep the dice in use simple, a 2/9 probability can also be found by saying Cueball would succeed when 2D6 produces a 9, 10, or 12 (4/36, 3/36, and 1/36 probability, respectively, giving 8/36, i.e., 2/9).
#Another method would be to roll 1d6 twice, using the first as a base number and the second as a control die where 1-2 = +0, 3-4 = +6 and 5-6 = +12 for a linear spread of 1-18. In this case a roll of 3, 4, 5, or 6 on the first roll coupled with a 5 or 6 on the second roll would indicate the top four of the eighteen possibilities, 4/18, or 2/9.
#Or to roll 2d6 and ''multiply'', rather than add, the results. A successful roll is 20 or more.
#Or to take the maximum of 1d6 and 1d12. Denoting 4 or lower as a successful roll, the method yields a probability of 16/72 = 2/9.
#Alternatively, approximate the odds by using a d100 (or equivalent roll of two D10s) and seeking an 78 or higher (i.e. the range of 78-99, assuming this roll can produce a zero/double-zero roll, instead of a 'natural 100' for which the range would have to start at 79), which gives a 22% chance, which may be sufficiently acceptable as it is substantially similar to 2/9's effective odds of 22.222%. If you re-roll either the 0 or 100 (depending on whether you use 78 or 79 as the cutoff), you would bring the probability exactly to 22/99 or 2/9.

The first two options also instantly reveal cases of whether ''two'' cursed arrows are nominally chosen (an outcome that is at identical odds to the opposite possibility of neither being so), should this be useful roleplaying information in addition to the basic fact of ''failing'' to avoid at least one of them. The option suggested in the comic could also be used to indicate this if the dice add up to 10 or lower, the fourth one if (for example) the complementary results of 2, 4 or 5 are rolled, and the final one in the event that the 'percentage' given is 0-21 (or 1-22).

One could argue that the above solutions do not have the "polished" D&D feel of rolling a certain number of dice, adding them up, and seeing if the result is greater than or equal to an entirely correct required total. This is a commonly used mechanic for difficulty checks, hit calculations, and other such chance-based events in D&D. The DM may feel that this dice format is a requirement, but this approach is far too clunky for most DMs to be practical. It may be inferred that as the DM's mind tends towards more combinatorial solutions, she is either unable or unwilling to consider more straightforward and less time-consuming solutions to this cursed arrow problem.

The title text claims that Randall only started doing this to the DM after she herself insisted on forcing another combinatorial puzzle on the players several times, involving a bunch of locked treasure chests and a multitude of keys to unlock them with. This might be a reference to an M-of-N encryption system [https://thalesdocs.com/gphsm/luna/6.3/docs/usb/Content/overview/security_features/mofn_about.htm] [https://blog.apnic.net/2021/05/28/what-is-m-of-n-in-public-private-key-signing/], where a system has ''n'' valid passwords (instead of just one) but requires ''m'' of those passwords to be given before it will open; it is assumed m is greater than 1 but less than n. While this is easy enough to implement in a computer system, it would be extremely cumbersome to build for a physical lock with keys, and spreading the mechanism across multiple separate treasure chests would be impossible without literal magic (luckily, magic is in plentiful supply in a typical Dungeons and Dragons game).{{cn}}

==Transcript==
:[Cueball, Megan, Ponytail, White Hat, and Knit Cap are sitting around a table on office chairs. The first and last at either end and the other on the same side facing outwards. Everyone is looking at Cueball who is holding a finger up in front of him while speaking. Ponytail is facepalming while replying. The table is covered in sheets of paper and assorted dice.]
:Cueball: I grab 2 of the 10 arrows without looking and fire them, hoping I didn't grab one of the 5 cursed ones. Did I?
:Ponytail: Sigh. Umm. Okay.
:Ponytail: Roll... Uh... Hang on...
:Ponytail: Roll 3d6 and a d4. You need... 16 or better to avoid the cursed arrows.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I got '''''way''''' more annoying to play D&D with once I learned that our DM has a combinatorics degree and can't resist puzzles.

==Trivia==
{{incomplete|The trivia section is incomplete. Add the missing info from '''[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Talk:3015:_D%26D_Combinatorics#help this talk page section].''' See also [[3028:_D&D_Roll#Trivia|the trivia section of comic 3028: D&D Roll]].}}When this comic was originally released, the official title of this page was "xkcd: D Combinatorics", instead of "xkcd: D&D Combinatorics", due to an apparent error on Randall's end. The reason for this is thought to be caused by literal interpretation of the '''''&D''''' as {{w|List of XML and HTML character entity references|character entity}} by the code that created it, though it does not match any normally valid code. Of the standard list, only the codes for "°" and "÷" ''start'' with a (lowercase) "d" and do not ''always'' require a semi-colon at their end, though apparently even they still do so here. No entity name includes whitespace, so "&D ..." must theoretically only be sanitised out by a far too general converter of possible codes to plaintext.

Whatever the precise problem, the ampersand also presumably [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests#RSS_Feed_Broken|broke the RSS feed]], an issue that is said to be only fixable by [[User:Jeff]], who has been inactive for over a year now. {{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring White Hat]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Knit Cap]]
[[Category:Dungeons & Dragons]]
[[Category:Math]]
[[Category:Comics edited after their publication]]

2623: Goofs

2025-08-14T19:59:02Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Correcting punctuation. (But note that there are *five* of these, in this article... I wouldn't be surprised if someone came along and snipped out one or two or three or four. (Or five?)

{{comic
| number = 2623
| date = May 23, 2022
| title = Goofs
| image = goofs.png
| titletext = The film is set in 2018, but when Commander Bremberly chases the hologram through Times Square, there's a billboard for Avengers: Age of Ultron. Depending on the date, that billboard would have been advertising either Infinity War or this movie.
}}

==Explanation==
IMDb is the {{w|Internet Movie Database}}, a website that contains detailed, user-contributed information about movies and TV shows. One of the sections in many entries is "[[#Goofs|Goofs]]". This may list bloopers, inconsistencies, implausible actions, anachronisms, etc. in the movie. While some people find enjoyment in searching for these errors, to others, the entries listed can often be overly pedantic and missing the point{{Citation needed}} (a problem that can often afflict sites that rely on users to provide their content [Hey! Who are you calling a pedant?]). The comic makes fun of this with several goofs that simply point out differences between something in the movie and reality; but since the movie is fiction (in this case, a science fiction film that includes a space detective, a cybernetic dog, blimp drones, and a hologram kissing scene), one can say that these "goofs" might simply be more differences between the movie world and our own.

In the first goof, a named street doesn't actually exist in the city in which the movie is set. Unless the address is important to the plot (Manhattan has a number of streets with well-known characters - for example, the main theatre district is on Broadway, Fifth Avenue is a major shopping district, and Wall Street is known for large financial institutions), screenwriters can and do make up street names. It might actually be expedient to 'rename' a setting in many cases, to avoid issues such as fans showing up at said street and harassing the residents.

In the second example, they point out that there's no harpoon store at the location where the characters obtain a harpoon in the movie, and the nearest actual harpoon store doesn't have a display window. Movies take liberties with details like this for plot expediency, and is not considered a goof. Manhattan does not appear to have ''any'' notable harpoon stores,{{Citation needed}} with or without the kind of frontage described.

In the third example, the background of a scene is of an apartment in Downtown Vancouver (a cheap and popular filming location that frequently stands in for other cities). The goof points out that the real-life apartment does not belong to the character who supposedly lives in it. Fictional movie characters do not exist in reality,{{Citation needed}} and many scenes are set in fictional locations that are completely separate from their real-life filming locations. As such, this is only a "goof" if the scene is taken entirely literally.

It is also ironic that the person that wrote these "goofs" is pointing out the non-existence of a particular street or store, but ignores the most striking facts that space detectives, cybernetic dogs, and blimp drones don't exist in reality,{{Citation needed}} so their presence constitutes a much bigger goof.

The title text describes an actual anachronism. The film is set in 2018, but there's a billboard for the movie ''{{w|Avengers: Age of Ultron}}'', which came out in 2015, while the next Avengers film, ''{{w|Avengers: Infinity War}}'', came out in 2018. Assuming the movie was filmed before 2018, the filmmakers wouldn't have known what films would be current at the time it would be released, and certainly not the artwork they'd be using to promote them. They could have chosen to set it during the time of initial filming, but again, unless the specific date is significant to the plot, it's common to set (or rather, assume) a film takes place about the same time it's released. Generic advertisements for fictional (or {{w|Last Action Hero|parody}}) films might be put over egregiously obvious existing material, physically or in post-production editing, as might references to major brands – perhaps replaced by those agreed with from {{w|product placement}} partners.

The title text also mentions the possibility of a self-reference – the billboard could be for this film itself since it's being released at the same time it's set. This assertion that {{w|Blazing Saddles|in-universe self-reference}} is plausible for a movie production is likely another example of the goof's writer failing to understand the basic "premise of fiction". Most movies do not exist within the fictional world they portray,{{Citation needed}} and many audiences would find self-reference to be a far greater obstacle to suspending disbelief than an ad for the wrong Avengers movie.

==Transcript==
:[An excerpt from an Internet Movie Database web page showing a list of goofs from a film. Each item has some small illegible text below it, which on the real IMDb would say something like "7 of 72 found this interesting | Share this". The first and third items have a faint yellow-tinted background. The third item is only partially visible at the bottom of the "screen".]
:[Heading:]
:<big> Goofs (78) </big>
:[List:]
:The space detective's office is on Chestnut Ave, but Lower Manhattan has no street by that name. Agent Glennifer pursues the cybernetic dog onto what is clearly Ludlow Street.
:The agents destroy the blimp drones in Union Square with harpoons from a store display rack. The nearest harpoon store is several blocks away and has no outdoor displays.
:The apartment in the background of the hologram kissing scene actually exists in downtown Vancouver. We called the owners, who confirmed they had no residents named [...]

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Sometimes the IMDB "Goofs" section really seems to struggle with the whole premise of fiction.

==Goofs==
* There is no entry for a film featuring an agent called Glennifer or a commander named Bremberly on IMDb. Randall is clearly failing to do basic research.
* On the real IMDb, each item in the Goofs section would be listed under a category such as "Errors in geography" (which might apply to the three goofs listed in the main cartoon) or "Anachronisms" (which might apply to the goof in the title text). However, no such category is displayed here.
* On real Goofs pages, the information below each entry includes a public feedback listing (X of Y found this interesting) and a link entitled "Share this". In the comic, unintelligible squiggles are included in their place.
* On a real IMDb page, all of the text would be in the Verdana, Arial or sans-serif fonts, not Randall's handwriting. While in 2022 there were two notable fonts based on Randall's handwriting, no known font contained the glyph variants depicted in the comic.
* The comic features two entries with a yellow background, which is impossible. On IMDb, entries alternate between having off-white and gray backgrounds and only turn yellow when the mouse hovers over them.
* On IMDb, the number of goofs is located in a navigation box between the header and the goofs list. In the comic, the number is placed in the header, and there is no navigation box at all.
* A similar Goofs section exists in the [[explain xkcd]] wiki's page for this comic, [[2623: Goofs]], but it fails even more evidently to recreate the look of IMDb's Goofs page. Additionally, the last entry is recursive, which is clearly unprofessional.
* The penultimate entry is also recursive leading to a form of pairwise recursion and formal structure subject to analysis not typically associated with goofs sections in their generalized forms.{{Citation needed}}


{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Fiction]]
[[Category:Harpoons]]

3127: Where Babies Come From

2025-08-13T22:01:34Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ For anyone needing more on the where-and-why it might be 'zero on up' at times.

{{comic
| number = 3127
| date = August 11, 2025
| title = Where Babies Come From
| image = where_babies_come_from_2x.png
| imagesize = 652x362px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Historians: Contemporaneous documentation of the initial events is often sparse, and in fact people often get testy and uncooperative when we urge better documentation for the historical record.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by a mommy and daddy who love each other very much.

* '''The article could be a bit more clinical and direct.''' Right now, it's low on information, and high on vague implication, aiming for wit.}}

Children are often curious, and ask a lot of questions about the world around them. "Where do babies come from?" is one such question that tends to come up at some point, and is notable as one that many adults are uncomfortable giving correct answers to, because of the common reluctance to discuss sex-related matters with youngsters. While children are sometimes told that there's a baby inside a pregnant woman's tummy, the issues of how the baby got in there, or how it's supposed to get out, are often dodged. There are a variety of common myths about where babies come from, as told to children, such as "brought by a stork", "found in a cabbage patch", or [https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1987/04/18 "built from a kit"]. This comic presents a variety of answers to that question, supposedly from the point of view of specialists in several different areas of science, some of which are incorrect, others of which are allusions to the process of conception or childbirth expressed in the vocabulary of the specialist's field.

They might be deliberately misleading the questioner by using very euphemistic terms to avoid personal embarrassment, deliberately over-'simplifying' the explanation as a {{w|Lie-to-children|stepping stone}} to the eventual more specific truth, or else they are themselves ignorant/misled about the process. In each case, however, their abstraction of the process is described in terms that are actually relatively technical ones from their own field, to the presumed audience, showing that they are not necessarily able to find the right level of explanation, as well as not having used a less obtuse reframing of the topic much closer to that of actual reproductive biology.

;Geneticist: An admixture event refers to new genes being introduced into a population (for example, intermarriage adding genes for blue eyes into a population that previously lacked them). These gene movements are typically measurable on the order of thousand year or more timescales, and therefores are commonly dated to thousands or even millions of years ago. KYA = "one thousand years ago" and 0.001 KYA = 1 year, [[2205: Types of Approximation|approximately]] the duration of most human pregnancies. The comic uses this term to describe the gene mixing of two people having a child. The joke is in the use of such large scale terms to describe the creation of one child, and how the technical language being used hides the answer, especially from a child.

;Astronomer: Ejections of matter from parent bodies are common astronomical events, at scales ranging from comets to black holes. The process of giving birth is compared to a "low-impulse" ejection, such as the casting off of rocks and dust from a rotating asteroid. Such a comparison, while it may make sense in cosmology, is unlikely to find favor with any woman who is, or has ever been, in labor.
:Alternatively, the "low-impulse ejection" could refer to ejaculation, not the act of giving birth. The former would have a considerably higher impulse than the latter but it's still very low on a cosmic scale and would still qualify as "low-impulse".

;Software Engineer: An {{w|off-by-one error}} (aside from [[2248: New Year's Eve|being a difficult theme to build a party around]]) is a common programming mistake where a value ends up off by one. This is most frequently the result of confusion about whether lists of items are indexed {{w|Zero-based numbering|starting at position 'zero'}} or with the first of them at the more language-like position 'one'. A birth could also be described as a "population" metric suddenly [[605: Extrapolating|increasing by one]]; or, alternatively, a baby could cause a previously accurate static population metric to become off-by-one from the new correct total. This could also be referring to an unplanned pregnancy, which would lead the local population to be one higher than the parent(s) may have calculated.

;Geologist: The baby is said to have been created by the process of differential erosion, in which softer rocks are eroded more quickly, leaving harder rocks behind. Arguably, a geologist who was making a serious attempt to compare geological and biological processes would recognize that the growth of a fetus has much more in common with accretionary, rather than erosional, mechanisms. Granting that the geologist depicted is witty and not clueless, this explanation is the most intentionally farcical, the most {{w|List_of_Calvin_and_Hobbes_characters#Mom_and_Dad|Calvin's Dad}}, of the five. The suggestion that everything is removed except for the desired result is fairly often used to describe how sculptors work, and similar craftspeople such as woodcarvers.

;Meteorologist: Turbulent mixing of air masses ("turbulence") has been experienced by just about everyone who has ever been in an airborne aircraft. Turbulence can occur at all levels of the atmosphere from the ground up, and is frequently accompanied by clouds and precipitation, although the moisture alluded to here is likely that of bodily fluids and the turbulence being more about a tangible physicality between people. It is a pungent metaphor for coitus.

;Historians (title text): Instead of proffering an explanation for "where babies come from", the historians (plural) lodge a complaint about the difficulties they have encountered in obtaining the data needed to substantiate the babies' provenance. The plaint is a common preamble and disclaimer in formal history publications. Rather than answer the question in the general, they appear to be trying to answer it for each individual baby by questioning those thought to be responsible. The historians express surprise and indignation that their efforts to obtain "better documentation" of the "initial events" (the mating behavior) leading to baby formation are seen as prurient and voyeuristic, and are met with resistance.

"How is babby formed?" was a [https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/how-is-babby-formed notorious meme] from the early 2000s.

==Transcript==
:[Hairy, Ponytail, Hairbun, Cueball and Megan are standing below a question given at the top of the comic. Each of the five gives their answer to the question. Below each character is a label with their respective occupation.]
:Various experts answer the question “Where do babies come from?”

:Geneticist
:Hairy: Recent admixture event, roughly 0.001 Kya.

:Astronomer
:Ponytail: Low-impulse ejection from a parent body.

:Software engineer
:Hairbun: Off-by-one error in the population calculations.

:Geologist
:Cueball: The area was originally a uniform plane, but the non-baby parts eroded at higher rates.

:Meteorologist
:Megan: Moist ground-level turbulent mixing.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics with babies]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Sex]]

Talk:3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-13T21:50:38Z

92.23.2.228:

Can't believe this still hasn't been explained, it's been a whole {{#expr: trunc(({{#time: U|{{CURRENTTIMESTAMP}}}} - 1755097380 )/60)}} minutes since this released. How am I supposed to enjoy it now? {{unsigned ip|2a01:5a8:479:b635:b4cd:4b3e:238a:dfc|16:08, 13 August 2025}}
:Oh, hey 2a01:5a8:479:b635:b4cd:4b3e:238a:dfc, I know you!
:Honestly I didn't realise you existed outside the Alien Vs. Predator Slash Fiction fandom. I haven't seen you since you described an even more squicky use of the plasmacaster than usual. [[Special:Contributions/82.132.187.138|82.132.187.138]] 16:40, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
::omg hiii [[Special:Contributions/82.132.187.138|82.132.187.138]]! I think we've met in some forum where we pitted our web series together. I'm so proud of the Xronology (my series) for coming out on top, but your "Bottom Simulator 1993" wasn't too bad either! [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 16:44, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

This is the earliest I remember a comic being released in a looong time stevethenoob 19:31, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

One solution to this is to set up a personal website and link to it in your bio, while linking to all of your accounts from there. This way, people can discover your other interests via that personal website. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 17:24, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
:Given that I never use any (exactly-the-)same username twice, anywhere, this sounds like the absolutely last thing that I'd do. (I'm happy that you don't know whether I'm any (or all!) of @jimmy_wales, @realdonaldtrump, @KensingtonRoyal, @zuck, @FoxNews, @jairmessiasbolsonaro, @randallmonroe or ''anyone''...)
:In fact, I haven't got a 'bio' anywhere, except my CV/Resumé (which only lists my real-name email address that I don't use for anything but that) and what little I can get away with on any corporate system. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 20:20, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
::That's a good way to do it. What's linked can never be fully un-linked on the internet! [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 20:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
:::It helps that I got any possible internet self-promotion out of my system well before there was any 'social media' (and mostly before there was even 'the web') when it was all a far more pseudonimous text-only environment.
:::What doesn't help is that I also rejected things like LinkedIn as 'fads', like MySpace or Facebook (it'll never catch on!), to possibly tangible professional detriment. But I've muddled along. ;) (And it might even have helped not to have any embarassing skeletons in my closet, in anything easily googlable.)
:::But, hey let millenials be millenials and Zs be Zs, as well as the Gen Xs/Boomers that didn't come in ''well'' past the Eternal September. I'm sure they also mostly muddle through. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 21:50, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I call these "internet loops"! Could also be someone randomly knowing someone else I also know or other roundabout way to rediscover someone. It happened a bunch of time with a specific Minecraft content creator's community for me, where someone found my comment on an Avatar fan video, I spotted someone else on a maths video with very few views, other people there liked the same music and someone joined a Pokémon-themed Discord who has one of the Minecraft community members as shared friend. And some people there already knew an Undertale creation of the owner. [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 20:35, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-13T21:30:50Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Considered "...<something something> more than if the two interests are similar facets of a wider interest", but can't word it succinctly. (Or, indeed, anything, but here I gave up completely.)

{{comic
| number = 3128
| date = August 13, 2025
| title = Thread Meeting
| image = thread_meeting_2x.png
| imagesize = 399x425px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Hey, so did you ever finish your video series about Cassie and the caterpillar morph? I loved the first three, but never ... no, sorry, I get it, this isn't the place. Sorry! Sorry.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by Jake and Cassie ([[1380: Manual for Civilization|we finally kissed]]) ([[1817: Incognito Mode|we're posting this from Apple HQ]]). Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
Many people have different sets of acquaintances from different parts of their lives, and there's not much overlap. For instance, they have colleagues and work, and friends from different hobbies. People encountered in online forums are often very separate, since they may be anywhere in the world and even have quite differently eclectic tastes that they never mention. People find it surprising when there are overlaps in unrelated spheres.

In this comic, NorthLakeKayak and AntaresMike are two participants in an online thread (presumably about boating, or maybe specifically kayaking). NorthLakeKayak recognizes the username AntaresMike as also used by someone he remembers from a different forum about {{w|Animorphs}}, and apparently not a likely username to have [[1963: Namespace Land Rush|been independently claimed]] by someone else.

As children, the most striking example of this type of compartmentalization is that {{tvtropes|TeachersOutOfSchool|we think of teachers as only existing in school}}. They're actually people with real lives (as also referenced in [[2808: Daytime Firefly]]), but we find it extremely weird when we encounter them in some mundane place outside school, like at a restaurant or store. The comic makes the point that encountering the same person in two unrelated online forums is analogous to this.

Very often, the culture/rules of a particular forum will encourage relevence to the forum's ''{{w|raison d'etre}}'', at least in its main threads, and fellow users will get to know all about their on-topic obsessions but usually only see hints of other individuals' alternate pastimes and hobbies. In the title text, NorthLakeKayak starts to go drastically '{{w|off topic}}', presumably within the same conversation supposed to be discussing kayaks, and starts to {{w|Self-censorship|self-censor}} what he says, with apologies to the wider readership. And, perhaps, also to his fellow Animorph-appreciator, who may not appreciate being 'outed'/low-level-'{{w|doxing|doxed}}', even assuming they ''are'' indeed the same person; there's no indication that they have confirmed themselves as being the same AntaresMike, and not just another 'Mike' who opted to choose the exact same name from whatever independent association they choose to have with '{{w|Antares (disambiguation)|Antares}}'.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

[A portion of a thread in an online forum is shown. It has one post and a reply to that post]

[First post:]

[Stylized A avatar] '''AntaresMike'''

You could also check out this kayak model. I attached a motor to mine, and it's a little but of a kludge but it works great.

[Reply (indented):]

[Cueball avatar] '''NorthLakeKayak'''

Oh, hey, AntaresMike! I know you!

Honestly I didn't realize you existed outside of the Animorphs fandom. I haven't seen you in forever!

Uh. So. How are you doing?

Kayaking, I guess.

Anyway yeah that model is great.

[Bottom caption:]

Running into someone on a thread who you know from a totally different part of the Internet feels weirdly like running into your teacher in a store.

==References==
<references />

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Animorphs]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

Simple Writer

2025-08-13T21:24:39Z

92.23.2.228: There are several other issues, but at least it's not quite so HUUUUUUUUGGGGGGEEEEEE, perhaps depending upon screen. (But as it's likely a full-width of the uploader's screen, I bet even they find it large, as then fit into explainxkcd page margins...)

{{comic
| title = Simple Writer
| image = SimpleWriterExample.jpeg
| lappend = simplewriter
| extra = yes
| imagesize = 800px
}}

==Explanation==
{{misc page}}
This appears to be a page in which one can check to see if all the words in a given piece of text fits within the ten hundred words people use the most often. The page directly compares this to the style of writing featured in [[1133: Up Goer Five]] and ''[[Thing Explainer]]''.

3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-13T21:18:31Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3128
| date = August 13, 2025
| title = Thread Meeting
| image = thread_meeting_2x.png
| imagesize = 399x425px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Hey, so did you ever finish your video series about Cassie and the caterpillar morph? I loved the first three, but never ... no, sorry, I get it, this isn't the place. Sorry! Sorry.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by Jake and Cassie ([[1380: Manual for Civilization|we finally kissed]]) ([[1817: Incognito Mode|we're posting this from Apple HQ]]). Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
Many people have different sets of acquaintances from different parts of their lives, and there's not much overlap. For instance, they have colleagues and work, and friends from different hobbies. People encountered in online forums are often very separate, since they may be anywhere in the world and even have quite differently eclectic tastes that they never mention. People find it surprising when there are overlaps in different spheres.

In this comic, NorthLakeKayak and AntaresMike are two participants in an online thread (presumably about boating, or maybe specifically kayaking). NorthLakeKayak recognizes the username AntaresMike as also used by someone he remembers from a different forum about {{w|Animorphs}}, and apparently not a likely username to have [[1963: Namespace Land Rush|been independently claimed]] by someone else.

As children, the most striking example of this type of compartmentalization is that {{tvtropes|TeachersOutOfSchool|we think of teachers as only existing in school}}. They're actually people with real lives (as also referenced in [[2808: Daytime Firefly]]), but we find it extremely weird when we encounter them in some mundane place outside school, like at a restaurant or store. The comic makes the point that encountering the same person in two unrelated online forums is analogous to this.

Very often, the culture/rules of a particular forum will encourage relevence to the forum's ''{{w|raison d'etre}}'', at least in its main threads, and fellow users will get to know all about their on-topic obsessions but usually only see hints of other individuals' alternate pastimes and hobbies. In the title text, NorthLakeKayak starts to go drastically '{{w|off topic}}', presumably within the same conversation supposed to be discussing kayaks, and starts to {{w|Self-censorship|self-censor}} what he says, with apologies to the wider readership. And, perhaps, also to his fellow Animorph-appreciator, who may not appreciate being 'outed'/low-level-'{{w|doxing|doxed}}', even assuming they ''are'' indeed the same person; there's no indication that they have confirmed themselves as being the same AntaresMike, and not just another 'Mike' who opted to choose the exact same name from whatever independent association they choose to have with '{{w|Antares (disambiguation)|Antares}}'.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

[A portion of a thread in an online forum is shown. It has one post and a reply to that post]

[First post:]

[Stylized A avatar] '''AntaresMike'''

You could also check out this kayak model. I attached a motor to mine, and it's a little but of a kludge but it works great.

[Reply (indented):]

[Cueball avatar] '''NorthLakeKayak'''

Oh, hey, AntaresMike! I know you!

Honestly I didn't realize you existed outside of the Animorphs fandom. I haven't seen you in forever!

Uh. So. How are you doing?

Kayaking, I guess.

Anyway yeah that model is great.

[Bottom caption:]

Running into someone on a thread who you know from a totally different part of the Internet feels weirdly like running into your teacher in a store.

==References==
<references />

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Animorphs]]
[[Category:Social networking]]

3127: Where Babies Come From

2025-08-13T20:42:58Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ I'm not entirely sure it's related, but it's nostalgic.

{{comic
| number = 3127
| date = August 11, 2025
| title = Where Babies Come From
| image = where_babies_come_from_2x.png
| imagesize = 652x362px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Historians: Contemporaneous documentation of the initial events is often sparse, and in fact people often get testy and uncooperative when we urge better documentation for the historical record.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by a mommy and daddy who love each other very much.

* '''The article could be a bit more clinical and direct.''' Right now, it's low on information, and high on vague implication, aiming for wit.}}

Children are often curious, and ask a lot of questions about the world around them. "Where do babies come from?" is one such question that tends to come up at some point, and is notable as one that many adults are uncomfortable giving correct answers to, because of the common reluctance to discuss sex-related matters with youngsters. While children are sometimes told that there's a baby inside a pregnant woman's tummy, the issues of how the baby got in there, or how it's supposed to get out, are often dodged. There are a variety of common myths about where babies come from, as told to children, such as "brought by a stork", "found in a cabbage patch", or [https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1987/04/18 "built from a kit"]. This comic presents a variety of answers to that question, supposedly from the point of view of specialists in several different areas of science, some of which are incorrect, others of which are allusions to the process of conception or childbirth expressed in the vocabulary of the specialist's field.

They might be deliberately misleading the questioner by using very euphemistic terms to avoid personal embarrassment, deliberately over-'simplifying' the explanation as a {{w|Lie-to-children|stepping stone}} to the eventual more specific truth, or else they are themselves ignorant/misled about the process. In each case, however, their abstraction of the process is described in terms that are actually relatively technical ones from their own field, to the presumed audience, showing that they are not necessarily able to find the right level of explanation, as well as not having used a less obtuse reframing of the topic much closer to that of actual reproductive biology.

;Geneticist: An admixture event refers to new genes being introduced into a population (for example, intermarriage adding genes for blue eyes into a population that previously lacked them). These gene movements are typically measurable on the order of thousand year or more timescales, and therefores are commonly dated to thousands or even millions of years ago. KYA = "one thousand years ago" and 0.001 KYA = 1 year, [[2205: Types of Approximation|approximately]] the duration of most human pregnancies. The comic uses this term to describe the gene mixing of two people having a child. The joke is in the use of such large scale terms to describe the creation of one child, and how the technical language being used hides the answer, especially from a child.

;Astronomer: Ejections of matter from parent bodies are common astronomical events, at scales ranging from comets to black holes. The process of giving birth is compared to a "low-impulse" ejection, such as the casting off of rocks and dust from a rotating asteroid. Such a comparison, while it may make sense in cosmology, is unlikely to find favor with any woman who is, or has ever been, in labor.
:Alternatively, the "low-impulse ejection" could refer to ejaculation, not the act of giving birth. The former would have a considerably higher impulse than the latter but it's still very low on a cosmic scale and would still qualify as "low-impulse".

;Software Engineer: An {{w|off-by-one error}} (aside from [[2248: New Year's Eve|being a difficult theme to build a party around]]) is a common programming mistake in which a value is… well… ''off by one''. A birth could be described as a "population" metric suddenly [[605: Extrapolating|increasing by one]]; or, alternatively, a baby could cause a previously accurate static population metric to become off-by-one from the new correct total. This could also be referring to an unplanned pregnancy, which would lead the local population to be one higher than the parent(s) may have calculated.

;Geologist: The baby is said to have been created by the process of differential erosion, in which softer rocks are eroded more quickly, leaving harder rocks behind. Arguably, a geologist who was making a serious attempt to compare geological and biological processes would recognize that the growth of a fetus has much more in common with accretionary, rather than erosional, mechanisms. Granting that the geologist depicted is witty and not clueless, this explanation is the most intentionally farcical, the most {{w|List_of_Calvin_and_Hobbes_characters#Mom_and_Dad|Calvin's Dad}}, of the five. The suggestion that everything is removed except for the desired result is fairly often used to describe how sculptors work, and similar craftspeople such as woodcarvers.

;Meteorologist: Turbulent mixing of air masses ("turbulence") has been experienced by just about everyone who has ever been in an airborne aircraft. Turbulence can occur at all levels of the atmosphere from the ground up, and is frequently accompanied by clouds and precipitation, although the moisture alluded to here is likely that of bodily fluids and the turbulence being more about a tangible physicality between people. It is a pungent metaphor for coitus.

;Historians (title text): Instead of proffering an explanation for "where babies come from", the historians (plural) lodge a complaint about the difficulties they have encountered in obtaining the data needed to substantiate the babies' provenance. The plaint is a common preamble and disclaimer in formal history publications. Rather than answer the question in the general, they appear to be trying to answer it for each individual baby by questioning those thought to be responsible. The historians express surprise and indignation that their efforts to obtain "better documentation" of the "initial events" (the mating behavior) leading to baby formation are seen as prurient and voyeuristic, and are met with resistance.

"How is {{wiktionary|babby}} formed?" was a [https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/how-is-babby-formed notorious meme] from the early 2000s.

==Transcript==
:[Hairy, Ponytail, Hairbun, Cueball and Megan are standing below a question given at the top of the comic. Each of the five gives their answer to the question. Below each character is a label with their respective occupation.]
:Various experts answer the question “Where do babies come from?”

:Geneticist
:Hairy: Recent admixture event, roughly 0.001 Kya.

:Astronomer
:Ponytail: Low-impulse ejection from a parent body.

:Software engineer
:Hairbun: Off-by-one error in the population calculations.

:Geologist
:Cueball: The area was originally a uniform plane, but the non-baby parts eroded at higher rates.

:Meteorologist
:Megan: Moist ground-level turbulent mixing.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics with babies]]
[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Sex]]

Talk:3128: Thread Meeting

2025-08-13T20:20:49Z

92.23.2.228: In response to the prior edit of {{diff|384090}} ...*perpetually* updated. (Also a comment, perhaps you consider it inverse-snobbery/humblebragging. Feel free to email me directly about it.... oh wait, *you can't!*)

3117: Replication Crisis

2025-08-12T22:48:53Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ ...with added space.

{{comic
| number = 3117
| date = July 18, 2025
| title = Replication Crisis
| image = replication_crisis_2x.png
| imagesize = 367x492px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Maybe encouraging the publication of null results isn't enough--maybe we need a journal devoted to publishing results the study authors find personally annoying.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|replication crisis}} in science refers to the existence of a large number of published scientific results that others are unable to reproduce. One aspect of the scientific method is the replication of results, so the failure to replicate some results casts doubt on the validity of the results and scientific knowledge built on them. Research into the replication crisis itself [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/replication-crisis has been done], with a number of studies being redone and the results compared with the original studies. In this comic, a research team is looking to see if the situation has improved and end up "reproducing" the same results of the early reproduction crisis papers.

The joke is about reproducing a paper about being unable to reproduce papers, while both papers show there is general issue with reproducibility, in this narrow case the scientists were able to reproduce an earlier result, hence the "solved" newspaper headline.

There is a further possible jab: the replication crisis has indeed been "solved", in that the paper authors have shown that the same problems crop up even when scientists are aware of the issue. The "solution" is that the problems persist whether or not the scientists are aware of the replication crisis, so one could simply do science as if the crisis did not happen. This would be not so much a 'solution' as a counsel of despair. [[1574: Trouble for Science]] explores an issue similar to this comic's.

The title text refers to one previously suggested remedy when the replication crisis was first being dealt with — encouraging the publication of null results to counteract {{w|publication bias}}. However, because there is still a replication crisis it didn't solve the problem. The joke is that researchers, being human, are often tempted not to publish results if, for example, the results are not what they were expecting, opposed to a hypothesis they've spoken in favor of, likely to hurt their careers or embarrass them, confusing or difficult for them to explain, or aesthetically or in some other way displeasing to the researcher or their funder. Similarly to these actual efforts to counteract publication bias, this proposed measure extends this idea, albeit in a way that might sound silly.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

: [Megan, Ponytail, and Cueball are standing at a lectern. Ponytail is talking into the microphone.]
: Ponytail: In the early 2010s, researchers found that many major scientific results couldn't be reproduced.

: [Ponytail turns slightly to look around the room.]
: Ponytail: Over a decade into the replication crisis, we wanted to see if today's studies have become more robust.

: Ponytail: Unfortunately, our replication analysis has found exactly the same problems that those 2010s researchers did.

: [This panel shows a newspaper, with title "NEWS" surrounded by flourishes. There is a photo of the panel #2. The headline reads: "REPLICATION CRISIS SOLVED".]

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Scientific research]]

3117: Replication Crisis

2025-08-12T22:47:43Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Changing from a bare-reference to inline.

{{comic
| number = 3117
| date = July 18, 2025
| title = Replication Crisis
| image = replication_crisis_2x.png
| imagesize = 367x492px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Maybe encouraging the publication of null results isn't enough--maybe we need a journal devoted to publishing results the study authors find personally annoying.
}}

==Explanation==
The {{w|replication crisis}} in science refers to the existence of a large number of published scientific results that others are unable to reproduce. One aspect of the scientific method is the replication of results, so the failure to replicate some results casts doubt on the validity of the results and scientific knowledge built on them. Research into the replication crisis itself[https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/replication-crisis has been done], with a number of studies being redone and the results compared with the original studies. In this comic, a research team is looking to see if the situation has improved and end up "reproducing" the same results of the early reproduction crisis papers.

The joke is about reproducing a paper about being unable to reproduce papers, while both papers show there is general issue with reproducibility, in this narrow case the scientists were able to reproduce an earlier result, hence the "solved" newspaper headline.

There is a further possible jab: the replication crisis has indeed been "solved", in that the paper authors have shown that the same problems crop up even when scientists are aware of the issue. The "solution" is that the problems persist whether or not the scientists are aware of the replication crisis, so one could simply do science as if the crisis did not happen. This would be not so much a 'solution' as a counsel of despair. [[1574: Trouble for Science]] explores an issue similar to this comic's.

The title text refers to one previously suggested remedy when the replication crisis was first being dealt with — encouraging the publication of null results to counteract {{w|publication bias}}. However, because there is still a replication crisis it didn't solve the problem. The joke is that researchers, being human, are often tempted not to publish results if, for example, the results are not what they were expecting, opposed to a hypothesis they've spoken in favor of, likely to hurt their careers or embarrass them, confusing or difficult for them to explain, or aesthetically or in some other way displeasing to the researcher or their funder. Similarly to these actual efforts to counteract publication bias, this proposed measure extends this idea, albeit in a way that might sound silly.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

: [Megan, Ponytail, and Cueball are standing at a lectern. Ponytail is talking into the microphone.]
: Ponytail: In the early 2010s, researchers found that many major scientific results couldn't be reproduced.

: [Ponytail turns slightly to look around the room.]
: Ponytail: Over a decade into the replication crisis, we wanted to see if today's studies have become more robust.

: Ponytail: Unfortunately, our replication analysis has found exactly the same problems that those 2010s researchers did.

: [This panel shows a newspaper, with title "NEWS" surrounded by flourishes. There is a photo of the panel #2. The headline reads: "REPLICATION CRISIS SOLVED".]

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Scientific research]]

3127: Where Babies Come From

2025-08-12T19:16:05Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3127
| date = August 11, 2025
| title = Where Babies Come From
| image = where_babies_come_from_2x.png
| imagesize = 652x362px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Historians: Contemporaneous documentation of the initial events is often sparse, and in fact people often get testy and uncooperative when we urge better documentation for the historical record.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|This page was created by a mommy and daddy who love each other very much. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

Children are often curious, and ask a lot of questions about the world around them. One such question that tends to come up at some point is "where do babies come from?" and it's notable as one that many adults are uncomfortable giving correct answers to, because of the common reluctance to discuss sex-related matters with youngsters. While children are sometimes told that there's a baby inside a pregnant woman's tummy, the issues of how the baby got in there, or how it's supposed to get out, are often dodged. There are a variety of common myths about where babies come from, as told to children, such as "brought by a stork", "found in a cabbage patch", or [https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1987/04/18 "built from a kit"]. This comic presents a variety of answers to that question, supposedly from the point of view of specialists in several different areas of science, some of which are incorrect, others of which are allusions to the process of conception or childbirth expressed in the vocabulary of the specialist's field.

They might be deliberately misleading the questioner by using very euphemistic terms to avoid personal embarrassment, deliberately over-'simplifying' the explanation as a {{w|Lie-to-children|stepping stone}} to the eventual more specific truth or else they are themselves ignorant/misled about the process. In each case, however, their abstraction of the process is described in terms that are actually relatively technical ones from their own field, to the presumed audience, showing that they are not necessarily able to find the right level of explanation, as well as not having used a less obtuse reframing of the topic much closer to that of actual reproductive biology.

;Geneticist: An admixture event refers to new genes being introduced into a population (for example, intermarriage adding genes for blue eyes into a population that previously lacked them). The comic uses this term to describe the gene mixing of two people having a child. Population-level admixtures are commonly dated to thousands or even millions of years ago; KYA = "one thousand years ago". 0.001 KYA = 1 year, [[2205: Types of Approximation|approximately]] the duration of most human pregnancies. The joke is in the use of such large scale terms to describe the creation of one child, and how the technical language being used hides the answer, especially from a child.

;Astronomer: Ejections of matter from parent bodies are common events in the galaxy and the observable universe, at scales ranging from comets to black holes. The process of giving birth is compared to a "low-impulse" ejection, such as the casting off of rocks and dust from a rotating asteroid. Such a comparison, while it may make sense in cosmology, is unlikely to find favor with any woman who is, or has ever been, in labor.
:Alternately the "low-impulse ejection" could refer to ejaculation, not the act of giving birth. The former would have a considerably higher impulse than the latter but it's still very low on a cosmic scale and would still qualify as "low-impulse".

;Software Engineer: An {{w|off-by-one error}} (aside from [[2248: New Year's Eve|being a difficult theme to build a party around]]) is a common programming mistake in which a value is... well... off by one. A birth could be described as a "population" metric increasing by one, or alternately, a baby could cause a previously accurate static population metric to become off-by-one from the new reality of the situation. This could also be referring to an unplanned pregnancy, which would lead the local population to be one higher than the parent(s) may have calculated.

;Geologist: The baby is said to have been created by the process of differential erosion, in which softer rocks are eroded more quickly, leaving harder rocks behind. Arguably, a geologist who was making a serious attempt to compare geological and biological processes would recognize that the growth of a fetus has much more in common with accretionary, rather than erosional, mechanisms. Granting that the geologist depicted is witty and not clueless, this explanation is the most intentionally farcical, the most {{w|List_of_Calvin_and_Hobbes_characters#Mom_and_Dad|Calvin's Dad}}, of the five. The suggestion that everything is removed except for the desired result is fairly often used to describe how sculptors work, and similar craftspeople such as woodcarvers.

;Meteorologist: Turbulent mixing of air masses ("turbulence") has been experienced by just about everyone who has ever been in an airborne aircraft. Turbulence can occur at all levels of the atmosphere from the ground up, and is frequently accompanied by clouds and precipitation, although the moisture alluded to here is likely that of bodily fluids and the turbulance being more about a tangible physicality between people. It is a pungent metaphor for coitus, seemingly undertaken 'al fresco'.

;Historians (title text): Instead of proffering an explanation for "where babies come from", the historians (plural) lodge a complaint about the difficulties they have encountered in obtaining the data needed to substantiate the babies' provenance.{{cn}} The plaint is a common preamble and disclaimer in formal history publications. Rather than answer the question in the general, they appear to be trying to answer it for each individual baby by questioning those thought to be responsible. The historians express surprise and indignation that their efforts to obtain "better documentation" of the "initial events" (the mating behavior) leading to baby formation are seen as prurient and voyeuristic, and are met with resistance.

==Transcript==

:Various experts answer the question “Where do babies come from?”
:[Five characters are shown, left to right, each saying their answer. Below each character is their respective occupation.]
:Hairy [Geneticist]: Recent admixture event, roughly 0.001 Kya.
:Ponytail [Astronomer]: Low-impulse ejection from a parent body.
:Hairbun [Software engineer]: Off-by-one error in the population calculations.
:Cueball [Geologist]: The area was originally a uniform plane, but the non-baby parts eroded at higher rates.
:Megan [Meteorologist]: Moist ground-level turbulent mixing.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Biology]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Programming]]
[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Weather]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Hairbun]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Sex]]

3111: Artificial Gravity

2025-08-12T18:51:43Z

92.23.2.228: Undo revision 384028 by CalibansCreations (talk) Painfully unattributed. Really, just link us to what Tumblr is, and nothing more to prove that (at least in context) it's genuine?

{{comic
| number = 3111
| date = July 4, 2025
| title = Artificial Gravity
| image = artificial_gravity_2x.png
| imagesize = 423x365px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Low gravity can cause bone loss, so we're pleased to report that, since we initiated capsule motion, the number of bones in each crew member has been steadily increasing.
}}

==Explanation==
In a low gravity environment, such as a spaceship taking an interplanetary or interstellar voyage, the human body will experience slow but {{w|Effect_of_spaceflight_on_the_human_body|adverse side effects}}. Many prototype designs have been introduced to combat this, both in science fiction and real life. One of the most common (for non-fictional purposes, or in {{w|hard science fiction}}) is to use a rotating system to subject the crew to [[123: Centrifugal Force|centrifugal force]], simulating the effects of {{w|gravity}}. Examples of mimicking gravity using spinning elements are: the whole wheel-like space-station and internal living ring of the ''Discovery'', from ''{{w|2001: A Space Odyssey}}''; the extended rotating arms of the ''Hermes'', in ''{{w|The Martian (film)|The Martian}}''; the whole rotating structure of ''Endurance'', from the movie ''{{w|Interstellar (film)|Interstellar}}''.

[[Cueball]] instead describes a spacecraft in which the crew quarters are being continuously shaken back and forth across an axis. [[Ponytail]] immediately sees problems with this approach, and asks if the shaking pod can be replaced with a much safer and more stable spinning wheel or cylinder. Cueball concedes this argument, but reveals that the ship has already been built, launched, and is in operation, so the crew is stuck with the shaking pod setup. Apparently, nobody pointed out that there was a much better approach during the mission development.

A shaking spaceship design would create an experience of gravity for the crew — just a very unpleasant one. When the capsule accelerates "up" (from the point of view of the picture), the crew will feel a gravity-like force pulling them "down" against the capsule 'floor'. However when the capsule accelerates "down", the crew will find themselves thrown against what was the 'ceiling' of the capsule, but has now suddenly become the 'floor', in an experience similar to falling several metres. The direction of this artificial "gravity" will keep alternating as long as the capsule keeps shaking. This will result in the crew not only repeatedly falling against one surface or the other, but also at a variable apparent gravity as the capsule's lateral velocity changes. This might make their life onboard ship, which could (otherwise) be expected to last for many years, somewhat unpleasant.

This shaking system would also be wasteful of energy, since there would be losses due to friction at the joints between modules, as well as the energy costs of changing the motion of the crew module relative to the rest of the structure. In contrast, a rotating structure freely floating in a weightless environment tends to retain its motion, with negligible losses due to interactions with other bodies.

The title text discusses the form of bone density loss known as {{w|spaceflight osteopenia}}, caused by gravity loss. The speaker claims that "the number of bones in each crew member has been steadily increasing". This is because the shaking, and subsequent multiple impacts, are fragmenting the crew members' bones. The broken pieces of bone are then being counted as bones in their own right and increasing the effective count, without telling if the pod's awkward configuration has done anything to reduce bone ''mass'' loss.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Don't remove this notice too soon.}}
:[Cueball and Ponytail are standing near a blueprint of a spacecraft, with Cueball pointing at the blueprint. In place of conventional conical fairing, this spacecraft has a large mechanical arm on the nose. The arm is holding an egg-shaped capsule. Two semi-transparent drawings of the arm and the capsule are depicted on either side of it with speed streaks in between, implying shaking back and forth motion of the arm.]
:Cueball: To produce artificial gravity during the voyage, the crew capsule is kept in constant motion.
:Ponytail: Wouldn't it make more sense to spin it instead of shaking it, so the acceleration is steadier?
:Cueball: ...Listen. You, I, and the crew all wish we'd thought of that before launch.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

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

Talk:1875: Computers vs Humans

2025-08-12T18:35:16Z

92.23.2.228: (tildes, not hyphens)

Definitely related to https://xkcd.com/1263/ and https://xkcd.com/1002/ to a lesser extent. [[User:MrNinja|MrNinja]] ([[User talk:MrNinja|talk]]) 16:03, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
:Agreed and have added both to the explanation. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

I think the bot's version of the <code><nowiki>{{incomplete}}</nowiki></code> template param was better… [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]]

Wake me up when computers can beat humans in Football (soccer), Football (gridiron), Basketball, Baseball, etc. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 02:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

So far, these kind of contests always work like this: human will pick a goal and formulate rules, then groups of humans spend lot of time programming computer specifically for that goal and then the computer competes against some human. I'm waiting for contest where the human picking a goal would explain the rules to computer the same way he did to human, and no humans would be helping the computer to understand. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 00:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Making a computer "not care" for something is impossible, first you need to program the code for the thing and then program the code for the computer to disregard that thing. The computer must care for the thing before trying no to care about it.
----

On the contrary, I would say making a computer system "care" is harder than making it not care. My computer system does "not care" about ANYTHING, and has never cared, even before I turned it on. When I write any program, the system will blithely execute it, whether it's to perform an infinite loop or divide by zero or do a machine-learning task. The machine acts in as deterministic and uncaring fashion as a water pistol or rock. I throw a rock, and it skips over the surface of a lake, and then sinks.

I will agree that programmers generally care about the output of their program's response to input data (e.g. giving winning moves in Go), but whether the computer succeeds or not, it does not care. The goal is not one adopted by the computer--the goal is given to the programmers who generate computer code to attempt to achieve that goal. The computer follows the algorithm and all the results follow from this and the input data.

[[http://www.linkedin.com/in/Comet Comet]] 07:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

A MACHINE DOES NOT CARE.
- "The Gulf Between", by Tom Godwin
[[User:Noaqiyeum|Noaqiyeum]] ([[User talk:Noaqiyeum|talk]]) 11:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

there is a computer someone made that taught itself to play chess by playnig against itself. it beat the previous computer champion easily and it had only learned for 4 hours!
{{unsigned ip|45.52.20.3|16:11, 12 August 2025}}

explain xkcd talk:User: Aprilfoolsupdate!

2025-08-11T00:20:07Z

92.23.2.228: /* Can we help you..? */ unwanted formatting, sorry, using a non-wiki text convention that clashed with a wikimarkup-one...

==If you want your user page created, tell me==

==Talking with [[user:DollarStoreBa'al| DollarStoreBa'al]]==
No way am I that cool man.

By the way, here's a way to create a userbox:
{Userbox | border-c = #255 | border-s = 1 | info-s = 9 | id = ;) | info = <nowiki>[[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|This user _____ ]]</nowiki> | float = left}}. Thank [[User:Definitely Bill Cipher]] for this, I learned it from him. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:05, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:Oh, I'm sorry. Misunderstood your request. Userboxes are used on user pages to add supplemental information. I have one or two on my user page if you want to look at those. By the way, I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'the numbers'. Please clarify if you can. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

::like these numbers <nowiki> border-c = #255 | border-s = 1 | info-s = 9 | </nowiki> [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 14:18, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:::border-c controls the color of the userboxes border, between 1 and 255. Border-s is the thickness of the border. info-s is the font of the text inside the userbox... I think. Honestly not sure. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:22, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks anyway [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 14:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:::::You're welcome! Always happy to help. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:28, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

== Can we help you..? ==

So, {{template|brda}} seems to have been an experiment. To what end? Can we help you make your original idea work? [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

::I just don’t want to write the link down so I used a template. I just don’t understand what does that picture mean, and I need someone to help me explain.
::: *cringe* ...well, hope you can use what I gave you over on the other page, then.
:::Slightly more confused, myself, about the need for a template. Thought you'd maybe be wanting to include the image (ebedded, or as a link) in a signature or even something you'd want to manually enter in multiple places. Never mind. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 00:18, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

explain xkcd talk:User: Aprilfoolsupdate!

2025-08-11T00:18:23Z

92.23.2.228: /* Can we help you..? */

==If you want your user page created, tell me==

==Talking with [[user:DollarStoreBa'al| DollarStoreBa'al]]==
No way am I that cool man.

By the way, here's a way to create a userbox:
{Userbox | border-c = #255 | border-s = 1 | info-s = 9 | id = ;) | info = <nowiki>[[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|This user _____ ]]</nowiki> | float = left}}. Thank [[User:Definitely Bill Cipher]] for this, I learned it from him. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:05, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:Oh, I'm sorry. Misunderstood your request. Userboxes are used on user pages to add supplemental information. I have one or two on my user page if you want to look at those. By the way, I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'the numbers'. Please clarify if you can. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:09, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

::like these numbers <nowiki> border-c = #255 | border-s = 1 | info-s = 9 | </nowiki> [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 14:18, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:::border-c controls the color of the userboxes border, between 1 and 255. Border-s is the thickness of the border. info-s is the font of the text inside the userbox... I think. Honestly not sure. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:22, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks anyway [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 14:24, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:::::You're welcome! Always happy to help. --'''''[[User:DollarStoreBa'al |DollarStoreBa'al]][[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al |'''''Converse''''']][[Special:Contributions/DollarStoreBa'al|'''''My life choices''''']] 14:28, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

== Can we help you..? ==

So, {{template|brda}} seems to have been an experiment. To what end? Can we help you make your original idea work? [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

::I just don’t want to write the link down so I used a template. I just don’t understand what does that picture mean, and I need someone to help me explain.
:::*cringe* ...well, hope you can use what I gave you over on the other page, then.
:::Slightly more confused, myself, about the need for a template. Thought you'd maybe be wanting to include the image (ebedded, or as a link) in a signature or even something you'd want to manually enter in multiple places. Never mind. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 00:18, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

3126: Disclaimer

2025-08-10T19:22:49Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3126
| date = August 8, 2025
| title = Disclaimer
| image = disclaimer_2x.png
| imagesize = 346x396px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = You say no human would reply to a forum thread about Tom Bombadil by writing and editing hundreds of words of text, complete with formatting, fancy punctuation, and two separate uses of the word 'delve'. Unfortunately for both of us, you are wrong.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|If the academic integrity department asks, this page was NOT created by ChatGPT. Don’t remove this notice too soon.}}

This comic shows a message written by [[Cueball]] (likely representing [[Randall]]). The combination of a user profile image, metadata, and the body of text, suggest this is a posting on a forum. At the end—possibly as an automatically appended forum signature—he includes a disclaimer preemptively denying that the content was produced by ChatGPT, and that this is just the way he is.

{{w|ChatGPT}} is a {{w|large language model}}, a type of {{w|generative artificial intelligence}} designed to produce human-like text. In 2025, at the time of this comic’s release, tools like ChatGPT had become widely used for composing everything from professional emails to casual forum posts. Chatbots tend to be verbose. One side effect of this trend is that genuine, naturally long-form writing is sometimes mistaken for AI-generated content. People may become suspicious not only of length and thoroughness, but also of stylistic markers such as formally correct punctuation—particularly the {{w|Dash#Em_dash|em dash}}—which is uncommon among average internet users, but occasionally favored by ChatGPT.

The title text explains the context. It notes that some people claim no human would compose a meticulously organized essay about {{w|Tom Bombadil}}, a relatively minor character from ''The Lord of the Rings'', especially if it contains the word “delve.” This word is perceived as atypical in everyday conversation yet is frequently used by ChatGPT. Randall counters that he would write such an essay, and in fact has. The choice of “delve” may be a deliberate reference to Gandalf’s line in ''The Fellowship of the Ring'' about the Dwarves who “delved too greedily and too deep,” or perhaps to “Michel Delving,” the largest Hobbit settlement in the Shire, whose name literally means “large excavation.” He also says this is unfortunate for both of them: the person he's talking to for having jumped to the wrong assumption about the nature of the author, and Randall for having wasted so much of his time writing about a minor topic.

The presence of the em dash in the disclaimer further fuels the joke. Em dashes are seen by many as an indicator that a piece of text was AI-generated; although they have been a long-standing (even pre-GPT) feature of both Randall's comics and this site's user-written explanations, which of course does not disprove the more general observation being alluded to. The comic is also likely to be have been written specifically as a response to the release of {{w|GPT-5}}, the day before this comic was published.

==Transcript==
:[A Cueball profile picture is shown next to five paragraphs of illegible text, which contains varied punctuation marks and two square-bracketed citations. The last paragraph in the essay is separated from the other paragraphs by a line with three dashes. Its single sentence is highlighted, and lines connect that illegible sentence to a box with an enlarged, legible version of the sentence.]
:Enlarged text: Not ChatGPT output—I’m just like this.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I’ve had to start adding this disclaimer to my messages.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:LOTR]]

Talk:3126: Disclaimer

2025-08-10T19:20:39Z

92.23.2.228: I agree with you, by the way... Just 'cos basically every adaptation skipped him doesn't mean anything.

Is this related to the ChatGPT 5 release
: Probably. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:30, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Was anyone tempted to ask ChatGPT to write an explanation of this comic? [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 19:30, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
: Sure, https://chatgpt.com/share/6897c0ac-dfdc-8012-8030-76447b589747 [[User:BytEfLUSh|BytEfLUSh]] ([[User talk:BytEfLUSh|talk]]) 21:43, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Considering who Tom Bombadil is, anything less than a dissertation-length discussion is incomplete. PS: The captcha wanted me to select pictures that contained parking meters, but it showed what looked like a mailbox. Maybe parking meters look like mailboxes in the parts of Middle Earth that I haven't visited yet. [[Special:Contributions/64.201.132.210|64.201.132.210]] 20:23, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Am I the only one wondering if Randall actually made such a post? It would be fun to find but without knowing what LOTR boards he frequents and his screen name, it would be pretty difficult. [[Special:Contributions/47.248.235.170|47.248.235.170]] 20:44, 8 August 2025 (UTC)Pat

Who ''doesn't'' use the word 'delve'? I've used it {{w|One, Two, Buckle My Shoe|since I was a child}}! [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 20:59, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Once or twice, I've heard a Reddit reader on YouTube claim that a story was probably written by ChatGPT because of things like "used em dashes" and "flows so smoothly that I didn't make any mistakes while recording, while most stories by humans make me glitch once or twice". Um. Is it ''bad'' to use punctuation correctly? To polish writing so that it flows smoothly, as story-telling often should? [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 21:07, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
:Hyphens between spaces are [https://twitter.com/thiojoe/status/1947867455415783732 automatically converted to em dashes] when using modern versions of MS Word. [[Special:Contributions/104.28.205.246|104.28.205.246]] 22:27, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
::That's an en-dash; em-dashes are automatically created from two hyphens between words like--this[[User:ThatNerdyHylian|ThatNerdyHylian]] ([[User talk:ThatNerdyHylian|talk]]) 09:01, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
:It’s not bad—it’s just a lazy diagnostic. Smooth prose and correct punctuation aren’t inherently “AI tells”; they’re simply easier for large language models to produce consistently than for average human writers. (This is because large language models were trained to predict the next token, which is a task that emphasizes grammar more than it does ideas. Meanwhile, humans are taught to emphasize the ideas and only edit for grammar in formal writing.) People latch onto prose and punctuation because they’re visible, not because they’re reliable indicators. Over-reliance on such surface markers risks flagging well-edited human work as AI-generated, which is exactly the false-positive trap detection tools keep falling into. [[Special:Contributions/114.94.93.163|114.94.93.163]] 11:37, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

"Delve" is/was specifically a word considered a marker of ChatGPT. See https://news.fsu.edu/news/science-technology/2025/02/17/why-does-chatgpt-delve-so-much-fsu-researchers-begin-to-uncover-why-chatgpt-overuses-certain-words/ [[Special:Contributions/64.203.66.182|64.203.66.182]] 21:19, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
:Groundbreaking advancements in the realm of AI may indeed boast surprising and intricate compositions, showcasing a lexicon emphasising and underscoring its advanced comprehending of garnered language that surpasses what aligns with human usage. But I hope the team behind this paper delves into the possibility of false-positives.  [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 21:54, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

:You're absolutely right—''delve'' has become emblematic of ChatGPT’s stylistic tendencies.
:
:Florida State University researchers Tom Juzek and Zina Ward conducted a study titled ''“Why Does ChatGPT ‘Delve’ So Much? Exploring the Source of Overrepresentation in Large Language Models.”'' This study, published in the January 2025 Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics, systematically identified words like '''“delve,” “intricate,”''' and '''“underscore”''' that have sharply increased in usage within scientific abstracts and are notably more common in ChatGPT outputs. They called these '''21 “focal words.”'''
:
:The researchers ruled out several potential causes—such as model architecture, training data, or algorithms—as primary drivers of this lexical overrepresentation. Their model testing suggested that '''Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF)''' may contribute to the pattern, though the results were mixed and partially inconclusive. Intriguingly, they found that human evaluators might respond differently to the word “delve” compared to other focal words.
:
:So yes—''delve'' is indeed one of the telltale markers that researchers have pinpointed for ChatGPT’s distinctive language usage.
:
:Would you like to explore more on how other focal words (like “intricate” or “underscore”) compare, or dive into the experimental methodology they used? [[Special:Contributions/104.28.205.246|104.28.205.246]] 22:35, 8 August 2025 (UTC) 
Sorry not sorry, this is a [https://i0.wp.com/www.dude-n-dude.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/topper.jpg?ssl=1 really] [https://www.dude-n-dude.com/2025/07/28/reg-and-syd-triumph-of-the-dollar-bill/ sore subject] for me. Especially since I work at a marine biology laboratory that, for decades, has worked on topics related to (WARNING: [http://www.benway.com/firesign/fst-reviews/dwarf.htm PROHIBITED LANGUAGE]!) "climate change" (anthropogenic global warming). The MIT Technology Review, last May, published an article detailing the energy costs of all forms of AI. If you have not yet encountered this article, I [https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/05/20/1116327/ai-energy-usage-climate-footprint-big-tech/ recommend it] (WARNING: PAYWALL sorry not sorry, first-readers might get a pass). In case you were wondering how come 47 was so quick to pull US out of global climate accords, and conduct his full-on assault on [ahem] inconvenient truths, this is part of the answer (the other part is equally-energy-guzzling cryptocurrencies). Not for nothing did Frank Herbert, in 1965, create an "Orange Catholic Bible" for the sole purpose of quoting a single line from it: "Thou shalt not create a machine in the image of a human mind." [[Special:Contributions/2605:59C8:160:DB08:F999:FCE:2CB7:40E5|2605:59C8:160:DB08:F999:FCE:2CB7:40E5]] 17:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Basically anyone with autism was blamed for being ChatGPT at some point in the last 2 years
(I include myself in this, and many others). And Randall displays, through XKCD, basically every symptom. But hey, that's what happens when your thinking is logic-based. [[Special:Contributions/2A06:C701:419E:9400:FB39:2243:3D5D:F06D|2A06:C701:419E:9400:FB39:2243:3D5D:F06D]] 22:56, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Wait! If you look closely at the illegible text, you can see things that look like [1] or something, which occasionally comes from ai or Wikipedia. [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 01:08, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
:You can, but (in my own forum haunts) I'm not unknown to use footnotes[1], just like seen, to pepper my discourse; and these are clearly inline[2] []-references, not superscript[3] ones, as per actual Wiki markup. Copying and pasting from a superscripted source can remove that, but if it's an ''actual'' GPT posting, and being accurate with things like the mdashes (I normally avoid them, mainly due to the "word-word" vs "word - word" problem, but use parentheses and semicolons a lot more), you'd think it'd be accurate by the style-tags too. Unless it has been specifically/predominantly trained on this style of footnote use (and long-winded sesquipedalian lexicon) from the likes of myself, of course!
:[1] a.k.a. 'feetnete', in the full plural!
:[2] Foo[bar]
:[3] Foo[bar]
:[[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 10:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Tom Bombadil a "relatively minor character"? How dare you! In this essay, I will... {{unsigned ip|81.103.84.101|18:23, 10 August 2025}}

3126: Disclaimer

2025-08-10T18:04:43Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ Delving into the fact that they're actually more commonly in use in some places, like around the xkcd community. Revising and linking the reference to how GPT-5 had just been released.

{{comic
| number = 3126
| date = August 8, 2025
| title = Disclaimer
| image = disclaimer_2x.png
| imagesize = 346x396px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = You say no human would reply to a forum thread about Tom Bombadil by writing and editing hundreds of words of text, complete with formatting, fancy punctuation, and two separate uses of the word 'delve'. Unfortunately for both of us, you are wrong.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|If the academic integrity department asks, this page was NOT created by ChatGPT. Don’t remove this notice too soon.}}

This comic shows a message written by [[Cueball]] (likely representing [[Randall]]). The combination of a user profile image, metadata, and the body of text, suggest this is a posting on a forum. At the end—possibly as an automatically appended forum signature—he includes a disclaimer preemptively denying that the content was produced by ChatGPT, and that this is just the way he is.

{{w|ChatGPT}} is a {{w|large language model}}, a type of {{w|generative artificial intelligence}} designed to produce human-like text. In 2025, at the time of this comic’s release, tools like ChatGPT had become widely used for composing everything from professional emails to casual forum posts. Chatbots tend to be verbose. One side effect of this trend is that genuine, naturally long-form writing is sometimes mistaken for AI-generated content. People may become suspicious not only of length and thoroughness, but also of stylistic markers such as formally correct punctuation—particularly the {{w|Dash#Em_dash|em dash}}—which is uncommon among average internet users, but occasionally favored by ChatGPT.

The title text explains the context. It notes that some people claim no human would compose a meticulously organized essay about {{w|Tom Bombadil}}, a relatively minor character from ''The Lord of the Rings'', especially if it contains the word “delve.” This word is perceived as atypical in everyday conversation yet is frequently used by ChatGPT. Randall counters that he would write such an essay, and in fact has. The choice of “delve” may be a deliberate reference to Gandalf’s line in ''The Fellowship of the Ring'' about the Dwarves who “delved too greedily and too deep,” or perhaps to “Michel Delving,” the largest Hobbit settlement in the Shire, whose name literally means “large excavation.” He also says this is unfortunate for both of them: Randall for being the kind of person who could, and would, write all that; the person he's talking to for having jumped to the wrong assumption about the nature of the author.

The presence of the em dash in the disclaimer further fuels the joke. Em dashes are seen by many as an indicator that a piece of text was AI-generated; although they have been a long-standing (even pre-GPT) feature of both Randall's comics and this site's user-written explanations, which of course does not disprove the more general observation being alluded to. The comic is also likely to be have been written specifically as a response to the releast of {{w|GPT-5}}, the day before this comic was published.

==Transcript==
:[A Cueball profile picture is shown next to five paragraphs of illegible text, which contains varied punctuation marks and two square-bracketed citations. The last paragraph in the essay is separated from the other paragraphs by a line with three dashes. Its single sentence is highlighted, and lines connect that illegible sentence to a box with an enlarged, legible version of the sentence.]
:Enlarged text: Not ChatGPT output—I’m just like this.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I’ve had to start adding this disclaimer to my messages.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:LOTR]]

3126: Disclaimer

2025-08-10T17:54:08Z

92.23.2.228: /* Explanation */ I think that's better (also, no longer "hin" instead of "him").

{{comic
| number = 3126
| date = August 8, 2025
| title = Disclaimer
| image = disclaimer_2x.png
| imagesize = 346x396px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = You say no human would reply to a forum thread about Tom Bombadil by writing and editing hundreds of words of text, complete with formatting, fancy punctuation, and two separate uses of the word 'delve'. Unfortunately for both of us, you are wrong.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|If the academic integrity department asks, this page was NOT created by ChatGPT. Don’t remove this notice too soon.}}

This comic shows a message written by [[Cueball]] (likely representing [[Randall]]). The combination of a user profile image, metadata, and the body of text, suggest this is a posting on a forum. At the end—possibly as an automatically appended forum signature—he includes a disclaimer preemptively denying that the content was produced by ChatGPT, and that this is just the way he is.

{{w|ChatGPT}} is a {{w|large language model}}, a type of {{w|generative artificial intelligence}} designed to produce human-like text. In 2025, at the time of this comic’s release, tools like ChatGPT had become widely used for composing everything from professional emails to casual forum posts. Chatbots tend to be verbose. One side effect of this trend is that genuine, naturally long-form writing is sometimes mistaken for AI-generated content. People may become suspicious not only of length and thoroughness, but also of stylistic markers such as formally correct punctuation—particularly the {{w|Dash#Em_dash|em dash}}—which is uncommon among average internet users, but occasionally favored by ChatGPT.

The title text explains the context. It notes that some people claim no human would compose a meticulously organized essay about {{w|Tom Bombadil}}, a relatively minor character from ''The Lord of the Rings'', especially if it contains the word “delve.” This word is perceived as atypical in everyday conversation yet is frequently used by ChatGPT. Randall counters that he would write such an essay, and in fact has. The choice of “delve” may be a deliberate reference to Gandalf’s line in ''The Fellowship of the Ring'' about the Dwarves who “delved too greedily and too deep,” or perhaps to “Michel Delving,” the largest Hobbit settlement in the Shire, whose name literally means “large excavation.” He also says this is unfortunate for both of them: Randall for being the kind of person who could, and would, write all that; the person he's talking to for having jumped to the wrong assumption about the nature of the author.

The presence of the em dash in the disclaimer further fuels the joke; em dashes are seen by many as an indicator that a piece of text was AI-generated. The comic may also contain a subtle nod to GPT-5, which had been released the day before this comic was published.

==Transcript==
:[A Cueball profile picture is shown next to five paragraphs of illegible text, which contains varied punctuation marks and two square-bracketed citations. The last paragraph in the essay is separated from the other paragraphs by a line with three dashes. Its single sentence is highlighted, and lines connect that illegible sentence to a box with an enlarged, legible version of the sentence.]
:Enlarged text: Not ChatGPT output—I’m just like this.

:[Caption below the panel:]
:I’ve had to start adding this disclaimer to my messages.

{{comic discussion}}<noinclude>

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Artificial Intelligence]]
[[Category:LOTR]]

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2025-08-10T17:47:24Z

92.23.2.228: /* What if pic explain */

<noinclude>{{Community links}}

{|-
|valign="top" width="100%"|[[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|left|120px]] <big><big>Miscellaneous</big></big>

This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else. {{AddNewSection|Page=Explain XKCD:Community portal/Miscellaneous|Text=(+post)}}
|}</noinclude>

__TOC__
==ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS==
<div class="plainlinks" style="background:#edf6ff; border:1px solid #a7d7f9; margin:1em auto 1em auto; width:100%; font-size: 120%; padding: 0.5ex; text-align: center;">The discussion of the now-deleted page "Advertise here" has been archived. The archive is available at '''[[explain xkcd talk:Community portal/Miscellaneous]]'''.</div>

== 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}}

:Thanks 108.162.229.100! I've started collecting these helpful tools on a [[Browser helpers|new page]], to hopefully make them easier for others to find. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 01:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

== 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)
: +1 on this. '''Change'''

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)

For what it's worth, if the matter is ever re-opened, I'd vote to '''change''' to one of the alternate suggestions -- I quite like "extra knowledge, see discussions" but many others would be fine. The current one is a poor way to greet newcomers; it certainly gave ''me'' pause. Perhaps I've been sensitized by the general uptick in incivility in many places in recent years, but I'm actively avoiding forums and sites that appear to be encouraging rudeness. If one disregards that header, it becomes clear that this site isn't like that, but one has to get past that header first. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 17:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

'''Change''' because the only justification to keep it seems to be "It's just a joke why are people always so offended at everything" [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk about me behind my]] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ/ back]) 12:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I’d say '''change''' it. It’s not funny, it’s never been funny and it never will be funny. Why does a tag line have to be funny any way? All it needs to be is memorable and eye catching. I personally like “congratulations you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000” it’s a direct reference to an existing comic and encourages learning more.
:I agree, so '''change''' from me. —[[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]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 18:27, 8 December 2022 (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)
:We could refer to her as Megan, based on the character even despite its' "everywoman" stance. Megan is represented as Randall's wife in the ''_ Years'' comic series (with Randall being the supportive main Cueball character), as well as in other comics where Randall is represented as a Cueball in a comic with a Megan. {{unsigned ip|172.70.130.6}} 18:52, 26 Jul 2021 (UTC)
::Also, broken signing because I forgot that <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> was a thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.6|172.70.130.6]] 18:56, 26 July 2021 (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)
Thank You for the info!
[[User:GetPunnedOn]]
::Extra info, for GetPunnedOn (and others, but you're needing to he told this a lot, GPO...). Please use the full signature (those four tildes: <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>), to let us know that, in this case, you posted your reply at 23:30, 21 May 2023 UTC, as we knew what date and times in 2018 the prior users posted. Not even sure you'll read this/etc, so leaving it as an open message to anyone else who stumbles this way without otherwise picking up on the other hints to do so. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.206|172.71.178.206]] 08:52, 22 May 2023 (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)

::: Hello? Anyone there? [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 06:55, 8 July 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]].
: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)
:: this was the question. And I hadn't looked hard enough. Thank you
:: 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)

== is scraping this site ok? ==

Hi everyone! Some days ago I scraped explainxkcd to get the webcomics' content, and created an interactive network chart where nodes are comics and two nodes share a link if they have words in common. (It's here: https://www.fluentdata.tech/visualizing-the-xkcd-comics-network-using-google-vision-spacy-and-d3/)

However, looking back I don't know if I had permission to actually scrape this site. Where can I get this information? Is scraping OK?
:From [[explain xkcd:Copyrights]], "The Explain XKCD wiki is generally licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license (CC-BY-SA-3.0). This means that you can freely reuse our content, but you have to say where you got it — if you're sharing on the internet, a link back to the article is appropriate." So yes, scraping this site is allowed, but you should credit the site. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 03:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

== So what happened to the site? ==
Just curious, but it was down last night (June 14, Eastern Daylight time's night) and this morning has reverted to February. This is not a complaint, it's curiosity and a willingness to help out. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 15:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
:I'm curious too. It was down on the morning of Friday the 11th & is currently back up showing last Wednesday the 9th's comic. A post asking about it on [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/nxrm65 r/xkcd] got over 140 upvotes in 3 days. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 16:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
::The page was down for more than four days. Problem is there seem to be no administrators attached to explain xkcd anymore, so no one who actually knows anything replies to these posts... :-/ So if the page goes down permanently there seems to be no one who still uses this page, who knows what to do... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
:::That would be a shame since a ton of good content would be lost. Somebody somewhere needs to be paying the bills for the site to be hosted though. Don't they know what happens to the product they're paying for? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 13:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
::::Indeed, is there anyway we can contribute to the upkeep of the site? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.182|141.101.76.182]]

== Stuck? ==
So, nothing yet for the August 7, 2021 comic? I normally see the main page update within an hour of the new xkcd appearing. Not complaining, just hoping nothing is wrong. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 20:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

== Help finding a specific comic. ==

I've been trying to find this specific comic but I can not find it anywhere. It's the one where a character suggests going to another building to avoid companies like Google and Facebook and tries to leave only to find the doors (and windows?) replaced with walls. Turns out Google and Facebook bought all the buildings and removed all doors so people can only use their services.
: (Above unsigned post by [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.65|108.162.245.65]] 04:38, 28 October 2021‎ (UTC).)
: 99% sure that's not an xkcd (though it does sound entertaining). You might try asking on r/xkcd, they can often ID even non-xkcd comics.
: Please sign your posts. [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 05:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

== Update/further correct the Bots pages? ==

Seeing an edit to [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Bots the site's meta-page on Bots] (and making a minor grammatical edit myself), the current and seemingly unfixable inactivity of DgbrtBOT and its replacement by Theusaof... (though not, yet, as an officially recognised member of the Bots group?) makes the statement "There are 3 bots" dubiously correct, depending upon how you count them. As a humble IP unconnected to any 'bot, I am neither confident enough in the facts to revise all the relevent details nor able to do much about it (not even create the above page's Talk-space) but maybe someone else here can muster up both qualities. So over to you..? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.36|172.70.91.36]] 11:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

== Countdown Timer ==

Does anyone know what the timer in the upper right corner of the website is? As of writing, it's around "20D 20H 20M" (ha ha). Is this for some kind of event I don't know about (I mean, I don't keep track of that sort of thing, so I wouldn't usually know anyway, but still), or is this just something weird Randall's doing that we're all going to find out together?

Just curious.
(Tidal Rose)

:Yes, I've been wondering, too. I can't find any good explanation anywhere for it -- I looked on Reddit, etc. I guess he really is keeping it a secret -- perhaps a book announcement. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.253|162.158.255.253]] 00:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

It appears that the accompanying image may also be updating (not minute to minute at the moment). Curious to see what this little black line does! (My bet is that it's a new book as well)

:My first thought was counting down to Webb reaching L2, but it's a couple days late for that... looks to be approximately 10AM Eastern on January 31, though my datemath is probably not too good when the local hour is <6. [[User:Davidhbrown|Davidhbrown]] ([[User talk:Davidhbrown|talk]]) 05:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The image has definitely updated!

Is there a place where the progressive images are archived? [[User:Fuzzymo|Fuzzymo]] ([[User talk:Fuzzymo|talk]]) 01:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
:There is a [[Countdown_in_header_text|page structure]] now created for it. Go directly to [[Countdown_in_header_text/images|the /images sub-page]] for the captured series-so-far. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.43|162.158.159.43]] 04:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

The exact time it's counting down to is Monday, January 31, 2022 at 10 AM EST (Munroe's time zone) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.165|108.162.229.165]] 23:55, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Could it be for [https://www.nationaldaystoday.com/national-backward-day/ National Backward Day?]
:Already mentioned (and mostly rejected?) in the ''real'' conversation about this. (See the [[Countdown in header text]] page, etc, if you haven't already.) Not sure what the plane would have to do with it, unless it turns out to be flying backwards when we see movement lines. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 17:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

== What if 103 ==

Why is it "not quite a coincidence" that the titanic was traveling at about the same speed when it hit bottom as when it hit the iceberg?
: 1. please sign your posts! 2. im guessing the joke is that it wasnt moving [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 17:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Bumpf
:: What are you talking about? Its speed was around 20.5 kts at the time of impact.

== Syndication comic: uploaded with no number, link to xkcd doesn't work? ==

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Syndication

In the title, the page is very broken and there's no evidence Randall Munroe ever uploaded this. Someone in the comments theorises it's a fan uploaded comic pretending to be official. Any way to find out? [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 08:08, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

== Concerning a certain editor ==

I'm puzzled and slightly worried as to the motives of [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Gadget-HotCat&namespace=&tagfilter=&start=&end= a given named editor]. Having made direct comments myself (and seen others do so), albeit only as an IP, I'm concerned as to their potentially reckless nature. As messages to(/in reply to) them have done very little to get a valid explanation, I thought I should note the case slightly more formally. They seemed quite helpful when they started to post (at a time of notable vandalism, and I'm reluctant to jump to any adverse conclusion about that) and I obviously cannot speak of their time beyond this submission, but I find an overwhelming amount of their most recent interactions to be (to put it charitably) naive, despite clearly the intelligence to use advanced Wiki markup/etc.

I welcome a ready and willing editor. Moreover one who has bothered to get an accountable account, more than I have ever done! I would be happy to see them usefully contribute further, but could they perhaps realise (or accept, if they already know) that the drive to submit random and (pretty much always) unexplanatory content is not useful to anyone. And that's all I wish to say, right now. As much of a nudge as I want to make for the moment. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.64|141.101.99.64]] 14:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

== xkcd Volume 0 ==
xkcd Volume 0 is a collection of chosen comic strips - but there's also red-text found scattered though pages, usually as some type of cypher or code. Because of that, can an authorized user create a stub for [[xkcd Volume 0]] so that the codes can be documented, or does that risk too much of a copyright violation? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.56|108.162.241.56]] 00:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

== Russia ==
Is there a comic that mentions Russia? Omg Omg Omg {{unsigned|Omg omg omg Бельков|23:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)}}
:@[[User:Omg omg omg Бельков|Omg omg omg Бельков]]: [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=russia&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go Let me use the search bar]. ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 23:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
:Might be a good idea if the mods had a look at the following accounts, BTW:
:"Omg сайт вместо гидры", "Omg omg omg Бельков", "Omgomg", "Площадка omg", "Darknet omg omg", "Ссылка на omgomg", "Омгомгомг магазин", "Омгомгомг сайт", "Омгомгомг ссылка", "Омг сайт магазин", "Омг ссылка", "Омг тор ссылка", "Площадка omg ссылка", "Сайт омг омг ссылка", "Сайт omg onion", "Сайт omg shop", "Сайт omgomg", "Omgomgomg ссылка", "Omg omg market onion", "Omg onion", "Omg online", "Omg shop ссылка", "Omg web net", "Omgomg гидра", "Omgomg замена гидре", "Omgomg market", "Omgomg tor", "Omgomgomg магазин", "Omgomgomg сайт", "Omg omg сайт зеркало", "Omg omg ссылка онион", "Omg omg сайт аналог гидры", "Omg зеркало", "Omg аналог гидры", "Omg вместо гидры", "Omg даркнет", "Omg дарк", "Omg маркет", "Omg omg площадка тор", "Omg онион", "Omg площадка даркнета", "Omg площадка новая", "Omg площадка торговая", "Omg ссылка", "Omg dark", "Omg darknet", "Omg market", "Omg omg даркнет", "Omg omg магазин ссылка", "Omg omg площадка отзывы", "Omg omg площадка сайт", "Зеркало ссылка омг"
:Wasn't particularly concerned, but then one decided to have a go at posting. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.185|172.69.79.185]] 23:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

== Edit War ==
An edit war has occurred on this page. Three topics were added and then removed. One user got banned. It seemed that the "Miscellaneous" is not actually miscellaneous. I can't create any talk pages, either. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 03:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

:Spammers are being impersonated. [[User:ClassicalGames|Clas]]rch 2023 (UTC)

== Connect spam ==
It seems that the pages with "Connect" in their titles tend to receive spam posts. [[User:Memo Spike Connector|2503: Memo Spike Connector]] ([[User talk:Memo Spike Connector|talk]]) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Did this happen on Wikipedia too? [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 10:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Note for spammers: Do not rely on our group or others such as [[User:Memo Spike Connector]] to revert your edits. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 10:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

== April fools day ==
April fools day is coming. Let's predict what [[Randall]] will post for the day. [[User:Memo Spike Connector|2503: Memo Spike Connector]] ([[User talk:Memo Spike Connector|talk]]) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

: Uh, oh, April Fool's Day has already passed and there doesn't seem to be any related comics this year. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

:: Seems like they've seen our trying to predict the April Fools comic. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 23:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

== Public sandbox ==

What are the public sandbox pages used for? The "Main Page sandbox" was originally intended for testing the main page features, but then it received a lot of off-topic comments. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:24, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

:The [[:Template:sandbox]] page received spam posts recently, with some user repeatedly trying to put words under another person's pen. I'm afraid someone will start using chatbots to spam in the future. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 07:03, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

:The above issue seems to have been resolved. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.135.43|172.69.135.43]] 02:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

::And then a mysterious "fanmade comic" appeared. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.174|172.69.22.174]] 02:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

::For the record, [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous&diff=prev&oldid=312713 massive editing has occured] here, which is clearly debatable. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.35|172.70.90.35]] 08:33, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

== Editor guide for specific category ==

Could you add an editor guide on how to add this category to pages? Some user did it wrongly a while ago. https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Category:Comics_sharing_name

I can't create talk pages. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.230|162.158.166.230]] 09:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

==Vector images don't work==
The vector images don't show up on my browser. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 22:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
:Which vector images, and which bowser? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.184|172.69.79.184]] 23:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

::There is supposed to be a vector image on the top of this page, just above the "Contents" block. It seems to be that none of the vector images show up normally on this computer. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 23:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

:::I used a new browser and it failed again. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 08:06, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
::::But ''which'' browser(s)? I mean, if you're using Lynx, then you probably won't get native inline SVG rendering support, ever. If you're using NCSA Mosaic then you definitely need to change to something a bit newer ''anyway''. If you're using the latest Chrome/Firefox/Edge/whatever then I'd be surprised if it doesn't work. And if it's ''only on this site'' (i.e. that similarly embedded graphics work elsewhere), then that's a whole other line of enquiry.
::::Help us to help you, if you have indeed got a problem (and perhaps explain how you found the problem, too, to know how you detected the anomaly). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.9|141.101.98.9]] 12:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

== Solar system category ==

Could the category for the solar system be possibly created? There are several comics related. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 07:13, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:Hey! You don't need to make an admin request. In proposals 1.49 there's where you can propose categories, and if you think it's a good idea/get support you can just go ahead and make it. [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

== Categorization problem ==

Just now, I found two user pages lying in the [[:Category:Internet]] category. Could we possibly create a categorization template so that user pages that transcluded a comic page will not be categorized? We can also solve the problem that puts the Main Page in various theme categories. [[User:CategoryGeneral|CategoryGeneral]] ([[User talk:CategoryGeneral|talk]]) 03:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
:I've blanked one of the sandboxes. The other one doesn't belong to our group. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 03:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
::Nice sentiments, but please stop feigning talking to yourself or using [[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2293:_RIP_John_Conway&diff=prev&oldid=310329 your own edits to justify your various unnecessary aliases]]...
::There really do not need to be 'personal sandboxes', and the use made of the sandboxes is not useful. Many things that a Sandbox is used for could be done simply by the "Show preview", and certainly it isn't supposed to be a notepad for unrelated junk. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.67|172.70.85.67]] 08:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

== Help with Creating a User Page ==

I'm a relatively new user, and I decided "I should probably make a user page," but for some reason it says that I "do not have permission to create this page" even though it's my page. [[User:Trogdor147|Trogdor147]] ([[User talk:Trogdor147|talk]]) 03:08, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
:Check the user page now! [[User:Z1mp0st0rz|Z1mp0st0rz]] ([[User talk:Z1mp0st0rz|talk]]) 15:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks! To everyone redirected here via my previous comments, click here -> [[User:Trogdor147|Trogdor147]] ([[User_talk:Trogdor147|talk]]) 00:17, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

== Versailles-Rose-style cultural export ==

America has already banned cultural export from several places, but this happened again in [[Talk:2781: The Six Platonic Solids]]. That is illegal. It should be taken seriously. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.71|172.69.134.71]] 23:55, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
:Presuming you're refering to that thing edited out in [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2781:_The_Six_Platonic_Solids&diff=prev&oldid=316742 this edit], if I thought I understood the original comment, then I'm darned if I can work out what your official objection to it is.
:If I thought the original wasn't just CG being CG, I'd revert that removal for being nonsensical. No "inciting illegality", so far as I can see, so no need to remove the comment or complain about it.
:You're not CG (or an off-site ally) wearing an IP cloak to do other typical CG-like things, such as we've seen many times before, are you? Don't do that, if so. I won't be restoring the original, but you need to establish better reasons for editorialising a Talk page's contributions.
:...but, if anyone is going to edit things around again, I hope they also put a suitably attributed {{template|unsigned ip}} on the other most recent appended line, ok? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.16|172.70.86.16]] 10:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
: He restored that offensive line. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.17|172.69.22.17]] 23:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
: Not sure what's going on here, but the nonsense language makes me suspect bots, in which case maybe just ban the IP. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 23:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
:: Difficult, with IPs. I'm one but not the type you want to ban, if you can take my word on that. It all depends on which Cloudflare gateway(s) you get routed through, and then which 'local' IP you happen to get assigned as from interaction to interaction.
:: Personally I suspect an idiot (a human, but an idiot. Or maybe an entire off-site group of idiots who are playing some sort of group game using our site as the playing-board. If it's automated (which is more difficult to do reliably than direct human trolling, realistically) then it's still an idiotically set up auto-trolling with no clear usefulness beyond 'because we can'. Nobody bothered to answer me as to why, but that just reinforces my feeling that there's no legitimate reasons behind any of it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.97|172.71.242.97]] 09:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

::That post appeared back again. That's kind of hidden cultural reference. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.17|172.71.154.17]] 23:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
::Too hidden. As I asked before (but it was deleted) explain it to us. Or me, at least. If tou actually have a point, we can help you. But you don't, I suspect. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.97|172.71.242.97]] 09:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

There is a hidden reference to another country's culture. Many Americans hate that country. We do not allow such countries' culture to invade our website. Our website is American. EDIT: Those captchas are way too hard. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.156|172.71.154.156]] 23:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
:Still obtuse. And, I suspect, also incorrect. Which country? China ? North Korea? Canada? You can say, you know... Free speech exists, with no overriding legal prohibition against even mentioning whatever enemy nation you consider as beyond the pale for 'many'. Perhaps you aren't allowed to incite hatred (not sure if it's a legal thing, but it would be a generally established forum policy) but merely mentioning a general emnitity arising from the distrust of all things mapleleafian can be done without fear or favo(u)r. Educate us. Make us understand the issue, that we might never again fall into the trap of razy lacism or accidentally mention beavers in polite company... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.130|172.70.85.130]] 08:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
:: Click the "edit" button and you'll see that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.204|162.158.166.204]] 23:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

== Twix re-referencing ==

Nearly put this as an HTML comment in the Social Media category (it has no Talk). Not sure if this should be under Proposals/Maintenance/Co-ordination in here (please move there, if you feel strongly it does belong in any of these). But probably needs saying.

Just seen one (out of many!) Twitter-referencing articles entirely rebranded to say "X" instead (and "x" for "tweet", etc). Which I felt a mistake. Reverted and added a single "now rebranded as..." caveat to the original mention, given the comic concerned was clearly Twitter-branded (older look, too), and this seemed a better solution.

I just want to express my opinion (and thus ask if I'm truly rolling with the consensus) that "now known as "X" is perhaps the besr direction to go. As and when, not necessarily as a splurge of appended edits to ''every'' Twitter-referencing page right this minute. (For one thing, it could so easily be rebranded/retrobranded/debranded altogether in the near future if either sanity prevails or greater insanity piles upon that already seen.)

Clear Twitter-era comics certainly don't need "tweets" changed to... whatever gets settled on as the proper term for post-Twitter tweets. "Twixes"? Yeah, nobody really knows that, yet, anyway. When (inevitably) a comic arises referencing "X (formerly known as Twitter)" then the referencing can be reversed. If/when Wikipedia renames/redirects accordingly then maybe that'll be a cue to (as we editors come across them in other edit contexts) change <code><nowiki>{{w|Twitter}}</nowiki></code> to something like <code><nowiki>{{w|X (Social media)|Twitter}}</nowiki></code> to avoid hitting the redirect, or whatever makes sense by then. But I would resist big changes to legacy references (i.e. pre-July 2023) and imagine that well-meaning editors that do try to help by almost 'keyboard/leopard' mass changing be discouraged/pre-empted.

But that's IMHO. I think it should potentially be a conversation, here, rather than me being a full on vigilante-reverter (and others having their own ideas) just because *I* have a particular impression of what's suitable to maintain site style. For the present. And potentially in years to come when the fate of The Media Formerly Known As Twitter might have transformed yet again and Randall's œuvre (perhaps still being drawn, thrice Earth-weekly, from his Lunar south-pole penthouse 'retirement' suite, or else from his official AI mind-mapped legal successor-entity!) continues to attract new readers for whom this "Twitter" thing needs actual explaining, even though they've used MuskMedia's 'æMotifier' quantum-netlink ever since they got their first cranial emotion-transceiver implant inserted and become a fully accredited voting Martian Citizen! (Or, alternatively, it's become as unknown to most people as AskJeeves/Geocities/Fidonet because it's a sidelined or even completely defunkt thing.)

So, yeah, ''waaay'' too early to do crazy site-wide edits, but perhaps agree on what we might do right now on a throttled back basis. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.197|141.101.98.197]] 09:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

== wait what? (is this "view a bunch of html" thing intentional?) ==

so i was trying to see the rss feed because i was curious and ended up with the page showing me a bunch of html code for some reason. what is going on???

also just realized half of the "[something][/something]" thing you use in forums to, for example, post something as a spoiler is basically html but with square brackets instead of whatever these are called (the ones that look like this: "<>") [[User:An user who has no account yet|An user who has no account yet]] ([[User talk:An user who has no account yet|talk]]) 18:30, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
:{{w|RSS}} is, or should be, based upon XML (eXtensible Markup Language). Which is basically the 'core' of many common markup languages, especially HTML (or XHTML, as it has been standardised). You're really supposed to use an RSS ''reader'' utility to parse the 'html code' and present it in a more human-readable way. (Although it's also fairly easy to human-read the RSS and scan for details of interest, so long as you have at least an inkling of what you're looking at and for.)
:Regarding the forum <code>[code]...[/code]</code> stuff, I ''think'' you're speaking of {{w|BBCode}}, which I think is intended to be a handy solution to allowing only ''sanitised'' markup to be posted by any given forum's random, rambling and potentially rabid users with something to say. If you're happy to allow a contributor to render a <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> tag (or with <code><nowiki></nowiki></code>, or via a CSS property, etc), your forum back-end translates the allowable <code>[b]...[/b]</code> into that mandated browser-friendly form.
:But if anyone tried to use any actual <X>-tag directly, then it gets sanitised into <code>&lt;X&gt;</code>. This means that ''unless the forum explicitly allows it'' (and in a form that the browser understands, might need a .js/.css extension to execute it in modern browsers) one couldn't <code><blink><marquee>Blink A Marquee</marquee></blink></code> within any arbitrary post text...
:And also, with such lightweight "Bulletin Board Code" and neutralised 'original raw HTML', you can also stop many of the possible techniques for someone trying direct script-injection or even just rendering follow-up messages liable to inheriting an opened (but not closed) formatting from more freely used HTML.
:(I'm not entirely sure if 'markup security' is the prime reason for using it, and I know some weird and disruptive loopholes have occasionally still had to be closed in the parsing/conversion rules, but it seems to me as good an impetus as any.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.8|172.71.242.8]]

== Is it possible to add a feature that keeps track of all viewed comics so that you specifically view unseen comics only? ==

I'm trying to read every xkcd comic, and I believe I have done so, but I still have a small doubt in my head. Would it be possible, even if only on explainxkcd to keep track of comics viewed? If not, is it possible to create a program that can do this locally or would I just need to go back through all of them? {{unsigned|SteveTheNoob|10:40, 12 October 2023}}

: I'm not aware of anything simple that might (say) work as a <nowiki>{{Special:RandomUnreadOnly}}</nowiki> restriction, if that's what you're looking for. You(/everyone with a named account) probably need a "read list" page off your userspace that gets updated by a bit of "Visited!" embedded template/code/scripting attached to every relevent page (probably limited by being 'noinclude'd) and can be checked before it suggests your next landing spot (Random or otherwise). It would be a bit contrived. Even more so if you store page details ''with'' a last-viewed timestamp (either to allow you to revisit upon an update or to just allow pages seen early on to be occasionally revisited), which I'd suggest would be useful. But if it's an internal wiki page (rather than browser-side) it would probably be visible to anyone (write-restricted, I imagine) and I'm not sure that's a wise move.
: Too late to necessarily help you, but the aspiring completist could simply progress logically (not 'Special:Random'ly) from Comic 1 on up (or the current latest on down, with future 'latest's being a different progression to track) and keep a note of where you've got to after each binge-session of Next/Previous following. That'd catch most of the comics, less those that are unnumbered for various reasons. It could be done wikiwise with a variation on the 'Latest Comic' (global) tracker, but again with a Userspace page. Or just a browser extention, updating a Bookmark/Favourites link or just jot it down on a bit of paper. Some of these would take far less effort than trying to a implement per-user shared-but-private wikimedia solution bespoke to the exacting needs of this particular Wiki. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.205|172.70.91.205]] 13:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

== While False ==

There’s now over a year ago since [[user:While False|While False]] contributed for the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:While_False&diff=303753&oldid=301370|Barry-Larry-very last time]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.5|162.158.222.5]]

:While False’s “Explain xkcd museum” can be found [[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|here]]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.44|162.158.222.44]]

== Furries ==

Someone has been adding vaguely-relaged pages to [[:Category:Furries]]. Is this okay? This person's criteria seem to be that anything related to anthropomorphic animals (including anything related to Narnia) is "furry"; they also consider anything pertaining to knots or cheese graters to be furry-related. (The knot and grater things are NSFW inside jokes within the furry fandom.)

My opinion is that anything with anthropomorphic animals is close enough to fall under the furry category (after all, anthropomorphic animals are basically what define the furry fandom), but individual Narnia-related pages don't need to be tagged as furry. [[:Category:Chronicles of Narnia]] being a subcat of Furries is enough IMO. As for knots and graters, I don't think those also should be enough to tag someone.

What do you all think? {{unsigned ip|172.71.146.55|04:38, 1 February 2024}}

:My opinion: that it must depict furries subculture or its ''unambiguous'' inspirations.
:I see that [[:Category:Chronicles of Narnia]] has been labeled such, but this implies that [[969: Delta-P]] (amongst others) includes furries.
:I'd also argue that merely 'talking animals' aren't sufficient to be "furrie". [[1503: Squirrel Plan]] (not catted... yet!) are still ultimately scuiromorphic squirrels. 'Intelligent' animals, and 'translator-microbed' for our benefit, but barely different in depiction from any [[635: Locke and Demosthenes|other typical appearance]]. YMMV.
:And if a long-standing comic has not been given a long-standing category ''until you 'spot' the connection'', then it might be obscure and need (in-line) justification. See the markup (and edit-history) of the Lowercase in [[739: Malamanteau]] as an example of perhaps why and how.
:...in particular, when someone made [[1762: Moving Boxes]] an example of "Furries", someone else thought it was (improperly) due to the word "Hooves", when it was really due to "Knots". Equally improperly, IMO, given that various types of knot were mentioned in the Explanation, but certainly no references there to Furries (or even to more 'obvious' kinks than furry-fandom, with or without extant categories or obvious interest by Randall). Personally, I thought it had been about the word "Kits" (c.f. "cubs"), not that I agreed with that assertion either. So do add an in-line comment, and it ''might'' help justify it to future editors who don't see what you see. Still arguable, but at least avoids arguing cross-purposes.
:''To summarise'', unless you consider everything with Animals in it (or at least every one with animals being [[928: Mimic Octopus|'odd' in any human-relatable way]]) as potential Furries-fodder, it really must be obviously referencing Furrie-subculture. Enough to be considered worthy a mention in the Explanation as well, not just because of a tenuous word-association or imagery inadvertently triggering an obscure personal interests. (There's a comic that specifically makes me think "Caramel", but it has nothing intrinsically to do with (e.g.) [[:Category:Food]]. I know why it makes me think that, but wouldn't consider it meaningful to ''anyone'' else. Even if it might for a small subculture, however, it still wouldn't actually be a valid category to apply if there was no reason for Randall to have had that same association in mind.)
:Categories should not include much more true material than they reasonably need to, just on the offchance that there's a totally unintended link. (And if ''all'' the Narnia references need cat:Furries, they also need cat:Animals. I might argue that cat:Religion is at least as necessary, just for every mention/hint of Aslan. But I wouldn't actually flood that option, either.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.207|172.71.242.207]] 10:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
::I think there are enough pages in the category as of right now (22:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)), but seeing as I don't know all the references (what's so funny about knots and cheese graters?) it's obvious that I'm just William Shatner's generation 💅 descendant who pretends to be a furry for clout online. So I'm not sure whether you should trust me. --[[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 22:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

== What is the significance of the word "crap" here? ==

I often see vague references to "crap" in discussions on this wiki, but I don't understand the meaning. Of course, I *do* know what the literal definition of "crap" is; I just don't know the significance here. It doesn't seem to be a word used particularly often in xkcd, so what is the significance here? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.49|108.162.245.49]] 02:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
:I think you're refering to the escapades of a particular idiot (and possibly copycats). The actions conducted might well be refered to by various verb forms/etc of the word.
:Though there are 'legitimate' uses of the word in comics, in context, I don't think there is any particular Randallesque significance that you need to worry about. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.55|172.71.178.55]] 04:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you! What did the particular idiot do? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.62|172.71.150.62]] 22:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
:::Just particularly low-vocabulary/high-volume/zero-creativity nuisance editing Probably doesn't need dignifying by further explanation, and really not worth dwelling on. But this was just one particular type of nuisance, dealt with just as many other nuisances (by whatever hand) also were/will be. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.212|172.70.91.212]] 02:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

== Is ReCAPTCHA really necessary? ==

I worry that I might be opening up a can of worms here, but here goes. For various personal reasons I don't like setting up accounts with things unless I really, really need to. I'm sure I'm not the only one. There are also people who can't set up accounts because they don't have an email address. Because we're not logged in, every time we want to make any edit or post any comment on any part of this Wiki, we have to go through multiple laborious ReCAPTCHAs. I'm sure the irony isn't lost on the rest of you that CAPTCHA/ReCAPTCHA is the butt of more than a few jokes on various XKCD comics, which imply that they are disingenuous processes whose real purpose is to farm out stultifyingly mundane computing tasks to a captive audience. Furthermore, I am editing on mobile, which can present formatting problems, rendering the ReCAPTCHA (and, by extension, my editing) impossible to complete. I know there are other ways in which this Wiki combats spam, so do we really need ReCAPTCHAs? Removing them would make this site considerably more accessible to eccentrics and Luddites such as myself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.13|172.70.85.13]] 18:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
:I'm guessing you weren't here for the crap incident? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.120|162.158.41.120]] 23:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
:Speaking as an accountless luddite (long term active and non-lurking contributor; I ''choose'' not to clutter myself with yet another account, inventing yet another apt username when I don't actually have to), it ''can'' be annoying to have to do a round or two of Traffic Light or Tractor identification. But, given the number of obvious fake accounts, it may be that removing the control would release a deluge of one-shot spams that are currently caught.
:It's less trouble than the extra issue of having done a CAPTCHA successfully, submitting a ticked contribution, the explainxkcd server complaining of overload/whatever (error 503, I think) and then the necessary refresh-submit moans that I ''didn't'' give a CAPTCHA (logical enough... the side-server confirmation data probably loses synchronicity against the 'new' POST submission). And not even sure whether an other-than-CAPTCHA solution could handle that type of fail-over any better. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.49|172.70.163.49]] 10:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

== Why do all the comic updates feel late to me? I only ever see them on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and weekends. ==

I'm in the same time zone as Randall, so it could just be a sleep schedule thing tbh. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 21:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
:Quick poll of server-times for explainxkcd's BOT back to mid-February suggests that significantly more than half were before midnight Randall Mean Time (or Randall Daylight Time). That said, a long long experience has taught me not to fret the "only see it the next morning" ones (my time). They keep coming. 2916 was an outlier (almost 29 hours longer to arrive than 2910 did, assuming that wasn't a BOT delay that I'm not aware of).
:In this sample, it went from an earliest time of 11:37 (servertime, remember), Q1 at 18:12, Q2 at 22:03, Q3 at 03:11 (still pre-midnight, for you and him), and the latest was 16:31 the day after. Mondays seem to be a bit lagged over Wednesdays and Fridays but, outliers apart, there doesn't seem to be much in it.
:I could do a far longer sampling (I can recall of a couple-of-days-delayed ones that arrived ''eventually'', but at least officially kept the MWF cycles going. not counting delayed-specials/etc), but there's not much to be seen recently to concern me. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.190|172.69.79.190]] 23:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

== New users can't create pages ==

Hey, you know how new users can't create their own user pages? Well, it turns out that new users can't create ''any'' pages. Could this be the autoconfirm thing? {{unsigned|PDesbeginner|14:56, 20 June 2024}}
:If you think about it, you'll realise that it's probable that new users can't create user pages '''exactly because''' they can't create ''any'' pages... ;) But that state of affairs won't last long, if you're patient.
:...Until then, petitioning for (say) a new Category (with sufficient examples to provide a reason for it) might get you helped out by a sympathetic existing page-creator. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.90|172.70.91.90]] 19:45, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

== Minor edit/Watch this page ==

Before I save an edit, how do I decide which checkbox to select? [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 14:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
:I use the "minor edit" for fixing (my own) typos and when adding links or such to the(my) text. I never used the "watch" option but I guess you can use it to receive mail notifications if someone changes the page [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
:I did a test and it turns out that the "Watch this page" box makes the page get automatically added to your watchlist when you save the edit. Thanks for the help with when to select the minor edit box, but does anyone know what it actually does? [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 20:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::From my experience of other wiki sites (where I have an account, thus get to see such options), it's not much more than a bit of administrivia, to allow you to mark anything that you consider not bothersome in any way (de-doubling unnecessary whitespace, trivial typo-correction, etc.) and thus letting others selectively ignore such tweaks (at least until they start to wonder why an article has gained/lost several paragraphs as part of an apparently "minor edit").
::If it has any functional utility beyond just a handy user-flag, I haven't seen it. And no doubt there are those who would ''especially'' check (or have 'Bots check) so-called-minor edits, just to make sure they really are. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.203|172.70.162.203]] 23:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks! [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 16:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

== Hi! ==

How are all you beautiful people doing? I'm quite alright myself. [[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 03:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

== Red text ==
I found red text in the "Flowchart" comic explanation. Could you deal with it? [[User:CategoryGeneral|CategoryGeneral]] ([[User talk:CategoryGeneral|talk]]) 08:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
:In [[1195: Flowchart]]? I don't see any there.
:There are similarly named comics, and plenty of furtyer comics "that have a flowchart" so perhaps try at least telling us the number of the one you mean. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.145|172.70.86.145]] 18:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

== The future ==

You know, we're not too far from a future where each and every edit to this website will have paragraphs of critical commentary. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.210|108.162.245.210]] 23:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

== Comic # 2974 explanation ==

Someone please hug the editor of the explanation of comic #2974. They seem a little depressed. I noticed your nitpickyness and I cared. Thank you. Also you made me laugh a bunch. {{unsigned ip|172.70.111.167|13:28, 21 August 2024}}
:I don't see that myself (though there will be a number of editors, maybe the bits you mean are less obvious now) although hugs are rarely a bad idea (being careful in cases of sunburn, dermititis, excessive blisters or bubonic infections of various kinds) so free (but entirely optional!) hugs all round. Just because not all symptoms of depression are particularly obvious anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.17|172.70.162.17]] 14:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

== Comic #3000 ==
Y’all, we’re getting scarily close to comic 3000. Any bets on what it’ll be about? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
:I'll get back to you on that in a couple of months... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.164|172.70.162.164]] 04:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
::I myself think that it’s going to be a continuation of the <code><nowiki>[[Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd phones]]</nowiki></code> series. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 20:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
:::(You probably meant to use something like <code><nowiki>[[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd phones]]</nowiki></code>, which appears as the now clickable: [[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd phones]] ...or something similar. FYI.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.62|141.101.98.62]] 20:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
nothing, you get nothing >:[ [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
It was SOOO disappointing and just a regular comic :( [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 22:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

== Trouble finding comic about how kids read too many comics ==

Iirc, it was a comic that had newspaper quotes from various times in history. One was that kids read too many comics, one was that kids look out the window too much. Maybe one on too many video games, and/or too much tv. And maybe one on reading. Anyway, I'm having trouble finding it because the keywords are too vague. And "xkcd comic" just brings me to the homepage. Any help would be appreciated 🙏 [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.6|172.70.131.6]] 04:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
:[[1601|1601: Isolation]] [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 15:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

== Correct name ==

What’s the correct name for this wiki? ExplainXKCD is what I use, but there’s also Explainxkcd or explainxkcd or explain xkcd. Please advise for all of us pedantic editors. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 00:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
:A question for the ages. The case of "xkcd" itself is officially all lowered, and all domain names are inherently caseless, whilst xkcd's (usual) comic-text is sᴍᴀʟʟᴄᴀᴘs (or, rather, partly camel-cased SᴍᴀʟʟCᴀᴘs). If I don't use "explainxkcd" I might go for "ExplainXkcd" or "explainXkcd" (the latter two probably wrong, but at least adds degrees of parsability, maybe with some cringing). There's even a [[:File:Logo.png|case]] (NPI!) to call it "EXPLAINxkcd", but I wouldn't. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.138|172.71.26.138]] 10:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
::I’ve also noticed that if you substitute x for 23, k for 11, c for 3, and d for 4, as that is the order that they appear in the English alphabet, those four numbers add up to 42, or the answer to life, the universe and everything else. Is this intentional? Has anybody else noticed this? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 21:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
:::[[xkcd#Meaning of xkcd|Yes]] [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.150|172.68.205.150]] 22:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

== Coincidence ==

I just used the random page feature and got comic [[498: Secretary: Part 5]] twice in a row and got [[496: Secretary: Part 3]] on the third!
Its not important but I just think its neat[[User:Pego|Pego]] ([[User talk:Pego|talk]])

== Horrendously Cursed numbers ==

I need them. Currently, my favorite (which I found by a whole lot of guesswork) is 2^2.321928094886. It equals 5. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 23:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

It happened to bring a typo on page [[1506: xkcloud]] to my attention. [[User:ConscriptGlossary|ConscriptGlossary]] ([[User talk:ConscriptGlossary|talk]]) 04:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

== 2024 Harris banner ==

Will there be an article archiving and explaining the Harris banner on xkcd.com as of my typing this? https://imgs.xkcd.com/news/harris_news@2x.png [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 01:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Check [[Header text]]. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 03:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 04:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

== IP Editing Doesn’t Make Sense ==

I've read various arguments for why IP editing is allowed, or even a 'good idea'. I've read none that was compelling. Here are my reasons why I think it's not a good idea, and why it should be banned:

Per {{w|WP:ISU}}, user names that imply shared use are not allowed, so why is editing using an IP address allowed, given that IP addresses usually are shared? If the logic behind this policy is that an edit must be traceable to an individual editor, not a collective entity, then allowing anonymous editing from an IP address flies squarely in the face of that.
IP editing accounts for a large chunk of vandalism, disruptive editing, BLP violations, etc., and stopping it would reduce the cleanup workload for other editors.
Using multiple IP addresses, either intentionally or unintentionally, fragments a user's edit history, and makes it difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to detect editing patterns and decipher intentions.
The 'hassle' of registering really is not great, and therefore I don't buy the argument that mandatory registration would make it difficult to recruit new editors.
It's too easy for a registered editor to get around certain rules (such as creators not being allowed to remove speedy tags from their own articles) by logging out and editing under IP.
The whole malarkey about hiding IP addresses, allegedly for privacy reasons (!), would go away if IP editing weren't an option.
To be clear, I think everyone should be able to access the site without registering, and anyone should be allowed to edit, just not edit without registering. In that sense it's not that different from using a public library: you're welcome to browse the collection, access the reference section, etc. without anyone asking you any questions, but if you want to take a book home, you need to get a library card from the nice librarian first.

And a further clarification: I've nothing against users who edit under IP; my issue is with the system which allows this. As long as it is allowed, users are of course welcome to make use of this. I just think it shouldn't be allowed {{unsigned|IP Addresses Don’t Make Sense|23:25, 14 November 2024}}
:As an habitual IP, far for it for me to get involved in the argument. I will say that sometimes think it'd be nice to have a "history" that proves my actual involvement (the other day I came across a contribution from 2013 that was clearly mine), but those moments pass when I see how easy (too easy) it is to have gotten myself an account. Witness the various accounts that get conjoured up on a whim, 'yourself' included... You're not helping the cause by doing this.
:If you're a named user, normally, then you're just giving more reasons for locking everyone into far more restrictions than your nominal argument suggests, and forgetting how much non-disrupting (indeed, fixing) behaviour is also done by everyone. The perfect situation? Maybe not. But there are worse ones, for anyone who has thought about it for any time. Do you want ''my'' suggestions? I've got a whole shopping list of them, but you won't want to hear about them. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.227|172.69.194.227]] 03:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

== when did xkcd jump the shark ==
like, when exactly do you feel xkcd jumped the shark (if at all)? [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 12:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:If it has, than put me down as "likes shark-jumping". I've been directly enjoying (if not always as caught up with as I am these days) xkcd since before [[195: Map of the Internet]] (quite possibly back into only double-figures, but hard to know what I later rewound back to; or quite how far back I subsequently joined the fora and/or started explainxkcding, as both histories are shrouded behind data that's either now lost or inconveniently anonymised).
:Not everything is as geeky as that, but it doesn't have to be. Horses for courses, naturally. (Perhaps lasagna?) If ''everyone'' who had such a moment actually decides to tell you their answer, probably could be up to 3000 or so distinct replies. ("It was the flying ferret" "Those spiders always did it for me" ...) ''To clarify, there may be many valid answers, but the people who would give them are far more likely not to be here to answer your question. If anybody ''does'' hover around here and want to give a definite answer of why they no longer like xkcd, then bear in mind that they're more the exception than the rule. Twice-over!'' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.122.102|172.71.122.102]] 14:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hi, 42.book.addict here to put in my own two cents (check my user page on why I’m an IP). I would like to comment that I have noticed that I very much enjoy the older (albeit lower quality and resolution) comics than before. I think that I like the old xkcd strips more because they were much more geeky and nerdy than now, as well as more funny and witty. I feel like Randall has adapted the strip to appeal to a larger audience, which in turn lowered how much I enjoyed it (as I’m a massive nerd/geek). I can’t give an exact number, because the Covid-19 comics were highly enjoyable and are more of an outlier. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.117|162.158.167.117]] 17:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

== How do I add userboxes to my page? ==
I saw a user with userboxes and I want to be able to continue developing my personal page. Can anyone tell my how? [[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]] ([[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al|talk]]) 19:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:Probably the easiest thing is to look at the source of any page that has something you want to use. 'Edit', the page. You can just copy what's there, if you understand all the {{}} stuff, or even just remember what to put in those {{}}s, etc. Perhaps you could try a bit of in-situ exiting (Preview if you want modify to understand, but ''don't'' fully Save... at least not until you're working back in your own userspace).
:Not knowing how much you know about wikisyntax/markup, I could be either overexplaining or explaining entirely over your head by saying something like the following, but ''if'' it's useful (now, or once you've started), then you're welcome:
:*You can use templates by editing in the {{template|template}} text, with the appropriate name there.
:*Some of them accept/need parameters, which you use by adding a "|" symbol after the name and then a parameter. Add more parameters by adding further "|", for first(, second, third, etc) parameters, as necessary, if that's how the template concerned works.
:*Some templates accept/need "|paramName=paramData" for certain things that can control control (look at any comic page, and how the {{template|comic}} is used, and note that "whitespace is (relatively) free"!), so look out for that.
:*Templates can nest... A {{template|notice}} might have a {{template|w}}(ikipedia link) within it. And there's a whole flow-control 'language' of making complex branching decisions so don't be surprised to see loads of {s and }s (usually doubled, ''perhaps'' tripled, and singly in 'wikitable' markup) in things you're trying to use.
:*Then there's the rest of the wikimarkup... Simple formatting to linking (external website, page on this wiki, interwiki formats (though some of those have templates ready to simplify!), etc). There's some things (handy relevent shortcuts) unique to this site, other things fairly universal. The ''general'' userbox format isn't that different from many other wikiprojects, but you may find something or other a bit more 'tuned' to our needs.
:*Try things out. Remember: "Show Preview" is your friend. (There's also the Sandboxes, but you usually don't need to fully save something, leaving its remnants in a page history, to learn thst it works... Or, more usefully, that it doesn't (or not as you expect).
:...any use? Could be telling you things you actually know, or you're about to ask about the {}s again. But at least look at the userbox markup, that you want to emulate, and then apply what you already can deduce to some testing to see what the bits you ''can't'' deduce actually do. Then you may have nice questions which are more straightforward (or at least direct!) for us to answer. ;)
:And this is my general advice to anyone (where I'm unsure what level of experience they're thrning up with). If it becomes clear that more technical replies are needed (assuming I can give them!), or if we need to go back to more basic principles, then I would adjust. But you have at least been able to do ''some'' edits, so probably don't need module 1 part 1 of Wiki 101. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.4|172.70.85.4]] 22:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
: My advice? Copy a box from the source of a user page that has them (copy the text within the braces, including the braces), and mess with some of the parameters until you get what you want. If you feel like you can understand it, you can also look at the {{template|userbox}} template and try to see what the possible parameters are, but the template is pretty complicated. I'm pretty sure that all of the parameters are named, so the order shouldn't matter. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 03:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

== Who is this? ==
what is [[User:Lettherebedarklight]]?
:They're a user of this wiki, just like you. They might have caught your attention because they're currently [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Lettherebedarklight&oldid=367915 edit warring with an admin] and seem to be resolutely [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Lettherebedarklight&action=history against the idea of having a normal signature or talk page]. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 20:57, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
::no, I mean his user page just redirects to his user talk - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 23:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
:::Exactly! See the second and third links in my message --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

== Visual editing ==

why is the visual editor not here yet? - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 23:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:Because the only person who has access to the backend has gone dark and nobody else has access (which is also why the site is collapsing). You can read more about this in the Technical and Admin requests portals. At this point, we're lucky the wiki hasn't completely broken down already. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 08:59, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

::Noting that the visual editor gives a chance of ''really'' weird markup (WYSIWYG, yes... probably, but there's plenty of chance to do [[2109: Invisible Formatting|silly''' '''things]] that you'd never do if you actually saw the code).
::Though the site isn't actually collapsing. It always has a chance ''of'' collapsing, of course, just like any site (fully maintained or not). but the running issues with it are either non-serious things that updating won't help (continual 'spam attack' attempts, though it can be shown that it's already set up to be pretty proofed against most of them and most attacks continue to be dumber than the age-old system set up to prevent them from doing too much, with a high proportuon of the rest still dumber than the 'Bot that currently adds even more protection, and ultimately even those that get past that get handled by the existing userbase) or easily avoided issues (you can't use MathML like you used to be able to, but there's alternatives to that in most circumstances). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.92|172.68.205.92]] 16:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
:by owner of the wiki, you mean (the mysterious) [[User:Jeff]]? - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 00:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
::Precisely --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:36, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

== soup ==

what is [[Template:soup]] for? - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 00:44, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
:I guess it's a userbox, [[User:Certified_nqh/userbox|see some examples here]]. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:36, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

== deleting pages ==

does anyone here know how to delete pages? {{unsigned}}
:You add "<nowiki>[[Category: Pages to delete]]</nowiki>" and hope an admin eventually deletes it. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:46, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

== Google Chrome is now (again) truncating TITLE TEXT in webpages incl. XKCD ==

Greetings,
As of early April 2025, we’ve noticed that Google Chrome is no longer displaying to us the complete TITLE TEXT when we mouseover an XKCD image. This appears to be a regression of earlier-reported issues, going back 12 years or more.

We’ve been using m.xkcd.com on my mobile devices, and we may begin to prefer it on desktop as well, since the mobile rendering is the best way we’ve found to access the complete Title Text without browser interference.

Coming here because, perhaps, many readers of ExplainXKCD might need explained why the Title Text no longer makes a lot of sense with the ellipses, and also, we’ve no idea how to access the remainder of the text from the browser UI, without going into DevTools or something.

'''Note: This also affects images and Title Text here on Explainxkcd itself!!!'''

We’re using a ChromeOS Chromebook, Stable channel:
Version 134.0.6998.183 (Official Build) (64-bit)

[[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 22:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
:In my experience with Chrome for Android, it just doesn't have the space to display the text in the window that it gives. (Latest comic ends with "an emitted SIm card hitting...") That also happens with (my prefered choice of browser) Firefox for Android. (''That'' ends with "a emitted SIM card hitting the side ...", for reference.) It's just a function of the screen-real-estate and the fitting it in with all the "Copy link / Share link / Share image / [etc]" options that this interface needs.
:Don't know about ChromeOS and Chromebook, all that much, but I get the impression it works more with the tablet paradigm rather than a normal laptop one (like the one I'm usong here, which gives a nice hover-text rendition of the whole job), and assumes and/or is a lower resolution so subject to such pixelated real-estate issues as I mention.
:That applies to the xkcd.com site. Here on explainxkcd.com it displays as (the beginning, and then) "and you listen very carefully..." on one line and then the URL of "explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/File:decay_chain_2x.png" on the next, above the various "click options". I ''believe'' that's to do with the fact that the explainxkcd image is an href (which gets represented in that space too), whereas the xkcd.com one is perfectly happy to just give me (as much as it can of) the "title=..." parameter of the img-tag.
:...and I've learnt not to worry about that. It's a technical limit that isn't any website's fault (well, maybe it's the fault of ''having'' too long a title-text), and the best that any browser under the circumstances can do.
:There's two ''or three'' main ways of seeing the whole thing though:
:#Go and edit the URL to add "view-source:" in front of it, and look at the source (that's how it works for Android Chrome, I imagine it's how it works in ChromeOS Chrome, it also works in both Windows and Android Firefox, and seems to be industry standard). Awkward, perhaps, to narrow down the appropriate length of markup tagging and read it straight, but it's there.
:#*Noting that a recent update of the Android Chrome started to make the ''default'' action of a URL of "view-soirce:<validURL>" to open a search up on the "view-soirce:<validURL>" line. One has to be careful to eschew using the enter/return key as that makes use of the "magnifying glass" option, you have to choose the second (non-default) "globe-like thing" option which depicts "yes, use this exact 'address'". No, I don't know what they messed with, and why they messed with it, and it's not the only thing that has changed recently with the UI that I really rather they hadn't changed, but took a while for me to dig up an answer about that so I freely share it in anticipation of it being important to someone else who remains similarly confused.
:#Easiest thing is to come here to explainxkcd, and don't bother with the hover-over (or whatever-you-do-to-get-the-title-text) text, at all. It's written beneath all (or nearly all?) Explanation Page images in plain sight. No hovering needed. Should be complete, unless the BOT (or someone who later comes along) has managed to mess it up, but then somebody (else) will probably fix it to how it really should be, and any remaining pecularities gets documented in the Explanation and/or its Talk.
:#There's also maybe dedicated xkcd viewers (I've got three installed from the Android store, just because I haven't yet decided that any one does everything I want it to do: "xkcd", "xkcd Browser" and "XKCDroid") that do at least try to be more hassle-free with their presentation of the hover-over title text. Don't know if you have such options under the ChromeOS system, but with even Windows going for 'app store' functionality behind it (not that I use it, save for very particular elements) I would rather hope that there'd be ports/clones of similar functionality that you can look at.
:I can easily imagine that the crew behind Chrome have indeed been messing around with your particular build. Like I said, things keep changing to my own instance, althugh the biggest problem I have is often that when editing it doesn't recognise the need to pop up the on-screen keyboard until I've changed tabs away from the editing page and back again, then I can actually do something (beyond cut/copy/paste actions, which sometimes is enough). But that's probably not going to affect you like it does me.
:And I don't use any "m.site.url" version of anything, if I can help it. Most mobile-site implementations tend to assume that I'm viewing in extreme portrait mode (which I'm not) and rearrange themselves in a way that really doesn't work in my prefered landscape orienttion, and that's just the start. As I don't do this, the above testing/examples I give was all done on "(explain)xkcd.com", not "m.xkcd.com" or whatever. But I don't see that it'll make a material difference to my checks and enumerations I've just done on your behalf. And still, hopefully, helps you understand my conclusion that... well, use one or other of my 'get arounds' (number 2?) and let Chromebook Chrome go and do whatever it feels like with hovertexts, 'cos you're not too bothered about it. Sound good? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.5|172.70.58.5]] 23:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

== An apology ==

Hello. I am a former vandal; I am the one who ran the "crap" bot and posted the Soviet flags; I also did smaller-scale vandalism several times. I'm not sure exactly when I quit, but it's been a year or two. I'm sorry for the trouble I caused, and I won't do it again. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.116|172.71.158.116]] 16:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:Care to explain what your reasoning was? --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

::I didn't really have any reasoning; I just (stupidly) thought it was funny. I don't want to reveal my exact age, but I was in my early-to-mid teen years then; it was just immature "humor." [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.125|172.69.23.125]] 21:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

== is this HTML?==
I wonder if this is HTML. <h1> Is this h1? </h1> [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 04:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:turns out h1 is the same as == [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 04:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Actually, it's not, if you check.
:Wiki ==ed header is:
::<code><nowiki><h2>is this HTML?</nowiki></code> (+ the thing that gives you the "[edit]" link, etc, to the end of the h2-entity)
:Wiki 'forced' H1 is:
::<code><nowiki><h1>Is this h1?</h1></nowiki></code> (and nothing else)
:It's not ''very'' obvious, but H1/= and H2/== are actually ''slightly'' different.
<H1>H1 text...</H1>
<H2>H2 text...</H2>
<H3>For contrast, this is H3</H3>
:Let's just say that the full range from = to ====== match H1 to H6 (give or take other differences, and I haven't checked what even greater "="-strings might or might not do), but mixing established wikimarkup and XML-family markup is best done with care and with good reason (e.g. to deliberately not invoke Table Of Contents-type sectioning? ...no, apparently not even that!).
:And you know that there's always the Sandbox pages (or, even better, edit something, Preview it, view the Preview's source and then ''don't "Save Changes"'' ...unless you still need to for some other reason) as a better alternative to 'asking' ultimately rhetorical questions in here. (And inviting potentially rhetorical answers, like this one.)
:You seem to have an enquiring mind, which is good. But remember that "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing". I'm only giving you a bit of ''extra'' knowledge here, but also adding about the caution you should take. Please don't be a nuisance with it, unintentionally or otherwise. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.104|162.158.216.104]] 06:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

== How do I create a user page for myself? ==

I do not know how to create a user page for myself {{unsigned|Log of n|15:50, 16 May 2025}}
:It helps if you remember to sign things. But it looks like you ''might'' be able to create it (account old enough and contributed enough).
:If you see the redlinked links to your (non-existing, at first) "User:" and "User talk:" pages, in your usual signature (or the one I gave you, just above), you should be able to click on them and get the option to create them to put things in. Other places you can find those redlinks is in page-histories, your user-contributions and the RecentChanges list, in various slightly different ways. Or, having created User: space, click on the (redlinked) Discussion tab, or vice-versa.
:Try it, see if it works. If it doesn't, then ''anyone'' can create those pages for you (who can create any), but I don't think that's necessary for you. If you get rebuffed, let us know and someone will either give you better instructions or help you out directly.
:(The reverse is true, too: if you can create your own User: pages, you can create ''anybody else's'' who needs them, and more besides. But probably best if you don't just go finding redlinks and making them non-red, just because you can. Hold off on that, as it's too easy to create pages for long-idle accounts, spam-accounts or even regular editors who ''don't want'' their pages (yet?). If a very new account asks, maybe ''they'' need help, not yet having reached the threshold, but more experienced people often oblige after not too long. Follow their lead, learn from them before going mad with power... ;)
:...should this be in the FAQ? Isn't it already? Without getting exact about the thresholds needed (in case they're adjusted, if nothing else), I'm sure this could be written there. I'd check, but it's not like I can edit it (or create pages) as I currently am. Nor do I feel the need to. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.182|172.70.91.182]] 17:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

== I found a comic site. ==

It's called euge.ca and it's a lot inspired by XKCD. Could we explain it together? [[User:ExplainEuge.ca|ExplainEuge.ca]] ([[User talk:ExplainEuge.ca|talk]]) 08:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:Could we do that in my user page? [[User:ExplainEuge.ca|ExplainEuge.ca]] ([[User talk:ExplainEuge.ca|talk]]) 08:43, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::But your user page isn’t created... there, now it is [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 12:37, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:How's that related to xkcd? We don't explain things "inspired by" xkcd... --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 13:02, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

== Lonely Comic explanations ==

It’s kinda strange to see some of the earlier comics have just a few paragraphs and minimal discussions while others have dozens of paragraphs (ok, maybe not that much, but you get the idea) and hundreds of discussions. I felt lonely when visiting those lonely explanations [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 02:35, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Feel free to mark them as incomplete if they don't explain the comic enough! However, most of the early xkcd comics were simple drawings or simple jokes that didn't need a long explanation. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

== Leaderboard score ==

What does the score on the leaderboard mean? What are the rules of score? [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 07:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

== User box ==

{{Userbox | border-c = #033 | border-s = 1 | info-s = 9 | id = ?| info = Can someone tell me what’s a userbox?| float = right}} [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 12:31, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:You'll find a lot more answers if you type the same thing on google and add "Wikipedia" at the end: https://www.google.com/search?q=Can+someone+tell+me+what%E2%80%99s+a+userbox%3F+wikiepdia&num=10&newwindow=1&udm=14&sxsrf=AE3TifO4CvTB3NGTONgx7ci3eXPbJh2B1g%3A1754574833361&uact=5 --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 13:54, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

== [[:Category:Artificial Intelligence]] ==

We have a category titled "Artificial Intelligence" ([[:Category:Artificial Intelligence]]). Shouldn't that be [[:Category:Artificial intelligence]] with a lower-case "i"? --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 01:02, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
:Tricky. Wikipedia has it as {{w|Artificial intelligence}}, and use it as the mid-sentence "artificial intelligence", but also have {{w|Wikipedia:WikiProject Artificial Intelligence}}. It's something that ''can'' be used as a compound-noun title (thus deserves full title-case), unless you're wondering "if, one day, perhaps, we will truly encounter an artificial intelligence of some kind", in unironic use of the original words.
:For most purposes, I think, in the comics "AI" (the abbreviated title of the subject) is used/meant, so I suspect that it'd be the more titular umbrella of things (including, or at least aspiring to, AGI, etc) that applies.
:I don't see any obvious wikipedia discussions about whether or not to (have) capitalise(d) the term. I suspect that it just was assumed as default and everyone understands that a discussion of "artificial intelligence" can be refered to as "AI", there, but wouldn't complain about any variation other than "ai". ;) Whether umbrella title or 'just words' is used here... I don't think it matters (i.e. no change needed, meaning least fuss in not 'correctiny' it in all the places it would need to be). But a question could still be asked, in case there's a different consensus from my own 'feeling' about this. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 10:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

== What if pic explain ==

Can someone explain to me what is {{brda}}? [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 13:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
:That'd depend upon what the person who created {{template|brda}} meant it to be, and I'd ask them, not the community. (I've just asked them, myself, for my own curiosity. Or, rather if I can help them do what they thought they wanted to do.) Probably just an experiment. Maybe one that didn't work, because of not knowing how to do what they wanted to do. Or possibly even why they wanted it in the first place.
:As has been said, before, it's very easy to create site pages (if you can at all), though it might be best to ask others first for advice, if you're fairly new to the whole concept. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
:Ah, that was you...
:So... I guess you're asking what the actual picture is, then? (And is that reason why you created the template, or something else?)
:It's an image that's present (in 'footnote-3') in that particular What-If article, which says ">Here's an image which is great for annoying a few specific groups of people:", and following the appearance of the "'''Br'''eaking '''Ba'''d" logo (using the chemical symbols for Bromine and Barium, as a stylistic choice). And I'd say that it probably annoys (amongst other people):
:*Chemists, who might or might not know of {{w|Davyum}}, but either way know that it doesn't mean anything.
:*Fans of Breaking Bad
:*Fans of Twilight (perhaps, though why this and not the non-footnote "Twilight: Breaking Dawn" 'poster' below?
:*People who think that images shouldn't appear in popover 'footnotes'
:*People whose browsers ''can't show'' images in such footnotes (or even show the popover footnotes themselves)...
:I'm sure you could think of a few others, perhaps even something that you yourself are. Were you possibly annoyed for not knowing what the image was? ;) [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:47, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2025-08-10T17:33:53Z

92.23.2.228: /* What if pic explain */

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2025-08-10T17:33:06Z

92.23.2.228: /* What if pic explain */

<noinclude>{{Community links}}

{|-
|valign="top" width="100%"|[[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|left|120px]] <big><big>Miscellaneous</big></big>

This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else. {{AddNewSection|Page=Explain XKCD:Community portal/Miscellaneous|Text=(+post)}}
|}</noinclude>

__TOC__
==ARCHIVED DISCUSSIONS==
<div class="plainlinks" style="background:#edf6ff; border:1px solid #a7d7f9; margin:1em auto 1em auto; width:100%; font-size: 120%; padding: 0.5ex; text-align: center;">The discussion of the now-deleted page "Advertise here" has been archived. The archive is available at '''[[explain xkcd talk:Community portal/Miscellaneous]]'''.</div>

== 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}}

:Thanks 108.162.229.100! I've started collecting these helpful tools on a [[Browser helpers|new page]], to hopefully make them easier for others to find. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 01:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

== 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)
: +1 on this. '''Change'''

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)

For what it's worth, if the matter is ever re-opened, I'd vote to '''change''' to one of the alternate suggestions -- I quite like "extra knowledge, see discussions" but many others would be fine. The current one is a poor way to greet newcomers; it certainly gave ''me'' pause. Perhaps I've been sensitized by the general uptick in incivility in many places in recent years, but I'm actively avoiding forums and sites that appear to be encouraging rudeness. If one disregards that header, it becomes clear that this site isn't like that, but one has to get past that header first. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 17:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

'''Change''' because the only justification to keep it seems to be "It's just a joke why are people always so offended at everything" [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk about me behind my]] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ/ back]) 12:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I’d say '''change''' it. It’s not funny, it’s never been funny and it never will be funny. Why does a tag line have to be funny any way? All it needs to be is memorable and eye catching. I personally like “congratulations you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000” it’s a direct reference to an existing comic and encourages learning more.
:I agree, so '''change''' from me. —[[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]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 18:27, 8 December 2022 (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)
:We could refer to her as Megan, based on the character even despite its' "everywoman" stance. Megan is represented as Randall's wife in the ''_ Years'' comic series (with Randall being the supportive main Cueball character), as well as in other comics where Randall is represented as a Cueball in a comic with a Megan. {{unsigned ip|172.70.130.6}} 18:52, 26 Jul 2021 (UTC)
::Also, broken signing because I forgot that <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> was a thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.6|172.70.130.6]] 18:56, 26 July 2021 (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)
Thank You for the info!
[[User:GetPunnedOn]]
::Extra info, for GetPunnedOn (and others, but you're needing to he told this a lot, GPO...). Please use the full signature (those four tildes: <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>), to let us know that, in this case, you posted your reply at 23:30, 21 May 2023 UTC, as we knew what date and times in 2018 the prior users posted. Not even sure you'll read this/etc, so leaving it as an open message to anyone else who stumbles this way without otherwise picking up on the other hints to do so. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.206|172.71.178.206]] 08:52, 22 May 2023 (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)

::: Hello? Anyone there? [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 06:55, 8 July 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]].
: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)
:: this was the question. And I hadn't looked hard enough. Thank you
:: 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)

== is scraping this site ok? ==

Hi everyone! Some days ago I scraped explainxkcd to get the webcomics' content, and created an interactive network chart where nodes are comics and two nodes share a link if they have words in common. (It's here: https://www.fluentdata.tech/visualizing-the-xkcd-comics-network-using-google-vision-spacy-and-d3/)

However, looking back I don't know if I had permission to actually scrape this site. Where can I get this information? Is scraping OK?
:From [[explain xkcd:Copyrights]], "The Explain XKCD wiki is generally licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license (CC-BY-SA-3.0). This means that you can freely reuse our content, but you have to say where you got it — if you're sharing on the internet, a link back to the article is appropriate." So yes, scraping this site is allowed, but you should credit the site. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 03:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

== So what happened to the site? ==
Just curious, but it was down last night (June 14, Eastern Daylight time's night) and this morning has reverted to February. This is not a complaint, it's curiosity and a willingness to help out. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 15:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
:I'm curious too. It was down on the morning of Friday the 11th & is currently back up showing last Wednesday the 9th's comic. A post asking about it on [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/nxrm65 r/xkcd] got over 140 upvotes in 3 days. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 16:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
::The page was down for more than four days. Problem is there seem to be no administrators attached to explain xkcd anymore, so no one who actually knows anything replies to these posts... :-/ So if the page goes down permanently there seems to be no one who still uses this page, who knows what to do... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
:::That would be a shame since a ton of good content would be lost. Somebody somewhere needs to be paying the bills for the site to be hosted though. Don't they know what happens to the product they're paying for? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 13:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
::::Indeed, is there anyway we can contribute to the upkeep of the site? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.182|141.101.76.182]]

== Stuck? ==
So, nothing yet for the August 7, 2021 comic? I normally see the main page update within an hour of the new xkcd appearing. Not complaining, just hoping nothing is wrong. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 20:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

== Help finding a specific comic. ==

I've been trying to find this specific comic but I can not find it anywhere. It's the one where a character suggests going to another building to avoid companies like Google and Facebook and tries to leave only to find the doors (and windows?) replaced with walls. Turns out Google and Facebook bought all the buildings and removed all doors so people can only use their services.
: (Above unsigned post by [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.65|108.162.245.65]] 04:38, 28 October 2021‎ (UTC).)
: 99% sure that's not an xkcd (though it does sound entertaining). You might try asking on r/xkcd, they can often ID even non-xkcd comics.
: Please sign your posts. [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 05:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

== Update/further correct the Bots pages? ==

Seeing an edit to [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Bots the site's meta-page on Bots] (and making a minor grammatical edit myself), the current and seemingly unfixable inactivity of DgbrtBOT and its replacement by Theusaof... (though not, yet, as an officially recognised member of the Bots group?) makes the statement "There are 3 bots" dubiously correct, depending upon how you count them. As a humble IP unconnected to any 'bot, I am neither confident enough in the facts to revise all the relevent details nor able to do much about it (not even create the above page's Talk-space) but maybe someone else here can muster up both qualities. So over to you..? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.36|172.70.91.36]] 11:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

== Countdown Timer ==

Does anyone know what the timer in the upper right corner of the website is? As of writing, it's around "20D 20H 20M" (ha ha). Is this for some kind of event I don't know about (I mean, I don't keep track of that sort of thing, so I wouldn't usually know anyway, but still), or is this just something weird Randall's doing that we're all going to find out together?

Just curious.
(Tidal Rose)

:Yes, I've been wondering, too. I can't find any good explanation anywhere for it -- I looked on Reddit, etc. I guess he really is keeping it a secret -- perhaps a book announcement. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.253|162.158.255.253]] 00:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

It appears that the accompanying image may also be updating (not minute to minute at the moment). Curious to see what this little black line does! (My bet is that it's a new book as well)

:My first thought was counting down to Webb reaching L2, but it's a couple days late for that... looks to be approximately 10AM Eastern on January 31, though my datemath is probably not too good when the local hour is <6. [[User:Davidhbrown|Davidhbrown]] ([[User talk:Davidhbrown|talk]]) 05:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The image has definitely updated!

Is there a place where the progressive images are archived? [[User:Fuzzymo|Fuzzymo]] ([[User talk:Fuzzymo|talk]]) 01:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
:There is a [[Countdown_in_header_text|page structure]] now created for it. Go directly to [[Countdown_in_header_text/images|the /images sub-page]] for the captured series-so-far. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.43|162.158.159.43]] 04:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

The exact time it's counting down to is Monday, January 31, 2022 at 10 AM EST (Munroe's time zone) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.165|108.162.229.165]] 23:55, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Could it be for [https://www.nationaldaystoday.com/national-backward-day/ National Backward Day?]
:Already mentioned (and mostly rejected?) in the ''real'' conversation about this. (See the [[Countdown in header text]] page, etc, if you haven't already.) Not sure what the plane would have to do with it, unless it turns out to be flying backwards when we see movement lines. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 17:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

== What if 103 ==

Why is it "not quite a coincidence" that the titanic was traveling at about the same speed when it hit bottom as when it hit the iceberg?
: 1. please sign your posts! 2. im guessing the joke is that it wasnt moving [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 17:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Bumpf
:: What are you talking about? Its speed was around 20.5 kts at the time of impact.

== Syndication comic: uploaded with no number, link to xkcd doesn't work? ==

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Syndication

In the title, the page is very broken and there's no evidence Randall Munroe ever uploaded this. Someone in the comments theorises it's a fan uploaded comic pretending to be official. Any way to find out? [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 08:08, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

== Concerning a certain editor ==

I'm puzzled and slightly worried as to the motives of [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Gadget-HotCat&namespace=&tagfilter=&start=&end= a given named editor]. Having made direct comments myself (and seen others do so), albeit only as an IP, I'm concerned as to their potentially reckless nature. As messages to(/in reply to) them have done very little to get a valid explanation, I thought I should note the case slightly more formally. They seemed quite helpful when they started to post (at a time of notable vandalism, and I'm reluctant to jump to any adverse conclusion about that) and I obviously cannot speak of their time beyond this submission, but I find an overwhelming amount of their most recent interactions to be (to put it charitably) naive, despite clearly the intelligence to use advanced Wiki markup/etc.

I welcome a ready and willing editor. Moreover one who has bothered to get an accountable account, more than I have ever done! I would be happy to see them usefully contribute further, but could they perhaps realise (or accept, if they already know) that the drive to submit random and (pretty much always) unexplanatory content is not useful to anyone. And that's all I wish to say, right now. As much of a nudge as I want to make for the moment. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.64|141.101.99.64]] 14:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

== xkcd Volume 0 ==
xkcd Volume 0 is a collection of chosen comic strips - but there's also red-text found scattered though pages, usually as some type of cypher or code. Because of that, can an authorized user create a stub for [[xkcd Volume 0]] so that the codes can be documented, or does that risk too much of a copyright violation? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.56|108.162.241.56]] 00:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

== Russia ==
Is there a comic that mentions Russia? Omg Omg Omg {{unsigned|Omg omg omg Бельков|23:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)}}
:@[[User:Omg omg omg Бельков|Omg omg omg Бельков]]: [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=russia&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go Let me use the search bar]. ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 23:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
:Might be a good idea if the mods had a look at the following accounts, BTW:
:"Omg сайт вместо гидры", "Omg omg omg Бельков", "Omgomg", "Площадка omg", "Darknet omg omg", "Ссылка на omgomg", "Омгомгомг магазин", "Омгомгомг сайт", "Омгомгомг ссылка", "Омг сайт магазин", "Омг ссылка", "Омг тор ссылка", "Площадка omg ссылка", "Сайт омг омг ссылка", "Сайт omg onion", "Сайт omg shop", "Сайт omgomg", "Omgomgomg ссылка", "Omg omg market onion", "Omg onion", "Omg online", "Omg shop ссылка", "Omg web net", "Omgomg гидра", "Omgomg замена гидре", "Omgomg market", "Omgomg tor", "Omgomgomg магазин", "Omgomgomg сайт", "Omg omg сайт зеркало", "Omg omg ссылка онион", "Omg omg сайт аналог гидры", "Omg зеркало", "Omg аналог гидры", "Omg вместо гидры", "Omg даркнет", "Omg дарк", "Omg маркет", "Omg omg площадка тор", "Omg онион", "Omg площадка даркнета", "Omg площадка новая", "Omg площадка торговая", "Omg ссылка", "Omg dark", "Omg darknet", "Omg market", "Omg omg даркнет", "Omg omg магазин ссылка", "Omg omg площадка отзывы", "Omg omg площадка сайт", "Зеркало ссылка омг"
:Wasn't particularly concerned, but then one decided to have a go at posting. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.185|172.69.79.185]] 23:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

== Edit War ==
An edit war has occurred on this page. Three topics were added and then removed. One user got banned. It seemed that the "Miscellaneous" is not actually miscellaneous. I can't create any talk pages, either. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 03:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

:Spammers are being impersonated. [[User:ClassicalGames|Clas]]rch 2023 (UTC)

== Connect spam ==
It seems that the pages with "Connect" in their titles tend to receive spam posts. [[User:Memo Spike Connector|2503: Memo Spike Connector]] ([[User talk:Memo Spike Connector|talk]]) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Did this happen on Wikipedia too? [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 10:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Note for spammers: Do not rely on our group or others such as [[User:Memo Spike Connector]] to revert your edits. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 10:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

== April fools day ==
April fools day is coming. Let's predict what [[Randall]] will post for the day. [[User:Memo Spike Connector|2503: Memo Spike Connector]] ([[User talk:Memo Spike Connector|talk]]) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

: Uh, oh, April Fool's Day has already passed and there doesn't seem to be any related comics this year. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:14, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

:: Seems like they've seen our trying to predict the April Fools comic. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 23:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

== Public sandbox ==

What are the public sandbox pages used for? The "Main Page sandbox" was originally intended for testing the main page features, but then it received a lot of off-topic comments. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:24, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

:The [[:Template:sandbox]] page received spam posts recently, with some user repeatedly trying to put words under another person's pen. I'm afraid someone will start using chatbots to spam in the future. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 07:03, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

:The above issue seems to have been resolved. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.135.43|172.69.135.43]] 02:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

::And then a mysterious "fanmade comic" appeared. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.174|172.69.22.174]] 02:08, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

::For the record, [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous&diff=prev&oldid=312713 massive editing has occured] here, which is clearly debatable. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.35|172.70.90.35]] 08:33, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

== Editor guide for specific category ==

Could you add an editor guide on how to add this category to pages? Some user did it wrongly a while ago. https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Category:Comics_sharing_name

I can't create talk pages. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.230|162.158.166.230]] 09:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

==Vector images don't work==
The vector images don't show up on my browser. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 22:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
:Which vector images, and which bowser? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.184|172.69.79.184]] 23:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

::There is supposed to be a vector image on the top of this page, just above the "Contents" block. It seems to be that none of the vector images show up normally on this computer. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 23:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

:::I used a new browser and it failed again. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 08:06, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
::::But ''which'' browser(s)? I mean, if you're using Lynx, then you probably won't get native inline SVG rendering support, ever. If you're using NCSA Mosaic then you definitely need to change to something a bit newer ''anyway''. If you're using the latest Chrome/Firefox/Edge/whatever then I'd be surprised if it doesn't work. And if it's ''only on this site'' (i.e. that similarly embedded graphics work elsewhere), then that's a whole other line of enquiry.
::::Help us to help you, if you have indeed got a problem (and perhaps explain how you found the problem, too, to know how you detected the anomaly). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.9|141.101.98.9]] 12:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

== Solar system category ==

Could the category for the solar system be possibly created? There are several comics related. [[User:Unreliable Connection|2659: Unreliable Connection]] ([[User talk:Unreliable Connection|talk]]) 07:13, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
:Hey! You don't need to make an admin request. In proposals 1.49 there's where you can propose categories, and if you think it's a good idea/get support you can just go ahead and make it. [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:44, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

== Categorization problem ==

Just now, I found two user pages lying in the [[:Category:Internet]] category. Could we possibly create a categorization template so that user pages that transcluded a comic page will not be categorized? We can also solve the problem that puts the Main Page in various theme categories. [[User:CategoryGeneral|CategoryGeneral]] ([[User talk:CategoryGeneral|talk]]) 03:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
:I've blanked one of the sandboxes. The other one doesn't belong to our group. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 03:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
::Nice sentiments, but please stop feigning talking to yourself or using [[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2293:_RIP_John_Conway&diff=prev&oldid=310329 your own edits to justify your various unnecessary aliases]]...
::There really do not need to be 'personal sandboxes', and the use made of the sandboxes is not useful. Many things that a Sandbox is used for could be done simply by the "Show preview", and certainly it isn't supposed to be a notepad for unrelated junk. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.67|172.70.85.67]] 08:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

== Help with Creating a User Page ==

I'm a relatively new user, and I decided "I should probably make a user page," but for some reason it says that I "do not have permission to create this page" even though it's my page. [[User:Trogdor147|Trogdor147]] ([[User talk:Trogdor147|talk]]) 03:08, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
:Check the user page now! [[User:Z1mp0st0rz|Z1mp0st0rz]] ([[User talk:Z1mp0st0rz|talk]]) 15:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks! To everyone redirected here via my previous comments, click here -> [[User:Trogdor147|Trogdor147]] ([[User_talk:Trogdor147|talk]]) 00:17, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

== Versailles-Rose-style cultural export ==

America has already banned cultural export from several places, but this happened again in [[Talk:2781: The Six Platonic Solids]]. That is illegal. It should be taken seriously. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.71|172.69.134.71]] 23:55, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
:Presuming you're refering to that thing edited out in [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2781:_The_Six_Platonic_Solids&diff=prev&oldid=316742 this edit], if I thought I understood the original comment, then I'm darned if I can work out what your official objection to it is.
:If I thought the original wasn't just CG being CG, I'd revert that removal for being nonsensical. No "inciting illegality", so far as I can see, so no need to remove the comment or complain about it.
:You're not CG (or an off-site ally) wearing an IP cloak to do other typical CG-like things, such as we've seen many times before, are you? Don't do that, if so. I won't be restoring the original, but you need to establish better reasons for editorialising a Talk page's contributions.
:...but, if anyone is going to edit things around again, I hope they also put a suitably attributed {{template|unsigned ip}} on the other most recent appended line, ok? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.16|172.70.86.16]] 10:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
: He restored that offensive line. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.22.17|172.69.22.17]] 23:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
: Not sure what's going on here, but the nonsense language makes me suspect bots, in which case maybe just ban the IP. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 23:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
:: Difficult, with IPs. I'm one but not the type you want to ban, if you can take my word on that. It all depends on which Cloudflare gateway(s) you get routed through, and then which 'local' IP you happen to get assigned as from interaction to interaction.
:: Personally I suspect an idiot (a human, but an idiot. Or maybe an entire off-site group of idiots who are playing some sort of group game using our site as the playing-board. If it's automated (which is more difficult to do reliably than direct human trolling, realistically) then it's still an idiotically set up auto-trolling with no clear usefulness beyond 'because we can'. Nobody bothered to answer me as to why, but that just reinforces my feeling that there's no legitimate reasons behind any of it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.97|172.71.242.97]] 09:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

::That post appeared back again. That's kind of hidden cultural reference. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.17|172.71.154.17]] 23:46, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
::Too hidden. As I asked before (but it was deleted) explain it to us. Or me, at least. If tou actually have a point, we can help you. But you don't, I suspect. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.97|172.71.242.97]] 09:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

There is a hidden reference to another country's culture. Many Americans hate that country. We do not allow such countries' culture to invade our website. Our website is American. EDIT: Those captchas are way too hard. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.156|172.71.154.156]] 23:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
:Still obtuse. And, I suspect, also incorrect. Which country? China ? North Korea? Canada? You can say, you know... Free speech exists, with no overriding legal prohibition against even mentioning whatever enemy nation you consider as beyond the pale for 'many'. Perhaps you aren't allowed to incite hatred (not sure if it's a legal thing, but it would be a generally established forum policy) but merely mentioning a general emnitity arising from the distrust of all things mapleleafian can be done without fear or favo(u)r. Educate us. Make us understand the issue, that we might never again fall into the trap of razy lacism or accidentally mention beavers in polite company... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.130|172.70.85.130]] 08:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
:: Click the "edit" button and you'll see that. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.204|162.158.166.204]] 23:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

== Twix re-referencing ==

Nearly put this as an HTML comment in the Social Media category (it has no Talk). Not sure if this should be under Proposals/Maintenance/Co-ordination in here (please move there, if you feel strongly it does belong in any of these). But probably needs saying.

Just seen one (out of many!) Twitter-referencing articles entirely rebranded to say "X" instead (and "x" for "tweet", etc). Which I felt a mistake. Reverted and added a single "now rebranded as..." caveat to the original mention, given the comic concerned was clearly Twitter-branded (older look, too), and this seemed a better solution.

I just want to express my opinion (and thus ask if I'm truly rolling with the consensus) that "now known as "X" is perhaps the besr direction to go. As and when, not necessarily as a splurge of appended edits to ''every'' Twitter-referencing page right this minute. (For one thing, it could so easily be rebranded/retrobranded/debranded altogether in the near future if either sanity prevails or greater insanity piles upon that already seen.)

Clear Twitter-era comics certainly don't need "tweets" changed to... whatever gets settled on as the proper term for post-Twitter tweets. "Twixes"? Yeah, nobody really knows that, yet, anyway. When (inevitably) a comic arises referencing "X (formerly known as Twitter)" then the referencing can be reversed. If/when Wikipedia renames/redirects accordingly then maybe that'll be a cue to (as we editors come across them in other edit contexts) change <code><nowiki>{{w|Twitter}}</nowiki></code> to something like <code><nowiki>{{w|X (Social media)|Twitter}}</nowiki></code> to avoid hitting the redirect, or whatever makes sense by then. But I would resist big changes to legacy references (i.e. pre-July 2023) and imagine that well-meaning editors that do try to help by almost 'keyboard/leopard' mass changing be discouraged/pre-empted.

But that's IMHO. I think it should potentially be a conversation, here, rather than me being a full on vigilante-reverter (and others having their own ideas) just because *I* have a particular impression of what's suitable to maintain site style. For the present. And potentially in years to come when the fate of The Media Formerly Known As Twitter might have transformed yet again and Randall's œuvre (perhaps still being drawn, thrice Earth-weekly, from his Lunar south-pole penthouse 'retirement' suite, or else from his official AI mind-mapped legal successor-entity!) continues to attract new readers for whom this "Twitter" thing needs actual explaining, even though they've used MuskMedia's 'æMotifier' quantum-netlink ever since they got their first cranial emotion-transceiver implant inserted and become a fully accredited voting Martian Citizen! (Or, alternatively, it's become as unknown to most people as AskJeeves/Geocities/Fidonet because it's a sidelined or even completely defunkt thing.)

So, yeah, ''waaay'' too early to do crazy site-wide edits, but perhaps agree on what we might do right now on a throttled back basis. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.197|141.101.98.197]] 09:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

== wait what? (is this "view a bunch of html" thing intentional?) ==

so i was trying to see the rss feed because i was curious and ended up with the page showing me a bunch of html code for some reason. what is going on???

also just realized half of the "[something][/something]" thing you use in forums to, for example, post something as a spoiler is basically html but with square brackets instead of whatever these are called (the ones that look like this: "<>") [[User:An user who has no account yet|An user who has no account yet]] ([[User talk:An user who has no account yet|talk]]) 18:30, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
:{{w|RSS}} is, or should be, based upon XML (eXtensible Markup Language). Which is basically the 'core' of many common markup languages, especially HTML (or XHTML, as it has been standardised). You're really supposed to use an RSS ''reader'' utility to parse the 'html code' and present it in a more human-readable way. (Although it's also fairly easy to human-read the RSS and scan for details of interest, so long as you have at least an inkling of what you're looking at and for.)
:Regarding the forum <code>[code]...[/code]</code> stuff, I ''think'' you're speaking of {{w|BBCode}}, which I think is intended to be a handy solution to allowing only ''sanitised'' markup to be posted by any given forum's random, rambling and potentially rabid users with something to say. If you're happy to allow a contributor to render a <code><nowiki></nowiki></code> tag (or with <code><nowiki></nowiki></code>, or via a CSS property, etc), your forum back-end translates the allowable <code>[b]...[/b]</code> into that mandated browser-friendly form.
:But if anyone tried to use any actual <X>-tag directly, then it gets sanitised into <code>&lt;X&gt;</code>. This means that ''unless the forum explicitly allows it'' (and in a form that the browser understands, might need a .js/.css extension to execute it in modern browsers) one couldn't <code><blink><marquee>Blink A Marquee</marquee></blink></code> within any arbitrary post text...
:And also, with such lightweight "Bulletin Board Code" and neutralised 'original raw HTML', you can also stop many of the possible techniques for someone trying direct script-injection or even just rendering follow-up messages liable to inheriting an opened (but not closed) formatting from more freely used HTML.
:(I'm not entirely sure if 'markup security' is the prime reason for using it, and I know some weird and disruptive loopholes have occasionally still had to be closed in the parsing/conversion rules, but it seems to me as good an impetus as any.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.8|172.71.242.8]]

== Is it possible to add a feature that keeps track of all viewed comics so that you specifically view unseen comics only? ==

I'm trying to read every xkcd comic, and I believe I have done so, but I still have a small doubt in my head. Would it be possible, even if only on explainxkcd to keep track of comics viewed? If not, is it possible to create a program that can do this locally or would I just need to go back through all of them? {{unsigned|SteveTheNoob|10:40, 12 October 2023}}

: I'm not aware of anything simple that might (say) work as a <nowiki>{{Special:RandomUnreadOnly}}</nowiki> restriction, if that's what you're looking for. You(/everyone with a named account) probably need a "read list" page off your userspace that gets updated by a bit of "Visited!" embedded template/code/scripting attached to every relevent page (probably limited by being 'noinclude'd) and can be checked before it suggests your next landing spot (Random or otherwise). It would be a bit contrived. Even more so if you store page details ''with'' a last-viewed timestamp (either to allow you to revisit upon an update or to just allow pages seen early on to be occasionally revisited), which I'd suggest would be useful. But if it's an internal wiki page (rather than browser-side) it would probably be visible to anyone (write-restricted, I imagine) and I'm not sure that's a wise move.
: Too late to necessarily help you, but the aspiring completist could simply progress logically (not 'Special:Random'ly) from Comic 1 on up (or the current latest on down, with future 'latest's being a different progression to track) and keep a note of where you've got to after each binge-session of Next/Previous following. That'd catch most of the comics, less those that are unnumbered for various reasons. It could be done wikiwise with a variation on the 'Latest Comic' (global) tracker, but again with a Userspace page. Or just a browser extention, updating a Bookmark/Favourites link or just jot it down on a bit of paper. Some of these would take far less effort than trying to a implement per-user shared-but-private wikimedia solution bespoke to the exacting needs of this particular Wiki. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.205|172.70.91.205]] 13:28, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

== While False ==

There’s now over a year ago since [[user:While False|While False]] contributed for the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:While_False&diff=303753&oldid=301370|Barry-Larry-very last time]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.5|162.158.222.5]]

:While False’s “Explain xkcd museum” can be found [[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|here]]. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.44|162.158.222.44]]

== Furries ==

Someone has been adding vaguely-relaged pages to [[:Category:Furries]]. Is this okay? This person's criteria seem to be that anything related to anthropomorphic animals (including anything related to Narnia) is "furry"; they also consider anything pertaining to knots or cheese graters to be furry-related. (The knot and grater things are NSFW inside jokes within the furry fandom.)

My opinion is that anything with anthropomorphic animals is close enough to fall under the furry category (after all, anthropomorphic animals are basically what define the furry fandom), but individual Narnia-related pages don't need to be tagged as furry. [[:Category:Chronicles of Narnia]] being a subcat of Furries is enough IMO. As for knots and graters, I don't think those also should be enough to tag someone.

What do you all think? {{unsigned ip|172.71.146.55|04:38, 1 February 2024}}

:My opinion: that it must depict furries subculture or its ''unambiguous'' inspirations.
:I see that [[:Category:Chronicles of Narnia]] has been labeled such, but this implies that [[969: Delta-P]] (amongst others) includes furries.
:I'd also argue that merely 'talking animals' aren't sufficient to be "furrie". [[1503: Squirrel Plan]] (not catted... yet!) are still ultimately scuiromorphic squirrels. 'Intelligent' animals, and 'translator-microbed' for our benefit, but barely different in depiction from any [[635: Locke and Demosthenes|other typical appearance]]. YMMV.
:And if a long-standing comic has not been given a long-standing category ''until you 'spot' the connection'', then it might be obscure and need (in-line) justification. See the markup (and edit-history) of the Lowercase in [[739: Malamanteau]] as an example of perhaps why and how.
:...in particular, when someone made [[1762: Moving Boxes]] an example of "Furries", someone else thought it was (improperly) due to the word "Hooves", when it was really due to "Knots". Equally improperly, IMO, given that various types of knot were mentioned in the Explanation, but certainly no references there to Furries (or even to more 'obvious' kinks than furry-fandom, with or without extant categories or obvious interest by Randall). Personally, I thought it had been about the word "Kits" (c.f. "cubs"), not that I agreed with that assertion either. So do add an in-line comment, and it ''might'' help justify it to future editors who don't see what you see. Still arguable, but at least avoids arguing cross-purposes.
:''To summarise'', unless you consider everything with Animals in it (or at least every one with animals being [[928: Mimic Octopus|'odd' in any human-relatable way]]) as potential Furries-fodder, it really must be obviously referencing Furrie-subculture. Enough to be considered worthy a mention in the Explanation as well, not just because of a tenuous word-association or imagery inadvertently triggering an obscure personal interests. (There's a comic that specifically makes me think "Caramel", but it has nothing intrinsically to do with (e.g.) [[:Category:Food]]. I know why it makes me think that, but wouldn't consider it meaningful to ''anyone'' else. Even if it might for a small subculture, however, it still wouldn't actually be a valid category to apply if there was no reason for Randall to have had that same association in mind.)
:Categories should not include much more true material than they reasonably need to, just on the offchance that there's a totally unintended link. (And if ''all'' the Narnia references need cat:Furries, they also need cat:Animals. I might argue that cat:Religion is at least as necessary, just for every mention/hint of Aslan. But I wouldn't actually flood that option, either.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.207|172.71.242.207]] 10:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
::I think there are enough pages in the category as of right now (22:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)), but seeing as I don't know all the references (what's so funny about knots and cheese graters?) it's obvious that I'm just William Shatner's generation 💅 descendant who pretends to be a furry for clout online. So I'm not sure whether you should trust me. --[[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 22:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

== What is the significance of the word "crap" here? ==

I often see vague references to "crap" in discussions on this wiki, but I don't understand the meaning. Of course, I *do* know what the literal definition of "crap" is; I just don't know the significance here. It doesn't seem to be a word used particularly often in xkcd, so what is the significance here? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.49|108.162.245.49]] 02:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
:I think you're refering to the escapades of a particular idiot (and possibly copycats). The actions conducted might well be refered to by various verb forms/etc of the word.
:Though there are 'legitimate' uses of the word in comics, in context, I don't think there is any particular Randallesque significance that you need to worry about. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.55|172.71.178.55]] 04:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you! What did the particular idiot do? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.62|172.71.150.62]] 22:46, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
:::Just particularly low-vocabulary/high-volume/zero-creativity nuisance editing Probably doesn't need dignifying by further explanation, and really not worth dwelling on. But this was just one particular type of nuisance, dealt with just as many other nuisances (by whatever hand) also were/will be. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.212|172.70.91.212]] 02:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

== Is ReCAPTCHA really necessary? ==

I worry that I might be opening up a can of worms here, but here goes. For various personal reasons I don't like setting up accounts with things unless I really, really need to. I'm sure I'm not the only one. There are also people who can't set up accounts because they don't have an email address. Because we're not logged in, every time we want to make any edit or post any comment on any part of this Wiki, we have to go through multiple laborious ReCAPTCHAs. I'm sure the irony isn't lost on the rest of you that CAPTCHA/ReCAPTCHA is the butt of more than a few jokes on various XKCD comics, which imply that they are disingenuous processes whose real purpose is to farm out stultifyingly mundane computing tasks to a captive audience. Furthermore, I am editing on mobile, which can present formatting problems, rendering the ReCAPTCHA (and, by extension, my editing) impossible to complete. I know there are other ways in which this Wiki combats spam, so do we really need ReCAPTCHAs? Removing them would make this site considerably more accessible to eccentrics and Luddites such as myself. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.13|172.70.85.13]] 18:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
:I'm guessing you weren't here for the crap incident? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.120|162.158.41.120]] 23:22, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
:Speaking as an accountless luddite (long term active and non-lurking contributor; I ''choose'' not to clutter myself with yet another account, inventing yet another apt username when I don't actually have to), it ''can'' be annoying to have to do a round or two of Traffic Light or Tractor identification. But, given the number of obvious fake accounts, it may be that removing the control would release a deluge of one-shot spams that are currently caught.
:It's less trouble than the extra issue of having done a CAPTCHA successfully, submitting a ticked contribution, the explainxkcd server complaining of overload/whatever (error 503, I think) and then the necessary refresh-submit moans that I ''didn't'' give a CAPTCHA (logical enough... the side-server confirmation data probably loses synchronicity against the 'new' POST submission). And not even sure whether an other-than-CAPTCHA solution could handle that type of fail-over any better. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.49|172.70.163.49]] 10:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

== Why do all the comic updates feel late to me? I only ever see them on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and weekends. ==

I'm in the same time zone as Randall, so it could just be a sleep schedule thing tbh. [[User:Psychoticpotato|Psychoticpotato]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 21:29, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
:Quick poll of server-times for explainxkcd's BOT back to mid-February suggests that significantly more than half were before midnight Randall Mean Time (or Randall Daylight Time). That said, a long long experience has taught me not to fret the "only see it the next morning" ones (my time). They keep coming. 2916 was an outlier (almost 29 hours longer to arrive than 2910 did, assuming that wasn't a BOT delay that I'm not aware of).
:In this sample, it went from an earliest time of 11:37 (servertime, remember), Q1 at 18:12, Q2 at 22:03, Q3 at 03:11 (still pre-midnight, for you and him), and the latest was 16:31 the day after. Mondays seem to be a bit lagged over Wednesdays and Fridays but, outliers apart, there doesn't seem to be much in it.
:I could do a far longer sampling (I can recall of a couple-of-days-delayed ones that arrived ''eventually'', but at least officially kept the MWF cycles going. not counting delayed-specials/etc), but there's not much to be seen recently to concern me. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.190|172.69.79.190]] 23:32, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

== New users can't create pages ==

Hey, you know how new users can't create their own user pages? Well, it turns out that new users can't create ''any'' pages. Could this be the autoconfirm thing? {{unsigned|PDesbeginner|14:56, 20 June 2024}}
:If you think about it, you'll realise that it's probable that new users can't create user pages '''exactly because''' they can't create ''any'' pages... ;) But that state of affairs won't last long, if you're patient.
:...Until then, petitioning for (say) a new Category (with sufficient examples to provide a reason for it) might get you helped out by a sympathetic existing page-creator. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.90|172.70.91.90]] 19:45, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

== Minor edit/Watch this page ==

Before I save an edit, how do I decide which checkbox to select? [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 14:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
:I use the "minor edit" for fixing (my own) typos and when adding links or such to the(my) text. I never used the "watch" option but I guess you can use it to receive mail notifications if someone changes the page [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
:I did a test and it turns out that the "Watch this page" box makes the page get automatically added to your watchlist when you save the edit. Thanks for the help with when to select the minor edit box, but does anyone know what it actually does? [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 20:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::From my experience of other wiki sites (where I have an account, thus get to see such options), it's not much more than a bit of administrivia, to allow you to mark anything that you consider not bothersome in any way (de-doubling unnecessary whitespace, trivial typo-correction, etc.) and thus letting others selectively ignore such tweaks (at least until they start to wonder why an article has gained/lost several paragraphs as part of an apparently "minor edit").
::If it has any functional utility beyond just a handy user-flag, I haven't seen it. And no doubt there are those who would ''especially'' check (or have 'Bots check) so-called-minor edits, just to make sure they really are. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.203|172.70.162.203]] 23:07, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks! [[User:PDesbeginner|PDesbeginner]] ([[User talk:PDesbeginner|talk]]) 16:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

== Hi! ==

How are all you beautiful people doing? I'm quite alright myself. [[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 03:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

== Red text ==
I found red text in the "Flowchart" comic explanation. Could you deal with it? [[User:CategoryGeneral|CategoryGeneral]] ([[User talk:CategoryGeneral|talk]]) 08:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
:In [[1195: Flowchart]]? I don't see any there.
:There are similarly named comics, and plenty of furtyer comics "that have a flowchart" so perhaps try at least telling us the number of the one you mean. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.145|172.70.86.145]] 18:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

== The future ==

You know, we're not too far from a future where each and every edit to this website will have paragraphs of critical commentary. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.210|108.162.245.210]] 23:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

== Comic # 2974 explanation ==

Someone please hug the editor of the explanation of comic #2974. They seem a little depressed. I noticed your nitpickyness and I cared. Thank you. Also you made me laugh a bunch. {{unsigned ip|172.70.111.167|13:28, 21 August 2024}}
:I don't see that myself (though there will be a number of editors, maybe the bits you mean are less obvious now) although hugs are rarely a bad idea (being careful in cases of sunburn, dermititis, excessive blisters or bubonic infections of various kinds) so free (but entirely optional!) hugs all round. Just because not all symptoms of depression are particularly obvious anyway. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.17|172.70.162.17]] 14:37, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

== Comic #3000 ==
Y’all, we’re getting scarily close to comic 3000. Any bets on what it’ll be about? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 02:17, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
:I'll get back to you on that in a couple of months... ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.164|172.70.162.164]] 04:39, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
::I myself think that it’s going to be a continuation of the <code><nowiki>[[Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd phones]]</nowiki></code> series. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 20:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
:::(You probably meant to use something like <code><nowiki>[[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd phones]]</nowiki></code>, which appears as the now clickable: [[:Category:xkcd Phones|xkcd phones]] ...or something similar. FYI.) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.62|141.101.98.62]] 20:36, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
nothing, you get nothing >:[ [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 07:06, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
It was SOOO disappointing and just a regular comic :( [[User:Thehydraclone|Thehydraclone]] ([[User talk:Thehydraclone|talk]]) 22:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

== Trouble finding comic about how kids read too many comics ==

Iirc, it was a comic that had newspaper quotes from various times in history. One was that kids read too many comics, one was that kids look out the window too much. Maybe one on too many video games, and/or too much tv. And maybe one on reading. Anyway, I'm having trouble finding it because the keywords are too vague. And "xkcd comic" just brings me to the homepage. Any help would be appreciated 🙏 [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.6|172.70.131.6]] 04:30, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
:[[1601|1601: Isolation]] [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 15:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

== Correct name ==

What’s the correct name for this wiki? ExplainXKCD is what I use, but there’s also Explainxkcd or explainxkcd or explain xkcd. Please advise for all of us pedantic editors. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 00:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
:A question for the ages. The case of "xkcd" itself is officially all lowered, and all domain names are inherently caseless, whilst xkcd's (usual) comic-text is sᴍᴀʟʟᴄᴀᴘs (or, rather, partly camel-cased SᴍᴀʟʟCᴀᴘs). If I don't use "explainxkcd" I might go for "ExplainXkcd" or "explainXkcd" (the latter two probably wrong, but at least adds degrees of parsability, maybe with some cringing). There's even a [[:File:Logo.png|case]] (NPI!) to call it "EXPLAINxkcd", but I wouldn't. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.138|172.71.26.138]] 10:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
::I’ve also noticed that if you substitute x for 23, k for 11, c for 3, and d for 4, as that is the order that they appear in the English alphabet, those four numbers add up to 42, or the answer to life, the universe and everything else. Is this intentional? Has anybody else noticed this? [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 21:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
:::[[xkcd#Meaning of xkcd|Yes]] [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.150|172.68.205.150]] 22:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

== Coincidence ==

I just used the random page feature and got comic [[498: Secretary: Part 5]] twice in a row and got [[496: Secretary: Part 3]] on the third!
Its not important but I just think its neat[[User:Pego|Pego]] ([[User talk:Pego|talk]])

== Horrendously Cursed numbers ==

I need them. Currently, my favorite (which I found by a whole lot of guesswork) is 2^2.321928094886. It equals 5. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 23:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

It happened to bring a typo on page [[1506: xkcloud]] to my attention. [[User:ConscriptGlossary|ConscriptGlossary]] ([[User talk:ConscriptGlossary|talk]]) 04:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

== 2024 Harris banner ==

Will there be an article archiving and explaining the Harris banner on xkcd.com as of my typing this? https://imgs.xkcd.com/news/harris_news@2x.png [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 01:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
:Check [[Header text]]. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 03:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 04:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

== IP Editing Doesn’t Make Sense ==

I've read various arguments for why IP editing is allowed, or even a 'good idea'. I've read none that was compelling. Here are my reasons why I think it's not a good idea, and why it should be banned:

Per {{w|WP:ISU}}, user names that imply shared use are not allowed, so why is editing using an IP address allowed, given that IP addresses usually are shared? If the logic behind this policy is that an edit must be traceable to an individual editor, not a collective entity, then allowing anonymous editing from an IP address flies squarely in the face of that.
IP editing accounts for a large chunk of vandalism, disruptive editing, BLP violations, etc., and stopping it would reduce the cleanup workload for other editors.
Using multiple IP addresses, either intentionally or unintentionally, fragments a user's edit history, and makes it difficult, in some cases virtually impossible, to detect editing patterns and decipher intentions.
The 'hassle' of registering really is not great, and therefore I don't buy the argument that mandatory registration would make it difficult to recruit new editors.
It's too easy for a registered editor to get around certain rules (such as creators not being allowed to remove speedy tags from their own articles) by logging out and editing under IP.
The whole malarkey about hiding IP addresses, allegedly for privacy reasons (!), would go away if IP editing weren't an option.
To be clear, I think everyone should be able to access the site without registering, and anyone should be allowed to edit, just not edit without registering. In that sense it's not that different from using a public library: you're welcome to browse the collection, access the reference section, etc. without anyone asking you any questions, but if you want to take a book home, you need to get a library card from the nice librarian first.

And a further clarification: I've nothing against users who edit under IP; my issue is with the system which allows this. As long as it is allowed, users are of course welcome to make use of this. I just think it shouldn't be allowed {{unsigned|IP Addresses Don’t Make Sense|23:25, 14 November 2024}}
:As an habitual IP, far for it for me to get involved in the argument. I will say that sometimes think it'd be nice to have a "history" that proves my actual involvement (the other day I came across a contribution from 2013 that was clearly mine), but those moments pass when I see how easy (too easy) it is to have gotten myself an account. Witness the various accounts that get conjoured up on a whim, 'yourself' included... You're not helping the cause by doing this.
:If you're a named user, normally, then you're just giving more reasons for locking everyone into far more restrictions than your nominal argument suggests, and forgetting how much non-disrupting (indeed, fixing) behaviour is also done by everyone. The perfect situation? Maybe not. But there are worse ones, for anyone who has thought about it for any time. Do you want ''my'' suggestions? I've got a whole shopping list of them, but you won't want to hear about them. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.227|172.69.194.227]] 03:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

== when did xkcd jump the shark ==
like, when exactly do you feel xkcd jumped the shark (if at all)? [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 12:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:If it has, than put me down as "likes shark-jumping". I've been directly enjoying (if not always as caught up with as I am these days) xkcd since before [[195: Map of the Internet]] (quite possibly back into only double-figures, but hard to know what I later rewound back to; or quite how far back I subsequently joined the fora and/or started explainxkcding, as both histories are shrouded behind data that's either now lost or inconveniently anonymised).
:Not everything is as geeky as that, but it doesn't have to be. Horses for courses, naturally. (Perhaps lasagna?) If ''everyone'' who had such a moment actually decides to tell you their answer, probably could be up to 3000 or so distinct replies. ("It was the flying ferret" "Those spiders always did it for me" ...) ''To clarify, there may be many valid answers, but the people who would give them are far more likely not to be here to answer your question. If anybody ''does'' hover around here and want to give a definite answer of why they no longer like xkcd, then bear in mind that they're more the exception than the rule. Twice-over!'' [[Special:Contributions/172.71.122.102|172.71.122.102]] 14:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
::Hi, 42.book.addict here to put in my own two cents (check my user page on why I’m an IP). I would like to comment that I have noticed that I very much enjoy the older (albeit lower quality and resolution) comics than before. I think that I like the old xkcd strips more because they were much more geeky and nerdy than now, as well as more funny and witty. I feel like Randall has adapted the strip to appeal to a larger audience, which in turn lowered how much I enjoyed it (as I’m a massive nerd/geek). I can’t give an exact number, because the Covid-19 comics were highly enjoyable and are more of an outlier. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.117|162.158.167.117]] 17:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

== How do I add userboxes to my page? ==
I saw a user with userboxes and I want to be able to continue developing my personal page. Can anyone tell my how? [[User:DollarStoreBa'al|DollarStoreBa'al]] ([[User talk:DollarStoreBa'al|talk]]) 19:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
:Probably the easiest thing is to look at the source of any page that has something you want to use. 'Edit', the page. You can just copy what's there, if you understand all the {{}} stuff, or even just remember what to put in those {{}}s, etc. Perhaps you could try a bit of in-situ exiting (Preview if you want modify to understand, but ''don't'' fully Save... at least not until you're working back in your own userspace).
:Not knowing how much you know about wikisyntax/markup, I could be either overexplaining or explaining entirely over your head by saying something like the following, but ''if'' it's useful (now, or once you've started), then you're welcome:
:*You can use templates by editing in the {{template|template}} text, with the appropriate name there.
:*Some of them accept/need parameters, which you use by adding a "|" symbol after the name and then a parameter. Add more parameters by adding further "|", for first(, second, third, etc) parameters, as necessary, if that's how the template concerned works.
:*Some templates accept/need "|paramName=paramData" for certain things that can control control (look at any comic page, and how the {{template|comic}} is used, and note that "whitespace is (relatively) free"!), so look out for that.
:*Templates can nest... A {{template|notice}} might have a {{template|w}}(ikipedia link) within it. And there's a whole flow-control 'language' of making complex branching decisions so don't be surprised to see loads of {s and }s (usually doubled, ''perhaps'' tripled, and singly in 'wikitable' markup) in things you're trying to use.
:*Then there's the rest of the wikimarkup... Simple formatting to linking (external website, page on this wiki, interwiki formats (though some of those have templates ready to simplify!), etc). There's some things (handy relevent shortcuts) unique to this site, other things fairly universal. The ''general'' userbox format isn't that different from many other wikiprojects, but you may find something or other a bit more 'tuned' to our needs.
:*Try things out. Remember: "Show Preview" is your friend. (There's also the Sandboxes, but you usually don't need to fully save something, leaving its remnants in a page history, to learn thst it works... Or, more usefully, that it doesn't (or not as you expect).
:...any use? Could be telling you things you actually know, or you're about to ask about the {}s again. But at least look at the userbox markup, that you want to emulate, and then apply what you already can deduce to some testing to see what the bits you ''can't'' deduce actually do. Then you may have nice questions which are more straightforward (or at least direct!) for us to answer. ;)
:And this is my general advice to anyone (where I'm unsure what level of experience they're thrning up with). If it becomes clear that more technical replies are needed (assuming I can give them!), or if we need to go back to more basic principles, then I would adjust. But you have at least been able to do ''some'' edits, so probably don't need module 1 part 1 of Wiki 101. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.4|172.70.85.4]] 22:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
: My advice? Copy a box from the source of a user page that has them (copy the text within the braces, including the braces), and mess with some of the parameters until you get what you want. If you feel like you can understand it, you can also look at the {{template|userbox}} template and try to see what the possible parameters are, but the template is pretty complicated. I'm pretty sure that all of the parameters are named, so the order shouldn't matter. [[User:Firestar233|guess who]] ([[User talk:Firestar233|if you desire conversing]] | [[Special:Contributions/Firestar233|what i have done]]) 03:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

== Who is this? ==
what is [[User:Lettherebedarklight]]?
:They're a user of this wiki, just like you. They might have caught your attention because they're currently [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Lettherebedarklight&oldid=367915 edit warring with an admin] and seem to be resolutely [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Lettherebedarklight&action=history against the idea of having a normal signature or talk page]. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 20:57, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
::no, I mean his user page just redirects to his user talk - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 23:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
:::Exactly! See the second and third links in my message --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 15:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

== Visual editing ==

why is the visual editor not here yet? - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 23:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

:Because the only person who has access to the backend has gone dark and nobody else has access (which is also why the site is collapsing). You can read more about this in the Technical and Admin requests portals. At this point, we're lucky the wiki hasn't completely broken down already. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 08:59, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

::Noting that the visual editor gives a chance of ''really'' weird markup (WYSIWYG, yes... probably, but there's plenty of chance to do [[2109: Invisible Formatting|silly''' '''things]] that you'd never do if you actually saw the code).
::Though the site isn't actually collapsing. It always has a chance ''of'' collapsing, of course, just like any site (fully maintained or not). but the running issues with it are either non-serious things that updating won't help (continual 'spam attack' attempts, though it can be shown that it's already set up to be pretty proofed against most of them and most attacks continue to be dumber than the age-old system set up to prevent them from doing too much, with a high proportuon of the rest still dumber than the 'Bot that currently adds even more protection, and ultimately even those that get past that get handled by the existing userbase) or easily avoided issues (you can't use MathML like you used to be able to, but there's alternatives to that in most circumstances). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.92|172.68.205.92]] 16:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
:by owner of the wiki, you mean (the mysterious) [[User:Jeff]]? - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 00:29, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
::Precisely --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:36, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

== soup ==

what is [[Template:soup]] for? - [[User:Bb777|Bb777]] ([[User talk:Bb777|talk]]) 00:44, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
:I guess it's a userbox, [[User:Certified_nqh/userbox|see some examples here]]. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:36, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

== deleting pages ==

does anyone here know how to delete pages? {{unsigned}}
:You add "<nowiki>[[Category: Pages to delete]]</nowiki>" and hope an admin eventually deletes it. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 16:46, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

== Google Chrome is now (again) truncating TITLE TEXT in webpages incl. XKCD ==

Greetings,
As of early April 2025, we’ve noticed that Google Chrome is no longer displaying to us the complete TITLE TEXT when we mouseover an XKCD image. This appears to be a regression of earlier-reported issues, going back 12 years or more.

We’ve been using m.xkcd.com on my mobile devices, and we may begin to prefer it on desktop as well, since the mobile rendering is the best way we’ve found to access the complete Title Text without browser interference.

Coming here because, perhaps, many readers of ExplainXKCD might need explained why the Title Text no longer makes a lot of sense with the ellipses, and also, we’ve no idea how to access the remainder of the text from the browser UI, without going into DevTools or something.

'''Note: This also affects images and Title Text here on Explainxkcd itself!!!'''

We’re using a ChromeOS Chromebook, Stable channel:
Version 134.0.6998.183 (Official Build) (64-bit)

[[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 22:28, 4 April 2025 (UTC)
:In my experience with Chrome for Android, it just doesn't have the space to display the text in the window that it gives. (Latest comic ends with "an emitted SIm card hitting...") That also happens with (my prefered choice of browser) Firefox for Android. (''That'' ends with "a emitted SIM card hitting the side ...", for reference.) It's just a function of the screen-real-estate and the fitting it in with all the "Copy link / Share link / Share image / [etc]" options that this interface needs.
:Don't know about ChromeOS and Chromebook, all that much, but I get the impression it works more with the tablet paradigm rather than a normal laptop one (like the one I'm usong here, which gives a nice hover-text rendition of the whole job), and assumes and/or is a lower resolution so subject to such pixelated real-estate issues as I mention.
:That applies to the xkcd.com site. Here on explainxkcd.com it displays as (the beginning, and then) "and you listen very carefully..." on one line and then the URL of "explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/File:decay_chain_2x.png" on the next, above the various "click options". I ''believe'' that's to do with the fact that the explainxkcd image is an href (which gets represented in that space too), whereas the xkcd.com one is perfectly happy to just give me (as much as it can of) the "title=..." parameter of the img-tag.
:...and I've learnt not to worry about that. It's a technical limit that isn't any website's fault (well, maybe it's the fault of ''having'' too long a title-text), and the best that any browser under the circumstances can do.
:There's two ''or three'' main ways of seeing the whole thing though:
:#Go and edit the URL to add "view-source:" in front of it, and look at the source (that's how it works for Android Chrome, I imagine it's how it works in ChromeOS Chrome, it also works in both Windows and Android Firefox, and seems to be industry standard). Awkward, perhaps, to narrow down the appropriate length of markup tagging and read it straight, but it's there.
:#*Noting that a recent update of the Android Chrome started to make the ''default'' action of a URL of "view-soirce:<validURL>" to open a search up on the "view-soirce:<validURL>" line. One has to be careful to eschew using the enter/return key as that makes use of the "magnifying glass" option, you have to choose the second (non-default) "globe-like thing" option which depicts "yes, use this exact 'address'". No, I don't know what they messed with, and why they messed with it, and it's not the only thing that has changed recently with the UI that I really rather they hadn't changed, but took a while for me to dig up an answer about that so I freely share it in anticipation of it being important to someone else who remains similarly confused.
:#Easiest thing is to come here to explainxkcd, and don't bother with the hover-over (or whatever-you-do-to-get-the-title-text) text, at all. It's written beneath all (or nearly all?) Explanation Page images in plain sight. No hovering needed. Should be complete, unless the BOT (or someone who later comes along) has managed to mess it up, but then somebody (else) will probably fix it to how it really should be, and any remaining pecularities gets documented in the Explanation and/or its Talk.
:#There's also maybe dedicated xkcd viewers (I've got three installed from the Android store, just because I haven't yet decided that any one does everything I want it to do: "xkcd", "xkcd Browser" and "XKCDroid") that do at least try to be more hassle-free with their presentation of the hover-over title text. Don't know if you have such options under the ChromeOS system, but with even Windows going for 'app store' functionality behind it (not that I use it, save for very particular elements) I would rather hope that there'd be ports/clones of similar functionality that you can look at.
:I can easily imagine that the crew behind Chrome have indeed been messing around with your particular build. Like I said, things keep changing to my own instance, althugh the biggest problem I have is often that when editing it doesn't recognise the need to pop up the on-screen keyboard until I've changed tabs away from the editing page and back again, then I can actually do something (beyond cut/copy/paste actions, which sometimes is enough). But that's probably not going to affect you like it does me.
:And I don't use any "m.site.url" version of anything, if I can help it. Most mobile-site implementations tend to assume that I'm viewing in extreme portrait mode (which I'm not) and rearrange themselves in a way that really doesn't work in my prefered landscape orienttion, and that's just the start. As I don't do this, the above testing/examples I give was all done on "(explain)xkcd.com", not "m.xkcd.com" or whatever. But I don't see that it'll make a material difference to my checks and enumerations I've just done on your behalf. And still, hopefully, helps you understand my conclusion that... well, use one or other of my 'get arounds' (number 2?) and let Chromebook Chrome go and do whatever it feels like with hovertexts, 'cos you're not too bothered about it. Sound good? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.5|172.70.58.5]] 23:46, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

== An apology ==

Hello. I am a former vandal; I am the one who ran the "crap" bot and posted the Soviet flags; I also did smaller-scale vandalism several times. I'm not sure exactly when I quit, but it's been a year or two. I'm sorry for the trouble I caused, and I won't do it again. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.116|172.71.158.116]] 16:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:Care to explain what your reasoning was? --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

::I didn't really have any reasoning; I just (stupidly) thought it was funny. I don't want to reveal my exact age, but I was in my early-to-mid teen years then; it was just immature "humor." [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.125|172.69.23.125]] 21:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

== is this HTML?==
I wonder if this is HTML. <h1> Is this h1? </h1> [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 04:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:turns out h1 is the same as == [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 04:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
:Actually, it's not, if you check.
:Wiki ==ed header is:
::<code><nowiki><h2>is this HTML?</nowiki></code> (+ the thing that gives you the "[edit]" link, etc, to the end of the h2-entity)
:Wiki 'forced' H1 is:
::<code><nowiki><h1>Is this h1?</h1></nowiki></code> (and nothing else)
:It's not ''very'' obvious, but H1/= and H2/== are actually ''slightly'' different.
<H1>H1 text...</H1>
<H2>H2 text...</H2>
<H3>For contrast, this is H3</H3>
:Let's just say that the full range from = to ====== match H1 to H6 (give or take other differences, and I haven't checked what even greater "="-strings might or might not do), but mixing established wikimarkup and XML-family markup is best done with care and with good reason (e.g. to deliberately not invoke Table Of Contents-type sectioning? ...no, apparently not even that!).
:And you know that there's always the Sandbox pages (or, even better, edit something, Preview it, view the Preview's source and then ''don't "Save Changes"'' ...unless you still need to for some other reason) as a better alternative to 'asking' ultimately rhetorical questions in here. (And inviting potentially rhetorical answers, like this one.)
:You seem to have an enquiring mind, which is good. But remember that "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing". I'm only giving you a bit of ''extra'' knowledge here, but also adding about the caution you should take. Please don't be a nuisance with it, unintentionally or otherwise. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.216.104|162.158.216.104]] 06:53, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

== How do I create a user page for myself? ==

I do not know how to create a user page for myself {{unsigned|Log of n|15:50, 16 May 2025}}
:It helps if you remember to sign things. But it looks like you ''might'' be able to create it (account old enough and contributed enough).
:If you see the redlinked links to your (non-existing, at first) "User:" and "User talk:" pages, in your usual signature (or the one I gave you, just above), you should be able to click on them and get the option to create them to put things in. Other places you can find those redlinks is in page-histories, your user-contributions and the RecentChanges list, in various slightly different ways. Or, having created User: space, click on the (redlinked) Discussion tab, or vice-versa.
:Try it, see if it works. If it doesn't, then ''anyone'' can create those pages for you (who can create any), but I don't think that's necessary for you. If you get rebuffed, let us know and someone will either give you better instructions or help you out directly.
:(The reverse is true, too: if you can create your own User: pages, you can create ''anybody else's'' who needs them, and more besides. But probably best if you don't just go finding redlinks and making them non-red, just because you can. Hold off on that, as it's too easy to create pages for long-idle accounts, spam-accounts or even regular editors who ''don't want'' their pages (yet?). If a very new account asks, maybe ''they'' need help, not yet having reached the threshold, but more experienced people often oblige after not too long. Follow their lead, learn from them before going mad with power... ;)
:...should this be in the FAQ? Isn't it already? Without getting exact about the thresholds needed (in case they're adjusted, if nothing else), I'm sure this could be written there. I'd check, but it's not like I can edit it (or create pages) as I currently am. Nor do I feel the need to. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.182|172.70.91.182]] 17:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

== I found a comic site. ==

It's called euge.ca and it's a lot inspired by XKCD. Could we explain it together? [[User:ExplainEuge.ca|ExplainEuge.ca]] ([[User talk:ExplainEuge.ca|talk]]) 08:42, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

:Could we do that in my user page? [[User:ExplainEuge.ca|ExplainEuge.ca]] ([[User talk:ExplainEuge.ca|talk]]) 08:43, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

::But your user page isn’t created... there, now it is [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 12:37, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:How's that related to xkcd? We don't explain things "inspired by" xkcd... --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 13:02, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

== Lonely Comic explanations ==

It’s kinda strange to see some of the earlier comics have just a few paragraphs and minimal discussions while others have dozens of paragraphs (ok, maybe not that much, but you get the idea) and hundreds of discussions. I felt lonely when visiting those lonely explanations [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!|Aprilfoolsupdate!]] ([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 02:35, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

:Feel free to mark them as incomplete if they don't explain the comic enough! However, most of the early xkcd comics were simple drawings or simple jokes that didn't need a long explanation. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

== Leaderboard score ==

What does the score on the leaderboard mean? What are the rules of score? [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 07:03, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

== User box ==

{{Userbox | border-c = #033 | border-s = 1 | info-s = 9 | id = ?| info = Can someone tell me what’s a userbox?| float = right}} [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 12:31, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

:You'll find a lot more answers if you type the same thing on google and add "Wikipedia" at the end: https://www.google.com/search?q=Can+someone+tell+me+what%E2%80%99s+a+userbox%3F+wikiepdia&num=10&newwindow=1&udm=14&sxsrf=AE3TifO4CvTB3NGTONgx7ci3eXPbJh2B1g%3A1754574833361&uact=5 --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 13:54, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

== [[:Category:Artificial Intelligence]] ==

We have a category titled "Artificial Intelligence" ([[:Category:Artificial Intelligence]]). Shouldn't that be [[:Category:Artificial intelligence]] with a lower-case "i"? --[[Special:Contributions/208.59.176.206|208.59.176.206]] 01:02, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
:Tricky. Wikipedia has it as {{w|Artificial intelligence}}, and use it as the mid-sentence "artificial intelligence", but also have {{w|Wikipedia:WikiProject Artificial Intelligence}}. It's something that ''can'' be used as a compound-noun title (thus deserves full title-case), unless you're wondering "if, one day, perhaps, we will truly encounter an artificial intelligence of some kind", in unironic use of the original words.
:For most purposes, I think, in the comics "AI" (the abbreviated title of the subject) is used/meant, so I suspect that it'd be the more titular umbrella of things (including, or at least aspiring to, AGI, etc) that applies.
:I don't see any obvious wikipedia discussions about whether or not to (have) capitalise(d) the term. I suspect that it just was assumed as default and everyone understands that a discussion of "artificial intelligence" can be refered to as "AI", there, but wouldn't complain about any variation other than "ai". ;) Whether umbrella title or 'just words' is used here... I don't think it matters (i.e. no change needed, meaning least fuss in not 'correctiny' it in all the places it would need to be). But a question could still be asked, in case there's a different consensus from my own 'feeling' about this. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 10:14, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

== What if pic explain ==

Can someone explain to me what is {{brda}}? [[User:Aprilfoolsupdate!| Aprilfoolsupdate!]]([[User talk:Aprilfoolsupdate!|talk]]) 13:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
:That'd depend upon what the person who created it meant it to be, and I'd ask them, not the community. (I've just asked them, myself, for my own curiosity. Or, rather if I can help them do what they thought they wanted to do.) Probably just an experiment. Maybe one that didn't work, because of not knowing how to do what they wanted to do. Or possibly even why they wanted it in the first place.
:As has been said, before, it's very easy to create site pages (if you can at all), though it might be best to ask others first for advice, if you're fairly new to the whole concept. [[Special:Contributions/92.23.2.228|92.23.2.228]] 17:33, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

explain xkcd talk:User: Aprilfoolsupdate!

2025-08-10T17:26:38Z

92.23.2.228: /* Can we help you..? */ new section

Talk:3126: Disclaimer

2025-08-10T10:32:35Z

92.23.2.228: Now, having made a typo (and some not-so-good punctuation choices), now corrected, you'd perhaps think that I'm indeed not an AI. But maybe an AI would learn to do this to try to 'prove' itself human! Of course, no AI would present such counterargument???