Talk:Community

Collab

Hi Spike, Society is covered here. I looked at humanity which links to human, so that may be a title. Community works for me too.  EStop ⚓ 16:44, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I made the first move; the next move is yours. I warned you that our visions for the page might be different, though the mix may be fun. Spıke 🎙️16:57 28-Dec-15

OOO, in there before me! I am focusing on "what makes up a human" as background. A couple of paragraphs, I'll drop it in once done, see if you can do anything with it.  EStop ⚓ 17:04, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

I could indeed: How can you map "the Human Condition" to hair color and neglect Conditioner?! Reminder, if you use [edit] to edit individual sections, we will avoid Edit Conflicts if I am in a different one. Spıke 🎙️17:27 28-Dec-15

PS--It was not Plato but Thomas More with Utopia (capitalized), right? Spıke 🎙️17:57 28-Dec-15

I just chopped that sentence from Human condition in Wikipedia. Happy to change to Thomas Moore if that is more appropriate.  EStop ⚓ 18:09, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Hair styling

Metal flaking Spike? How do you know these things?  EStop ⚓ 17:35, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Purely by observing punkers. I do not even use conditioner to approximate the Human Condition. Spıke 🎙️17:57 28-Dec-15

That was a good line too. Thinking about my next move. Nice work on art, very funny.  EStop ⚓ 18:07, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

You should move your budding Becoming part of a community to underneath my comment on an obstacle to becoming part of a community (the lynch mob). Spıke 🎙️18:28 28-Dec-15

Will do. It needs making funnier and further expansion, working on some ideas.  EStop ⚓ 19:04, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Sorry Spike, I can't see where you mean. I'll continue in Word if you could oblige.  EStop ⚓ 19:09, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

If you want to play with "Becoming" go right ahead, I'll get some pictures together.  EStop ⚓ 19:57, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good. I have done the move, and broken off one of the paragraphs as In sociology. I am reaching the limit of what I had to say at the outset but will still tweak stuff you add. Your sporks from Wikipedia retain too many of their lists, about which the only way to make them funny is to end them with an absurd item, a well we are going to too often. Spıke 🎙️20:16 28-Dec-15

PS--Max Headroom would be a good pic for Community spokesman, wouldn't he? Who is there that he doesn't "speak" for? Spıke 🎙️20:39 28-Dec-15

Yes, that is better I'll ditch Boris and have a tweak of the sporked bits.  EStop ⚓ 21:02, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Ah, you fixed the text, thanks Spike.  EStop ⚓ 21:14, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

There will be more to come on "Becoming". Thinking... what is the actual process? How can you tell what bit to join?  EStop ⚓ 21:25, December 28, 2015 (UTC)

Review

I wont lie, this article was not funny at all. It just... You know, literally sounds like Wikipedia. --Gabriel734 (talk) 09:59, April 26, 2016 (UTC)

Though you removed your own comment, I'll reply to it. This article is a collaboration and you can see our different styles in different sections. "Literally sounding like Wikipedia" is a plus; as I explained on your user page, the key here is to create the impression one really is reading Wikipedia and use that to give punch to the jokes. One of the techniques my partner here used is to crib sentences directly from Wikipedia and then change them to be funny in a very subtle way. These sentences do literally sound like Wikipedia, and you need to pay attention to get the joke. There are several lists that start out reasonable and wind up absurd. I leave it to EStop to observe that one reader did not wait long enough for the humor to hit, which may indicate a new challenge for the author. Spıke 🎙️12:16 26-Apr-16

Gentlemen (and maybe ladies, too) I am humbled. I rarely descend to commenting upon the work of others but this is a marvellous exception.

User:Jimlemon

Thank you for the positive review and feedback!

Gabriel, what you say I shall consider, as the goal is always to get an article that pleases the widest audience, and getting feedback helps us improve. The collaborative style of this article is strictly informative, and if one author decided to go too far away from the style and discussion, their edits would stick out like a sore thumb, something I am guilty of occasionally! Some readers pick up on some jokes that others don't, some find jokes the author didn't intend to be jokes. The trick is to strike a balance between subtle and absurd, too much of one or the other, limits your audience too. So yes, perhaps I could have drawn more from the sporked text, something to think about. Our current collaboration is, by complete chance, another 'community' discussion using a completely different style; we are both (in fact three of us) conforming to the overall concept and feel of the article. This presents challenges from the other end of the scale.  EStop ⚓ 07:32, April 30, 2016 (UTC)