Talk:Worst 100 Ways to Deliver Bad News

Attention

READ ITEMS BEFORE EDITING

• Before adding another entry to The List, verify if there isn't a similar one already.
• Do NOT add entries after 1.
• Do NOT attempt to change the format of the article. Just don't.
• It is a GOOD thing to read all entries on the Talk Page. Do so.
• For God's sake, DON'T BE UNFUNNY!!! This is a featured article. If you're unable to accomplish this, read Uncyclopedia:How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid.

Am adding this .GIF in.

Any complaints?--Wit (tawk) 06:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Smaller then one

Vote here to Keep the entries below one or to Relocate them. --Boy Toy bitch at me 16:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Closed and relocated. --Boy Toy bitch at me 21:44, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• Relocate --Boy Toy bitch at me 16:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• Relocate sounds good. The WikiNews one should be fairly high up, though, in my opinion. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 20:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Vote for No.1 entry

Vote here for what should be the no.1 entry. Me? I can't decide...--Zyrac 20:47, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• My reasoning behind using the (current) no. 1 was that, as the list's climax, the no.1 shouldn't necessarily be the funniest, but it should stand out as the no. 1 (like Uncyclopedia the movie on the worst 100 movies, it's not the funniest, but it's a fitting end). So, for now, I'll go with that one.
• Current. Kakun 22:19, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Closed: The current #1 is kept. --Boy Toy bitch at me 16:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

This new one is CRAP, adopted? what? It's not even funny, I can't remember the one I initially saw, but it was someone adressing someone, and really stood out. --125.236.150.9 22:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey Derek, I know you hang out at uncyclopedia, so if you're reading this, your daughter jumped off a roof this morning. --Dave 13:04, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC). -Best --Perplextrator 22:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

35. After a light saber battle while your opponent is hanging on for dear life "I am your father." This one is great. 97.91.150.248 12:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Duplicate

42. Pretend they won a prize :: 13. Disguise it as an award, same thing. Techboy

Duplicates

There was some talk about duplicates on the VFH page. Since I don't really see any (at a glance), I thought the matter should be discussed. Which entries are duplicates, and should they be fixed? Doug 15:30, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)

82 and 69 are the same thing. --EvilZak 16:15, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)

No, one is Wikipedia and the other one is Uncyclopedia. On the previous edit, before the whole categorization, 1 and 69 were the same. Acid Ammo 20:05, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I disagree (1 and 82 now). 82 tells you that using Uncyclopedia is the 82nd worst way of delivering bad news, 1 isn't a way of delivering bad news at all, it's just some random guy using the no. 1 to deliver his news. I figured the no. 1 didn't really need to be the funniest, but it did need to stand out, which is why I picked this one. Doug 21:01, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

What in the world are you guys talking about? 1 is clearly different from 82 and 69, and everything else in the entire article for that matter. 82 and 69 are both "Post it on Wikipedia." --EvilZak 21:21, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I meant 81 instead of 82. Doug 22:34, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

82. Make a page about it on Wikipedia

Hey, anyone can edit it, and there probably isn't an article entitled "I killed your baby"

69.

They're different. I say keep 'em both. Acid Ammo 21:32, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

more duplicates?

Sorry to be a pain, but this pair look to be duplicate or at least near-duplicate:

Use pain as a distraction

Tape a "kick me in the crotch, then tell me that I have penile cancer" sign to his back.

Distract them with physical pain

*punch in the face* You only have two weeks to live!

• Merge the two. Acid Ammo 02:46, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

--Carlb 02:45, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Formatting

This page really could use some formating. Part of the challeng will be in working the pictures in smoothly with the text. Prettiestpretty 16:07, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I think we need to make some distinctions in types of pictures. There are pictures that are the joke (like delivery of the black baby). I think these need to be plain (no frame or caption), with the number halfway down the height of the picture. Then there's the pictures (and templates) that are part of the joke (like the rebus), these should be after the text, on the next line (with some indentation to make them line up with the other pictures). And thirdly, there's pictures that aren't part of the joke, but rather sort of a loose addition (currently, just the parrot picture), that should be right floating thumbs with captions. That's my idea for the formatting. The article is currently pretty close to this. The second category pictures could use some indentation and we could probably use a couple more thumbed pictures. Doug 16:18, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Any reason why you keep moving the picture of the parrot to the right side of the screen? All of the other images are on the left. --Carlb 22:34, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

That's just a side-effect of the reverts. It should just be on the left under the entry. I originally thought it'd be nice to have some non-essential images on the right, to balance out the layout, but that messes up all the formatting. Doug 23:13, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Template

Ok, the worst 100 template is screwing up the images, because it's getting on top of them. The first two entries HAVE to be text to fix it, so just type any crap so the pics won't be messed up. Also, when you do that, remove the thumb from the 102 pic. Acid Ammo 13:17, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Resort

I've re-sorted the list by topic/category (humour, distractions, games and puzzles, Internet, computers and office, song and dance, occasions, mass media) so everything is renumbered (starting with 103 and counting down to one). Similar entries have been grouped together, making the list easier to read and duplicates easier to spot. This does move a whole bunch of text entries (such as the russian reversal) to the first section, so the images should be clear of the template now. --Carlb 17:26, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I don't really agree with this move (sorry, it must have been quite a bit of work). Reading just internet entries, one after another takes out a lot of the surprise. If you mix it up, you get one media entry, one internet entry and one puzzle, which makes it more interesting. If you group everything together it becomes more predictable after a couple of entries in a category. Also, this way, if someone wants to add an entry, they'll have to renumber the whole thing. I'd prefer to revert this, and just move the big images a little further down the list. Doug 17:34, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I kinda agree with Doug. Another solution could be writing some more non-list text, above the Table of Contents, so the Template don't reach the list. Acid Ammo 20:03, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I like the idea where they're read as they were added. If one were to group them by type, it seems less like a list of 100 things. Prettiestpretty 20:42, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I have (with pain in my heart) reverted all of Carlb's hard work. I moved two entries up and the other ones down. Doug 20:55, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I agree that they should NOT be sorted by category. We should do everything we can to make sure that similar entries are not too close together. For example, the excel pie chart, the powerpoint presentation, and the talking paperclip, while all hilarious (especially the ones i made) would probably get boring if put too close together. Also, I'll have to change the Price is Right image that I made. I like the practice of putting images into those little boxes and writing the punchlines as captions. Its like a Far Side cartoon and I think it works pretty good. just my opinion. --billy b robby

I've moved the pie chart (by swapping #47 and #88) so that we don't have a whole bunch of pictures in a row. As for having more than a dozen entries saying (in various ways) "post it to the Internet", if it gets repetitive perhaps we should see if we could combine or remove a few of the similar ones. Scattering the same or similar idea a dozen times throughout the list isn't a good solution IMHO. --Carlb 13:34, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Repetetiveness has very little to do with it. Think of it this way; if you eat three spicy dishes in a row, the third one isn't going to have any impact, no matter how good it is. If you eat one mild dish, one spice and one sweet, each one will have the full possible effect. It's not about repetition, it's just that when you're thinking about using the media because the last ten jokes were about that, you're going to see the next one coming.

I've re-reverted the list to uncategorized. I really don't want to start an edit war here, but the you're the only one in the discussion that wants the list categorized, versus about five people that want it randomized. We should at least keep it this way until we reach an agreement. I may have missed some edits, I'll browse through the history to enter these as well. Doug 21:48, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Repetition

If we've said "use the media" ten times in the same list (or was it a dozen "use the Internet" entries?), changing (or reverting) the list order isn't going to fix anything. Too many entries which re-word the same basic concept... if every several entries it returns to "use the Internet" it's time to clean up or combine some of them. I had combined two Wikipædia (use wikipedia, {{wikipedia}}) and two Uncyclopædia (use Uncyclopædia, make a Worst 100 list like this one) entries, as well as combining the one "use Encyclopædia Dramatica" entry with some other Internet entry. I'd also combined the two "use physical pain as a distraction" entries (now reverted). Keeping them as-is but splitting them up just gives a list that returns to "use the Internet" as every seventh or eighth entry, so still the same issue with pointless repetition exists, sorry. It'll take some work to sort out the repetitive and near-duplicate entries by the looks of things. --Carlb 22:29, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I agree that too many entries of the same nature will become a problem (although mixing it up helps a little). At some point a subject will get used too often (like the internet), but it's sometimes possible to salvage the joke. Take the 'distract them with pain' jokes. If you remove the 'distract them with pain from the second one, the joke ("tape a kick me sign...") remains intact. Use wikipedia, use uncyclopedia, use encyclopedia dramatice, use slashdot, use bash.org, use YTMND etc... is getting a little old, and it certainly wouldn't hurt to remove some of the less funny ones, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a new internet-based entry being totally fresh and hilarious. It's a subtle matter, it's not so much the category, but rather the nature of the joke that creates repetition. If a joke simply uses an old theme without adding anything, it should be pretty safe to remove. However, even the scrabble entry, though games have been done, is quite new and funny, imo. As you said, it's going to take some work (and probably discussion for some entries). Doug 23:13, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

In any case, the ones I had combined will need to be fixed again as they've been reverted for some reason. --Carlb 15:59, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

New entries?

If we have #1-103 now, presumably the next new entry gets prepended into the #104 slot? If any of the new entries are large images, perhaps it would be best to move one existing entry up (from somewhere in the low 90's) and insert any new image in its place? The order is arbitrary in any case - it's not as if we actually do a real survey to determine that one entry is "best" and should be #1. --Carlb 03:08, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

The order isn't really important, but we could make a poll asking which is the best entry to be #1. There must be a way to make a poll with wiki... Acid Ammo 15:45, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

resizing .gif's?

I notice that, on using the wiki codes to resize Image:Mickeysoft-word.gif that instead of getting smaller, the size of the image (in bytes) actually goes up... way up. What started just above 30000 bytes is suddenly a quarter-million bytes. Any way to fix this? --Carlb 03:06, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

[[Image:Mickeysoft-word.gif|thumb|250px|Teh Mickey is kewl]] Acid Ammo 15:43, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I'm only saying

The last Number 1 was realy good. Kakun 18:45, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC) ...and now there is no numer one. Guess someone didn't notice the minus before the WikiNews one.--Zyrac 20:33, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I thought there was gonna be a poll. Kakun 20:35, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Ah, well someone should make a heading for that already. I'll stick it at the top so people notice it.--Zyrac 20:47, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted to the original ordering, with the original no. 1, but keep the poll up. If people want some other no. 1 entry we can always swap stuff around. Doug 21:50, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

As for the -1 entry? I had written an entry for #0 (zero was Zork narrator) but in retrospect it seemed that to have the list pass 1 and just keep on going looks worse (in a "when is this going to end?" sort of way) than moving Zork to some more ordinary position in the list and not creating the 1, 0, -1 sequence. Otherwise, there's a certain lack of finality. --Carlb 22:22, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

::I agree. Stopping at 1 would be nicer. -1 would have to be reworded, but it can be a bad way to deliver bad news for just the same reason. Doug 23:13, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I've swapped Zork out of the #0 slot (again), this time by switching it with #93 (do nothing... they'll find out eventually). --Carlb 18:23, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)

use a Monty Python reference

Any reason why "Honey, there's a Mr. Death here, come to see about the reaping..." was reverted? --Carlb 15:56, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

If it was me, then it was sloppiness in a larger revert. I have nothing against this one or the ebola one. Doug 23:57, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)

You've got Ebola!

Why is this one gone:

57.

??? --Carlb 22:35, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Don't know, don't care. Replacing it with new one. --AAA! (AAAA) 03:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Dishonorable mentions and In the list?

Where Dishonorable mentiond aren't in the worst 100 and In the list are the rest? -anonymous

too many cancers?

As this list grows, we're going to start running out of ways to kill off characters in this story... and changing "cancer" to "AIDS" in these entries isn't going to help as that one has also been done to death. --Carlb 17:38, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Possible deaths:

• Satellite fell on one's head
• Eletrocuted with a lightning
• Starvation
• Spontaneous human combustion
• Arrow to the head shot by lost-in-the-city cherokee
• Ate by a bear
• Ran over by train
• Killed by russian mafia
• House's roof gave in
• Antrax on drink
• Bookshelter fell on one in library
• Wierd death invloving glass and burned rubber.

Doesn't have to involve death at all. Can be as minor thing as a hair in a soup. --195.50.206.183 19:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC) --Boy Toy bitch at me 18:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Best Page I've Ever Seen

--Mrasdfghjkl 05:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I love it. -LivingInThePast

--Hilarious, kudos to whoever helped make these.

No. 95

If you want a more 'exotic' language than Spanish, feel free to use Danish:

"Du havde en mor." -- the word "har" is in past tense. It means the same as the Spanish line.

212.242.144.172 22:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Leet duplicate

##177 and 73 are duplicates. I propose replacing one with:

Free Clothing

(as yet unmade t-shirt image saying) "My Friends Found Out I Had Testicular Cancer Before I Did And All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt".

Any suggestions? — thetorpedodog ℅ bark! ≝ me 17:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Purge This Of All The Crap

As this list grows to almost 200, it is getting clear that we have many entries that simply aren't funny and should be purged. Many of the new entries are either retreads of better entries, completely unfunny, or both.

For instance: #187 is just a retread of #185, #136 and others. The only difference is that instead of new messages or log in pages, it is "Blocked." This isn't to say that all retreads are bad. For instance, the grave stone is a retread of the church sign, but both are funny for different ways (the Church sign is making the news public, the grave stone is funny because it is occuring at a funeral).

Then there are those that aren't funny, like 188, 174, 178... the list goes on. I say we purge this down so that it is funny again! However, anyone telling me to take iniative and do it myself should note - I am lazy. --THollan 01:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I've made an attempt to clean this up a bit... although it's still much closer to 150 entries than 100. Now to see how many seconds pass before someone reverts this. ;) --205.150.76.41 00:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Best 100 ways?

Please? Best_100_Ways_to_Deliver_Bad_News

No.

???

What does this say?

--AAA! (AAAA) 01:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I fucked your wifes lamp while wearing a dove in my hat.--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 01:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

We'll have to amputate. --User:Rotten1

Shit--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 04:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

What the?! Number 129

I'M DEAD?! -- Kaptain 14:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

1. 3 Should be "Final Jeopardy" not "Double"

Number 79 may not be that bad

If a woman found out she's pregnant, she oughta go to those web sites where you have men (i.e. pregnophiles) who will want to date her or hire her to pose in front of a camera for big bucks. Not bad, it sure beats the coat hanger option.

Files missing

141 and 145 have only red links. Any ideas where they might lurk? --Pullamössö 05:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

For number 59,MJ is dead.

Another one

I am aiming for an entry on 'Worst 100...' (or some such) 82.44.143.26 18:33, July 29, 2015 (UTC)