Talk:Mad Libs

Under Scrutiny The article to which this talkpage refers is being scrutinized by the user Lenoxus for the duration Another couple months or when it's changed to my satisfaction, whichever comes first. In his/her words, the reason is: Love the idea, still needs work mostly to clarify that this is being randomly generated and is not the "everyday" randomness you encounter at Uncyclopedia.. Lenoxus will be dropping in at various moments to see how things are going, and will possibly make a variety of changes ranging from the meaningless to the universally despised. Submitters may interpret this notice as motivation to either praise or fear this user. If your thoughts concerning Mad Libs might specifically enlighten this user, please talk to him, her, or the Dark Lord. — Lenoxus

List of templates

Random templates used in this page:

• Nouns: Singular Plural Indefinite Names
• Verbs: Infinitive Singular Past tense Perfect
• Adjectives
• Adverbs

Add your own MadLibs components! --Algorithm 01:56, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Grammer and such

As we all know, "Mad Libs {{verb singular}} of {{noun plural}}." However, I'm concerned that the truth of the matter is that "Mad Libs {{possessive verb singular}} of {{noun plural}}". Is this something to worry about? Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 21:21, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Faux Templates

Hmm, rather than creating "template:" namespace pages for these inserts, how about using includes like {{:Mad_Libs/Noun singular}} {{:Mad_Libs/Noun plural}} etc which would call subpages named: Mad_Libs/Noun singular etc. Would also keep it to one top page. --Splaka

Two reasons:

• Pages in the Template namespace don't show up in random page queries, whereas main-category subpages do. (See also Zork.)
• Adding ":Mad_Libs/" to every template call in this page would add a large amount of clutter to this page, rendering it even more unreadable than it is now. (This is why I shortened the templates yesterday (from Libsnoun to Noun, etc.))

Additionally, I really doubt we'll ever have need for a generic template entitled "Noun." In the event that one of these templates does cause overlap issues (Template:Name, probably) we can simply move it to a synonym (i.e. proper noun).--Algorithm 22:51, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough, although with over 600 templates it makes the templates cluttered. Hmm, what if you did something like Template:Rnd/Noun Template:Rnd/Proper Noun etc, the templates would be not much more complex ({{Rnd/Proper Noun}}), and would prevent confusion of someone later going to Template:Noun and just seeing a noun, and wondering what is going on. --Splaka 22:56, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Namespaces are always cluttered. This is why we have Uncyclopedia:Templates. --Algorithm 23:00, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

There are reasons for not using a separate Mad Libs namespace. The random words may be of use to others. For example, see Random Insanity. --KP CUN 23:31, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

If it will be of use to others, then my previous idea of putting them as subpages of a template (like Template:Rnd/Proper Noun or Template:Randword/Proper Noun) would work even better. You could have Template:Randword (or whatever the main one would be) actually return randomly one of its random subtemplates, giving you a totally random word of unspecified type. --Splaka 23:36, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, you can't randomly call a random template; the subnested random tags aren't parsed. I'm working on fixing the bug, but it could be an intrinsic limitation. --Algorithm 23:49, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Oh, well that would just prevent top-level total randomness, I still stand by suggestion ^_^ --Splaka 23:54, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

If you took the <choose> tags out of the template itself, or moved the <option>s to a subtemplate or something, Rndword could be done. --72.21.41.138

{{Expletive}} needs to be worked in somehow

I can't think of a way to do it though. Anyone got an idea of what context it'd go in? --72.21.41.138

A quote about TOURETTE'S SCROTUM SYNDROME. ~ Ghelæ ^talk_contribs 12:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Dammit!

I just made an article exactly like this, only smellier at Mad libs. That'll teach me to not check properly before I make an article, eh. I swear that this site wasn't here (or in Baghdad) when I searched tho. Everything considered, would anyone be offended if I merge mine into this one? Aaadddaaammm 08:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No, I wouldn't be rotted if you duel it.  –              Smiddle