explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals

 Create a new topic!      Refresh

Proposals Place for ideas and suggestions to improve the wiki's design and organization on general issues, such as adding a feature to the wiki or creating a new character or template. Create a new topic!

This page has archives. Discussions are usually archived after they have remained inactive for a long time or they are no longer relevant. Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Multiple Blondies, Merge Blondie/Lenhart

Blondie can be three different people: the generic Blondie, Miss Lenhart, and Mrs. Roberts (who only appeared in the 1337 series and 327: Exploits of a Mom). My proposal is to change Blondie's name to Miss Lenhart, but separate Mrs. Roberts and Blondie, as they are different people. Merging Miss Lenhart and Blondie would be similar to how Cutie and Megan were merged after Megan was named a few times. User:YZ100 00:57, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

Sounds good! I don't see why we'd need to keep using our own name when Randall has given her a different name. FaviFake (talk) 14:53, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Hmmm... not a lot of thought put in here, before the mass rejig actually happened. The same person who is explicitly a Math(s) teacher in some comics is also explicitly not into mathematics in at least one other (and instead has a Linguistics degree under her belt). Wish I'd said something, now, but I was already involved in the above discussion and didn't want to cause any more fuss than I had to. Oh well. Done now. (Or at least the 'easy' bit, but I suspect the other page-merging will be happening soon enough.) 81.179.199.253 16:54, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Well, that comic is particular because Blondie is used a news anchor. Iirc, Randall almost always uses either Cueball or Blondie to portray news anchors, and that comic had two news anchors so he had to use both. And even before the merger, the Miss Lenhart page said: "She may or may not represent the same character from comic to comic". I'll add that fun fact to the page though. FaviFake (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

I agree with User:FaviFake. The only recurring characters in xkcd who represent the same character across comics are Black Hat, Danish, Beret Guy, and technically White Hat. Miss Lenhart can do different things, and arguably it is possible for her to work part-time. But since xkcd doesn't have a fixed timeline, like in 1139: Rubber and Glue, 1753: Thumb War, or 2869: Puzzles, where people like Black Hat and Ponytail appear as kids, so it is possible for here to work as a news anchor in the past, if not part-time. The Miss Lenhart page says Cueball is used more commonly as a news anchor, and this could be because Lenhart works part-time. User:YZ100 21:12, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

I gave just one case, of several, where - similarly to "Rob is a Cueball, but a given Cueball isn't necessarily a/the Rob" - an aspect of character tied heavily to Miss Lenhart isn't one that agrees with all Blondies. My perspective remains that Miss Lenhart (when established as such) is notably as much a separate entity from generic-Blondie as Mrs Roberts is another, and we previously we had this decent distinction of definite-Misses Lenharts, definite-Mrs Robertses and all other generic Blondies that were neither suggested to be (at least part of the time) mathematics teachers nor hacker-moms.

Then there's the separate issue, in that same Meteorologist comic, that the Blondie/whoever (like Cueball) clearly isn't even really a News Anchor (part time or otherwise), and actual TV meteorologists/weather-presenters (even budding/probationary ones, who should have started off by being actual meteorologists who then are seen as suitable candidates to dip their toe into being a media personality) tend to be entirely different people from the journalists who present the news. The lesson is that justifying a positive truth from the the comics is tricky, but inconsistencies support various negative truths mmore practical

In the end, there's pretty much as much logic to consider all (ex-)Blondies to be Mrs. Roberts, instead. Or, as a better combination of matches, some are Lenhart and some are Roberts. (Or, a better-match/lesser-mismatch, would leave at least some Blondies as still 'only' a generic Blondie) Though the decision has been made now, so I was only here to point out some of the various problems invoked but apparently not even considered. 81.179.199.253 22:42, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

In 1985: Meteorologist, Lenhart has a Linguistics degree and she teaches grammar in 3229: Grammar. She isn't limited to just math, like how she teaches science in 3132: Coastline Similarity. Besides, being a math teacher and a mathematician are not the same thing. User:YZ100 4:50, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

You are of course begging the question, by insisting that the person/people with a Linguistics/Grammar background is Miss Lenhart, then using that as further proof as to why you are correct to say they are all the same person. Try not to do that. 82.132.221.157 13:37, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Page for What if? questions

Let's make a page for What if? questions we all have and take some of those questions to send to Randall? This may also help revive the blog articles. Does anyone have any other ideas? YZ100 4:38, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I think that Randall might be working on some other projects. Added a question onto User:FaviFake's page in regards to whether or not What If? will be continued in the future. tori :3^{talk to me!} 19:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

He doesn't really work on any projects like What if? 2 or What if? x10 anymore and the blag was discontinued. He works on the video series these days. But the whole point of What if? is for him to answer our questions. User:YZ100 22:43, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Clearing up how to become a trusted user

As a new user myself, the tiny section on why you can't make a user page yet is vague and annoying. Few edits? How many? Who makes you a trusted user, what is the process, etc are questions that many people ask. Just saying it would be nice for a better explanation on how to become a trusted user. Thanks :) Black Hat's Hat (talk) 18:08, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Not that it is my decision on how to approach this, I (as you can see from my non-username status, being far from being an official 'trusted user') prefer the vague nature.

If you define a line, then people will delibretely push right up to this line. Either in this kind of case where someone desires to get the enhanced abilities (for good or ill) and will do the exact minimum necessary to get to that point, or for limits of behaviour (such as being told "you may call your fellow forumites <beep>, <boop> or <censored>, but using <nastier word> is an instabanning offence>").

The actual criteria for page-creation abilities is not that difficult to achieve (and have been explicitly mentioned elsewhere), but is not just a single threashold. I might liken it to "it's better to travel hopefully than arrive", in that until the very point that someone realises that they have accomplished the ability to create new pages (any new pages, not just their own userpages), you have probably eased yourself into how the site works and appreciated its general construction and will then only create new pages that they have some amount of genuine justification for wanting to create (to save others having to clear up after some "Template:Cool, I can create new pages!" splurge, or similar...)

Ok, so it's not exactly a guaranteed method of getting a more considerate userbase, but it's better than automatically treating it as a 3246: Speedrun and missing out on the more general atmosphere there is to be had here.

Also, it doesn't at all stop you getting User Pages set up, right now. You just need to mention that you'd like them - as you maybe just have done - and any pre-established user can decide that they're happy to create them for you... if that's all you want to actually create, then you might never do any more and just continue to edit exactly as you're currently editing.

The point at which you realise that you can create new pages (you hit a redlink, by accident or curiosity, and get given the option to unredlink it ...whether or not you then go through with it) can then be just give you a fuzzy feeling and a realisation that you've 'arrived'.

...but, again, this is just my view. Having seen many new users, and come to admire many of those that stuck around and have done great things. I would gladly see you as one of them, even if I would advise against undue impatience on the way to getting there. Having checked your activity, I will say that you're not too far off, but I'll not enumerate exactly how distant that point will be... That'd be like setting up a finishing tape and encouraging you to recklessly sprint for it. ;) 81.179.199.253 20:49, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Makes sense ☃ Black Hat's Hat (talk) 17:48, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! This helped me create my user page! YZ100 (talk) 17:23, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

"It's 'cause you're dumb"

In another conversation, I said: "Why is Black Hat saying it? He's a classhole, so he knows a better way to insult than just saying "It's 'cause you're dumb." It would make more sense if Danish were saying it, as she was never given to be a classhole." I stand by my statement. Either delete it or make Danish say it. YZ100 (talk) 22:38, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

I'd go for deleting it. I've never understood it. FaviFake (talk) 10:38, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

If we are not going to make it make sense, remove it. Not only is it mean, but Randall himself celebrates knowledge in 1053: Ten Thousand. Change it to something else. YZ100 (talk) 00:00, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

It does actually makes sense. It is humorous. It definitely has a long history, with there being comprehensive discussions about this ten years ago, and longer.

But that's just my interpretation. Is the proposal that it 'just' be deleted (I'll let you work out how), or is that that you replace it with something else (ditto), whether that's someone else saying that, BH saying something else or a completely new scenario altogether?

Whatever your wish, make some effort to convince people. 81.179.199.253 00:59, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

There's been talk about this about 12 years ago. Check explain xkcd talk:Community portal/Proposals. TL;DR is that this was the original motto decided on by the original creators of this blog back when it was a blog, and was moved over to the wiki when we made the migration to MediaWiki. I would not be against changing/deleting it, but this is certainly something of great significance in regards of our history and requires a clear consensus within the community. tori :3^{talk to me!} 01:01, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Logo and tagline changes

SUMMARY: We are changing 3 things: The icon: we strongly recommend an SVG logo so that it can scale correctly. However, if you can only create a PNG/JPG file, the image should be square and 100×100 pixels. The wordmark: this should be a landscape monochrome image (wider than it is tall). This is a graphical version of the name "explain xkcd". Please remember that the name of the wiki is all lowercase (or all uppercase), so do not capitalise the "e" or "xkcd" differently from the rest of the wordmark. This should also be an SVG, with a width of 124px height of 32px. The tagline: this is shown below the name of the page. It is currently "explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb" (Learn why). You can propose a new tagline in #Better tagline. ㅤ The tagline can also be shown underneath the wordmark, although this is optional. This is an example of a Vector2022 compliant logo:

We're planning on switching the default skin from Vector (V10) to the modern Vector 2022 (V22), but unfortunately, our current site logo and all logo proposals are designed around V10. V10 logos are generally a single large squarish image, which is why we have the name of the site in the logo, but in V22, you need an small square icon section, and then a separate wordmark section for the site's name.

This is also an opportunity to change or redesign the site's current tagline, "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb", which has been controversial, since you need to create a tagline image regardless.

As such, we are now hosting a logo redesign contest! For more on the logo's design requirements, see wgLogos.

Please upload any logo proposals into the category Category:Explain xkcd logo proposals with the format "proposalname_[icon/wordmark/tagline]". We strongly recommend an SVG logo so that scaling can happen correctly. For example, you might name a wordmark image "AbbyProposal_wordmark.svg". If your proposal contains a full icon/wordmark/tagline set, give them the same proposal name, but you can also upload individual components if you want.

Icon and wordmark redesign

To see the current icon and wordmark proposals, see current explain xkcd logo proposals. To create a new proposal, follow the instructions:

HOW TO UPLOAD YOUR LOGO PROPOSAL: Click this link and click "Browse...". You can upload individual components or the entire icon/wordmark pair if you want. If you don't have an account or you don't have permission to upload files, upload the proposal at https://wetransfer.com and leave a comment below. We will upload it for you! In "Destination filename", give it a name like "NAME_OF_YOUR_PROPOSAL_icon/wordmark.svg". In "Summary", paste this text exactly: [[Category:Explain xkcd logo proposals]]. You can optionally also describe the proposal. Click "Submit". If you did it correctly, it should appear in this gallery.

I created a new logo proposal but I'm not sure how to upload my SVG to the given category. Can anyone help? I've uploaded the file but I'm not sure how to put it into the category. Here's the link: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/File:MorpheusProposal_icon.svg Morpheus (talk) 02:21, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

You just have to add "[[Category:Explain xkcd logo proposals]]" to the bottom of the page.

I should note, though, that the icon on the new logo will be much smaller than the current logo, so your proposal doesn't really work. Ideally you want to avoid having the sitename in the icon, because that's for the wordmark. Celene (talk) 08:39, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

I assumed icon meant the one that went on the top left of the site...what's the proper name for that? And is that one even up for replacement? Morpheus (talk) 00:32, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

The proper name is "icon", yes, it's up for replacement. As I said, the current site logo is designed for V10, which means that it's a large squarish image with the name of the site on it. This doesn't work for the V22 skin, because it's designed for the logo to be much smaller and to have the name of the site be in a separate "wordmark" section next to it.

Check out https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page on desktop for an example icon/wordmark pairing. Icon is to the left, wordmark is to the right. Celene (talk) 22:08, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

to confirm, the existing logo will remain in effect for users of Vector 2010? or, do we get the wordmarkless section of the new logo - Vaedez (talk) 10:56, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Ideally the new icon-wordmark pair could be adapted for a square size, but I suspect we'll end up with two different logos until someone develops a better square logo. FaviFake (talk) 14:49, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Maybe this is a stupid idea, and I don't know if this violates copyright, but maybe the Wikipedia puzzle globe from Malamanteau could make a good explain xkcd logo. It represents a wiki, in that the puzzle globe is synonymous with Wikipedia, almost certainly the most famous wiki, and it represents xkcd in that it is part of an xkcd comic. 97.121.204.141 22:22, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Unfortunately the logo is really old and not great. We'd have to upscale it but it still wouldn't look great. And I think we'd want at least one of the characters in the logo. FaviFake (talk) 10:45, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Before I went to bed last night I was thinking making a version with Beret Guy popping out of the globe; which could combine the wiki-implications of the globe with BG's manic energy, if y'all'd like me to submit that. 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 17:35, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Submit it! The important thing is to get every idea among the proposals, we can always refine it later UnfixedCuttlefish (talk) 21:45, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

I really like this idea! I actually had one similar to this, albeit a bit simpler, just a stick figure with a Wikipedia-like globe for their head. I made a sketch of it a few days ago and I'm actually working on making a vector version of it now! I don't think I can share images here yet but I'd really like to submit it once I'm done, though I will say I do find this idea more fun! AltaKarl (talk) 17:42, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Please do! The instructions for uploading as a non-registered editor are at the top of this section! FaviFake (talk) 09:15, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

I haven't permission to upload files so I have stuck my proposal on imgur, if someone could do the admin for me :] The source file is SVG (which imgur doesn't support, happy to provide by another means if needed), and elements are traced directly from comics so there are licensing implications of that UnfixedCuttlefish (talk) 21:52, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

Submitted both yours and mine. 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 01:12, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

i really love your design and would like to put my support behind it C: tori :3^{talk to me!} 04:37, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Whose, Unfixed Cuttlefish's? 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 05:13, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Ack, posted the reply on the wrong message…I meant yours with the Wikipedia puzzle globe. tori :3^{talk to me!} 15:08, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Better tagline

See the history of the current tagline and the opposition to it at explain xkcd:Tagline

Debate the tagline rename suggestions below! Celene (talk) 08:03, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Tagline: "Explain xkcd. And then explain the explanation." ;o) 82.13.184.33 08:44, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Love this one Morpheus (talk) 02:44, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Tagline: "Explainxkcd. Because nobody is an expert in everything Randall says."

I love your idea. Here's mine: Because no one is an expert in everything Randall says.[citation needed] YZ100 (talk) 23:19, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Strong support (but use Template: Citation needed, but without the blue text) Velocifyer (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Tagline: "Explain xkcd. It's 'cause you're just not Randall." Morpheus (talk) 02:48, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

(I don't have problems with the "'cause you're dumb", actually. And noting that I'm sure that you're not needing to ask for taglines to be SVGed and uploaded, but I can work something out for me and the contributor above if you want.) 92.23.5.92 19:27, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Tagline: "Explainxkcd. Often misattributed to Mark Twain". - reference to XKCD 1942 (Memorable Quotes) 66.212.64.105 22:30, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

I kind of like "explain xkcd: [citation needed]" since it's the main gimmick of the site, but I'm also inclined to keep the original tagline Celene (talk) 22:51, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

i also don't have an issue with the original. however, if changing it is inevitable, i would favor the [citation needed] joke, but i think it would work best as a suffix to a sentence. (e.g. "It's 'cause your dumb.^{[citation needed]}) -- somefan (talk | contribs) 23:06, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

I would actually prefer "It's 'cause you're dumb.^{[citation needed]}" over the status quo ("It's 'cause you're dumb.") with the rationale that it's much less likely to be taken the wrong way (I don't mind the original tagline either, but I can't deny it comes across as hostile, because other people have complained about it before) and exemplifies our character as a community.

I think I mentioned my preference previously in the Discord. Really, there's nothing to lose, and everything to gain, by tacking a {{cn}} onto the end of the tagline. Eunakria (talk) 23:25, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes. I'm not on the Discord, but I agree with you here. While I don't dislike the current tagline, and I like the idea of a rotating tagline, if we're changing it and we can't make it rotate, we should absolutely do this.

Also, I will now be joining the Discord. RadiantRainwing (talk) 04:00, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

i'm now leaning towards this as being a good modification! i was thinking of something like that, but i can't see any how it would make the statement be more likely to be taken correctly (if also meaning "nonhostile"). my interpretation is that this just adds insult to insult (LOL), as ^{[citation needed]} is jokingly used by Randall in his books and blog when declaring obviously true statements, which i find funny :) -- somefan (talk | contribs) 04:28, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Some What If? articles do use ^{[citation needed]} in this fashion, notably what if? 27 ("Death Rates") which subverts the prior use of the joke in What If?

[...] This means the death rate among humans who were not members of The Beatles is significantly higher than the 50% death rate among humans who were.

I expect this significant^{[dubious–discuss]} fact^{[citation needed]} will pave the way^{[citation needed]} for a great deal^{[dubious–discuss]} of important^{[citation needed][dubious–discuss]} research.

Also, you'd be facing an uphill battle trying to make the assertion that "people are stupid" in the context of xkcd, insofar as 1386: People are Stupid.

Eunakria (talk) 14:22, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

tbh for awhile now i've felt like the tagline would benefit from being a link to a page explaining that the tagline doesn't actually think you're dumb, it's meant in jest/sarcastically; i think my vote has to be for one of:

• the original tagline unmodified but the text is a link to "here's why this might read as an insult, here's why it isn't an insult" explicit tonal clue-in
• the original tagline with [citation needed], where the text inside the brackets is a link to the aforementioned tonal clue-in
• rotating tagline with the first bulletpoint as one of the rotated values, or if not rotated, a user preference to revert to the old tagline (i'd accept a usercss method of undoing whatever the new tagline is as well)

- Vaedez (talk) 10:42, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

In the vein of this, something along the line of <Comic Title>^{[citation needed]} may be interesting. I'm not sure this would work very well as a tagline, but maybe there is room somewhere for something that updates depending on the current page you are on. DarkAndromeda31 (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

What if we made the tagline rotating, like it is at mezzacotta.net? (example: here, then reload the page a ton) That way we can get every single reference and gag in there. If not, how about this tagline: "Explain xkcd: It's because you're not as smart as you're supposed to be.^{[citation needed]}" 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 04:20, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

The rotating tagline is probably the best choice if it's possible. Foo (talk) 14:26, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

A rotating tagline would be fun, but we need a few good options. I've done something similar before, specifically a rotating tagline in the footer of Skin:Citizen with all of the options being mediocre puns. I don't know if that fits the vibe of this wiki, which already has its own sense of humor in article text. Eunakria (talk) 01:35, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm minded of the "... histories of X an Y" postscript to Dwarf Fortress. Or, closer to home, a 2243-like way of 'mixing something up' dynamically, with but a little thought for the possibilities (possibly multi-path, rather than simply permutational). 92.23.5.92 22:21, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

One new idea: "I hope we've learned something today." (a reference to 169) 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 05:52, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Technically you don't need to have a tagline image (see the MediaWiki documentation wiki for an example of this) and you can still have a regular below-the-page-header tagline without a tagline image. Foo (talk) 14:19, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

To be clear, the wordmark (which will be displayed in V22 instead of a standard square logo) and optional revised tagline (to replace "it's 'cause you're dumb") are two separate things we want. Eunakria (talk) 14:24, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

^{Explain xkcd: You're one of today's lucky 10,000!}

Short, less insulting, and references a comic! What's not to love? DryPHB (talk) 17:30, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

This was one of the ones proposed in the original proposal; the main objection I saw was that no one knows who this 10000 is. (I like it though.) 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 00:54, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

This is the best one yet, but it's not perfect because you still need to have read the comic in order to understand it. However, it's certainly better than the current one. FaviFake (talk) 14:07, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

I support this one as well. I think that the current tagline also requires some prior knowledge of Black Hat's classhole nature to not be offended. Capycapybara (talk) 06:42, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

I was about to suggest this as a tagline myself. I think it is an iconic and positive sentence that represents what we're about. Maplestrip (talk) 10:19, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Couldn't agree more with this as a suggestion and with the supporting reasons others have given - much more in tune with the ethos of xkcd and knowledge, in my opinion.

Not necessarily relevant - I get that this is an American site - but to British English ears, calling someone "dumb" I think is more unpleasant than it perhaps is to US residents. Although we obviously understand the American idiom, used in British English, it's more likely to retain its original meaning, and therefore equates people who cannot speak with stupidity. 87.115.198.74 14:10, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I like this one! Addressing FaviFake's point that you need to have read the comic for it to make sense, maybe the tagline could link to the comic, like so:

^{Explain xkcd: You're one of today's lucky 10,000!}

What does everyone think of that? 68.132.88.17 23:06, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

My main issue with this one is that the “10000” in the comic specifically refers to Americans, while explainxkcd has an international audience. 84.226.147.179 20:18, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I really enjoy the thrust of this, but I would make it slightly more explainxkcd-POV, e.g. ^{Explain xkcd: Nurturing today's lucky 10,000.} -Pinkgothic (talk) 08:55, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Tagline: "Explain xkcd: Because jokes are funnier when you explain them." (paigefile) (talk)

@Celene, when is the deadline for proposals? 2601:600:9080:C6B0:CCFA:46D6:B28A:5D65 01:44, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't actually have a firm deadline set but I'd appreciate if you could get it in within two weeks from now Celene (talk) 00:10, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

I like the ideas of rotating taglines and of course "lucky 10,000." A proposal based on [1], "Majors in the Universe". A second suggestion might be based on [2]: "Both physics and stamp collecting!" Ideally, we'd have a tagline that truly represents the wonder of learning. Maplestrip (talk) 10:29, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

ExplainXKCD: Overly verbose explanations for somewhat simple jokes Ciciinho (talk) 00:19, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I think the current tagline is fine. It's a grade school level insult at worst, and I don't think we need to change a good tagline for something that maybe four people will get offended by. 2A04:4E41:3801:BEA3:0:0:AF8C:BEA3 01:00, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

There were definitely more than four people who were offended by it, see explain xkcd:Tagline. FaviFake (talk) 01:05, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I do quite like the rotating taglines idea, this is a list of sample taglines I made:

• It's 'cause you're dumb^{[citation needed]}
• You're one of today's lucky 10,000!
• A wiki of romance, sarcasm, math, and language
• An xkcd for everything, and an explanation for every xkcd
• Overanalyzing stick figures. For science!
• Overthinking webcomics so you don't have to
• Robert'); DROP TABLE explanations;--

Celene (talk) 01:27, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

The first one aside, here are some:

• You're one of today's lucky 10,000!
• A wiki of romance, sarcasm, math, and language
• An xkcd for everything, and an explanation for every xkcd
• Overanalyzing stick figures. For science!
• Overthinking webcomics so you don't have to
• Robert'); DROP TABLE explanations;--

(Here are ones I added:)

• Randall understands his comics best.
• It's 'cause you're not Randall. (Someone else said this)
• Someone is wrong on this page. Help us fix it!
• Not everyone understands xkcd.
• Romance, Sarcasm, Math, and Language: Explained! (I found this in another discussion, can't remember which)
• Explained in Ten Hundred Words.
• Because jokes are funnier when explained. (Someone else said this)
• What if the internet suddenly didn't exist?

Also, we should change the icon because Black Hat wouldn't say some of these. YZ100 (talk) 5:23, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I love "You're one of today's lucky 10,000" and "It's 'cause you're dumb [citation needed]", here are some more basic ideas for taglines I've thought of:

• waking up the sheeples
• enriching your search history since 2009
• because science is hard
• complex solutions to simple problems
• with questionable moral (yet scientific!) values
• 0 days since last cool bug sighting
• overengineering, overthinking, overanalyzing (or overdramatizing, if that's a word)
• science joke. you should probably move along.

They definitely need some refining, though. Till (talk) 13:29, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I thought of some other ideas. They still need work, though:

•It's 'cause our code's compiling

•It's 'cause you're close to a cat

Capycapybara (talk) 12:41, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

"Explain xkcd: perhaps the second website you looked at this morning " 2A0A:EF40:512:2C01:4FBB:976A:1658:C7C7 21:17, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

"Not the website we wanted, but the website we needed." (The 'we's can be substituted with 'you's if preferred.

"Because Knowing is 49.998% the battle."

"Because your grandparents never had it this good!"

"The Internet's most esoteric rabbit hole."

"Doomscrollers vote it a solid π out of 5."

@McFlyDallas 2607:FB91:274C:89B5:AD2:257:6EBA:4DAB 23:14, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Are any of these references to actual comics? Because otherwise I don't really think they fit the explain xkcd vibe. FaviFake (talk) 13:59, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

It seems most of these proposed rotating taglines reference a specific comic, so I think we should add a link to the comic somwhere in the tagline. For example, if someone doesn't know what "waking up the sheeples" references, readers should be able to get to the comic. But I don't want the link to be too prominent. Where should we put it? FaviFake (talk) 13:37, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps in situ with the text, e.g. "waking up the sheeples"? (oh man do I miss template:Tq) We could tone down the link contrast a bit. 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 05:13, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Or maybe a hidden link? The text could remain grey but become underlined if someone hovers over it. Or it could not even become underline, but still change the cursor! So people who know the reference who don't hover over it won't notice a link, but the people who want to know more or to select it to put it on google will notice that their cursor changes.

Feel free to create template:Tq, I miss it terribly as well! FaviFake (talk) 11:58, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

For the taglines, those sound like good ideas.
As to Template:Talk quote inline, I tried to re-create it, but as you can see it currently just dumps the code out:

My suspicion is that #invoke doesn't work, for whatever reason; two of the dependent templates (sigh), Template:error, Template:Encodefirst also just spew out code. Can someone please check it out, and if it still doesn't work, @FaviFake, can you please delete Template:Talk quote inline, Template:error, Template:Trim, and Template:Encodefirst. Really sorry for this mess. 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 08:08, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

No worries! I deleted all of them except template:trim, which actually works! FaviFake (talk) 14:45, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

Well at least it wasn't a total failure Template:emoji 😁 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 17:08, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to a tagline that references a specific comic (whether it links to it or not), provided the joke work to some extent without knowing the comic. I do however object to the several suggestions that refer to Randall by name, since his name isn't very prominent anywhere in the comics themselves/on the xkcd website. UnfixedCuttlefish (talk) 12:38, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

V22 complaints

i oppose the changing of the skin. 2022 is much uglier than 2010. Lettherebedarklight (talk) 17:07, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight As I explained in EX:CPT#Editing improvements (WikiEditor + VisualEditor), we are not changing the skin for everyone, we're only changing the default skin, which will mostly affect logged out users to improve their experience. As I explained in that discussion, you prefer V10, remember there's a huge bolded "Switch to old look" button right in the sidebar so you can switch back in literally 1 click. Worth remembering that most of our readers are logged out or never touch the preferences (or even know there are preferences they can tweak), so it's best if we make the experience as welcoming as possible to them, especially when all it takes to go back is 1 click. The needs or preferences of power users shouldn't determine what the average readers sees. FaviFake (talk) 00:16, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

@FaviFake Can you add support for mobile devices? Explain xkcd appears uncomfortably wide on my smartphone, and Reader Mode removes all edit functionality and some of the formatting. HaruruChanDesu (talk) 01:55, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

if so, i would very much prefer this to not be automatic-detection (or at least, have a user preference to disable it while logged in) as i tend to hate mobileized interfaces and find them harder to navigate, and the 'switch to desktop mode' toggle doesn't always work even though i have it globally enabled in my browser - Vaedez (talk) 10:23, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Seconded, please for the love of god don't change the default skin, it works perfectly fine Tux1 (talk) 06:23, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

It certainly does not "work perfectly fine". According to the WMF, Vector 2010 didn't match the expectations, was cluttered and not intuitive, and didn't highlight the community side, among other things:

1. The desktop interface did not match the expectations created by the modern web platforms. It felt disorienting and disconnected. Navigation and interface links were organized haphazardly.
   • Readers were unable to understand the purpose, terminology, and concepts of available tools such as the main menu, user menu, and page tools.
   • Editors found the hierarchy of the navigation to be confusing for newcomers.
   • Editors and other contributors wanted easier access to tools they used frequently.
   • Editors expressed interest in having fewer but more prominent ways to begin contributing.
2. There was clutter that distracted users from focusing on what they came for. It was challenging for readers to focus on the content. New editors were unable to use their intuition to perform simple tasks not related to reading.
   • Too much information density and navigational elements on the page made it difficult to focus on a particular reading or editing task.
   • Readers found it difficult to navigate the page and spent a lot of time scrolling.
   • Readers found it difficult to search for information that is relevant to them.
   • Readers wanted to have an easy way to view the table of contents throughout the page.
   • Character count per line was more than three times the recommended value.
3. A very small percentage of readers understood how wikis functioned. Many readers were not aware that the content they were reading was written by volunteers and updated frequently, or that they could potentially contribute as well.

You can read more about it at these pages:

• mw:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements/Features/Limiting content width
• mw:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements/Repository/Wikimania Stockholm research report
• mw:File:Desktop Improvements Report 2.pdf
• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Deployment of Vector (2022)/More about Vector (2022)#About
• mw:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements#Before, the interface…

If you don't like it, that's a different question, and you can just click the huge bolded "Switch to old look" button. But it objectively does not work perfectly. FaviFake (talk) 14:04, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

Vector 2022 doesn’t work on mobile devices, either. The lack of support for small screen widths makes makes reading Explain xkcd an ultimatum between straining your eyes to read tiny text and scrolling left and right and left and right and left and right and left.

If Vector 2022 actually supports mobile devices, please implement it correctly so that it woks on Explain xkcd. HaruruChanDesu (talk) 04:41, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Works better than Vector 2010 iirc but will probably want a distinct default mobile skin (and subdomain) like Minerva Neue Celene (talk) 07:52, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Vector 2010 actually has smaller non-collapsible sidebars, so V22 is marginally better to use on mobile devices because the actual content is more narrow and you can just zoom into it more, and most buttons are slightly bigger so they're easier to hit. But yes, a mobile-native skin is of course much preferable, but that doesn't have anything to do with the skin used on desktop. FaviFake (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

i debate the objectivity of your "objectively does not work perfectly", while conceding perfection is impossible, as this is a 1172: Workflow situation for me and i've spent a considerable amount of time wrestling with the "modernized" interface for usability reasons which i have not with the "classic". - Vaedez (talk) 10:32, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

If anyone cares, I subjectively prefer our current skin (Vector 2010) over Vector 2022. Then again I can change it on my settings so it's not too troublesome. 189.159.39.228 05:05, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Here's something. I'm using the V22 interface currently, but not in dark mode. This is because, when I attempted to switch over to dark mode, I found out that the page displayed on the main menu is completely broken. The background is still in the typical 'light mode' style, but the text is changed to white, making it unreadable. DollarStoreBa'al (talk) 16:12, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

DSB, I have this code in my commons.css, which I think fixed this problem. Try it! 7amiþ moi · 💬 · 📊 05:01, 15 August 2026 (UTC)