explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:906: Advertising Discovery

2015-05-20T00:38:12Z

Caeleste Alarum:

It's only trained Wikipedia veterans who believe that. Most people have no idea what the square brackets mean. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:45, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

:[citation needed] [[User:Promethean|Promethean]] ([[User talk:Promethean|talk]]) 02:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

:[Dubious:Discuss] [[Special:Contributions/120.145.27.228|120.145.27.228]] 17:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

:This just in. Wikipedia veterans are gullible idiots.
:: I knew it all along. [[User:Cflare|Cflare]] ([[User talk:Cflare|talk]]) 21:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

On the other hand, What if? has conditioned the readers to assume that anything with a [Citation Needed] sign next to it is an obvious fact and doesn't need a citation. [[User:Caeleste Alarum|Caeleste Alarum]] ([[User talk:Caeleste Alarum|talk]])

Talk:1526: Placebo Blocker

2015-05-18T15:21:46Z

Caeleste Alarum:

;Placebome

The title of the referenced paper introduces the 'Placebome', the collection of genes which lead to the placebo effect. This is an absolutely ridiculous word, and would be worthy of Jonathan Eisen's [http://phylogenomics.blogspot.ch/search/label/Worst%20New%20Omics%20Word%20Award Worst New Omics Word Award]. [[User:Quantum7|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7|talk]]) 08:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

;Title text bottle

It seems more plausible to me that the "they" and "same bottle" in the title text refer to the sugar pills for headache. The title text would then be an organic continuation of the immediately preceding dialogue. [[User:Angew|Angew]] ([[User talk:Angew|talk]]) 09:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
:Agreed. Take two sugar pils. The second will boost the effect of the first. It could work if you believe it.--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
:: Agreed, updated. -- [[User:Phyzome|Phyzome]] ([[User talk:Phyzome|talk]]) 13:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm confused about why this explanation is a stub. Personally, I think it explains the comic well, but I'll refrain from removing the incomplete tag in case most people think that the explanation isn't adequate. [[User:Caeleste Alarum|Caeleste Alarum]] ([[User talk:Caeleste Alarum|talk]]) 15:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:1526: Placebo Blocker

2015-05-18T15:21:14Z

Caeleste Alarum:

;Placebome

The title of the referenced paper introduces the 'Placebome', the collection of genes which lead to the placebo effect. This is an absolutely ridiculous word, and would be worthy of Jonathan Eisen's [http://phylogenomics.blogspot.ch/search/label/Worst%20New%20Omics%20Word%20Award Worst New Omics Word Award]. [[User:Quantum7|Quantum7]] ([[User talk:Quantum7|talk]]) 08:31, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

;Title text bottle

It seems more plausible to me that the "they" and "same bottle" in the title text refer to the sugar pills for headache. The title text would then be an organic continuation of the immediately preceding dialogue. [[User:Angew|Angew]] ([[User talk:Angew|talk]]) 09:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
:Agreed. Take two sugar pils. The second will boost the effect of the first. It could work if you believe it.--[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:14, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
:: Agreed, updated. -- [[User:Phyzome|Phyzome]] ([[User talk:Phyzome|talk]]) 13:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I'm confused about why this is a stub. Personally, I think it explains the comic well, but I'll refrain from removing the incomplete tag in case most people think that the explanation isn't adequate.

Talk:223: Valentine's Day

2015-05-18T15:09:09Z

Caeleste Alarum:

Should we remove the "incomplete" tag? I don't see how this could be improved or fleshed out any more. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.166|108.162.237.166]] 13:56, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I removed the "incomplete" tag because the reason for it was stated as "References to previous comics?", and the explanation includes reference(s) to other comics. [[User:Caeleste Alarum|Caeleste Alarum]] ([[User talk:Caeleste Alarum|talk]])

Talk:223: Valentine's Day

2015-05-18T15:08:37Z

Caeleste Alarum:

223: Valentine's Day

2015-05-18T15:04:17Z

Caeleste Alarum:

{{comic
|number = 223
| date = February 14, 2007
| title = Valentine's Day
| image = valentines_day.jpg
| titletext = One of these days me and Joey Comeau will get around to subverting the hetero-normative paradigm and fixing all this.
}}

==Explanation==
As mentioned in the comic, love is already pretty complicated, even more so on {{w|Valentine's Day}}. Valentine's Day makes it more complicated by introducing all kinds of questions. Is our relationship such that it should be acknowledged on Valentine's Day? If so, how? If by a card, what kind of card would be best? If by something more than a card, what? Candy? Flowers? A Date? What does the Valentine I received really mean? Friendship? Love? A covert request for sex? (see [[63: Valentine - Heart]]). As an example of the kinds of dilemmas that can arise, see also [[1016: Valentine Dilemma]].

The phrase "Because love isn't quite complicated enough as it is." is an obvious use of sarcasm, as love is really complicated, according to Randall ([[#Explanation|see above]]).

Referenced in the title text, {{w|Joey Comeau}} is the author of the webcomic [http://www.asofterworld.com/ A Softer World]. It is a queer comic whose work also discusses love in various forms, so between them [[Randall Munroe]] and he are a good team to consider working on "subverting the hetero-normative paradigm". {{w|Heteronormativity}} is the body of lifestyle norms holding that people fall into two distinct genders with natural and complementary roles in life. Whether or not anything that cartoons can do would fix the Valentine's Day problem is another issue. Among other things, ditching the hetero-normative paradigm presumably complicates things in terms of potential love relationships, which now include more possibilities than male-female, as is shown in [[216: Romantic Drama Equation]]. All of these might face the Valentine's Day issues in various ways.

==Transcript==
:Valentine's Day
:[There is a large, shaded, red heart.]
:Because love isn't quite complicated enough as it is.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Valentines]]
[[Category:Sarcasm]]

Talk:441: Babies

2015-05-18T13:31:49Z

Caeleste Alarum: Created page with "The explanation says that "disassembling a child will be impractical and possibly lethal for the child". I don't think that disassembling a child could be "possibly lethal". U..."

The explanation says that "disassembling a child will be impractical and possibly lethal for the child". I don't think that disassembling a child could be "possibly lethal". Unless your definition of "disassembling a child" is something like plucking strands of hair off them, if you took a child apart, they would die. I'm changing the explanation. (Also, sorry, I'm kinda new here, but I hope I'm doing the signature thing correctly.) [[User:Caeleste Alarum|Caeleste Alarum]] ([[User talk:Caeleste Alarum|talk]])

441: Babies

2015-05-18T13:29:39Z

Caeleste Alarum: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 441
| date = June 25, 2008
| title = Babies
| image = babies.png
| titletext = I bet my future kids will read this someday. DEAR FUTURE KIDS: how did you get internet in the cellar?
}}

==Explanation==
A common theme of xkcd is that one never feels that one has "transitioned to adulthood", in the sense of actually attaining the seriousness and sense of responsibility that children imagine all adults to possess. Here, the author illustrates this by imagining [[Cueball]] and [[Megan]] taking on the ultimate "adult responsibility" — having a child, treating it as they would any other engineering project. Disassembling a project to check the parts is an activity that is appropriate for a self-built computer or robot, but disassembling a child would be impractical. It would also kill the child. Megan also shows her lack of child experience by holding the baby upside-down by the foot, which isn't a good idea. Her behavior could also indicate that Megan is treating the child as an object rather than a human being.

The title text implies the author will have kids someday. It will be surprising if they read this comic, not just because it will give them an unflattering look into their father's attitudes on having children, but because he plans to lock them in the cellar where there will be no internet access. This is possibly a reference to Kaspar Hauser: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaspar_Hauser] , who is a boy that was claimed to have grown up in a dark cell in Germany in the 19th century.

This is also the topic of [[674: Natural Parenting]] and [[1384: Krypton]].

==Transcript==
:It doesn't seem right that we're old enough to have kids.
:[Megan holds a baby upside-down by one leg.]
:Megan: Sweet! We made a baby!
:Cueball: Are we sure we did it right?
:Cueball: We should disassemble it, check all the parts, and put it back together.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]