Talk:Rickrolling

This page should redirect

The page should redirect to Never_Gonna_Give_You_Up#.22Rickroll.22_Internet_meme, the portion of the article which actually explains the Rickroll. Zchris87v 23:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. --Onorem♠Dil 00:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

May need to be updated, if the section title changes, but otherwise sounds good. Done. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:40, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

April 1st, 2008 and YouTube featured videos

Can people please stop adding this info in to this article without sources, or just adding a link to YouTube as a source? This is a violation of WP:OR. We need a mention in a WP:RS/WP:V secondary source to add this to the article, and I'm sure there will be mention of it at some point soon. Cirt (talk) 05:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, a valid source is required, but I'm not surprised that there isn't one: it just happened. However, it's fairly easily verified by going to the site. *shrug* It's something that can be fully/properly addressed in a couple of days. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I added it to a new External links section - hopefully someone will remove the blatant violation of WP:OR in the text. Cirt (talk) 05:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The only problem with putting in a citation for this is that YouTube has not made a press release or anything for this (and they shouldn't be expected to as that is the nature of an April Fools joke). We can verify this personally by clicking on one of the featured videos on YouTube but that is all the citation that will be available until a news source reports on this joke (very likely since there is usually a story about Google's April Fools joke and this will probably be mentioned in anyn such story as YouTube is a part of Google). Diemunkiesdie (talk) 07:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

well, youtube has rickrolled the masses. If that isn't a good enough reason to keep this article, nothing is. 71.8.72.63 (talk) 06:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

YouTube is not an adequate cite for YouTube

Can someone please remove this cite? YouTube is not an adequate cite for YouTube itself - Can we just write an entire article on YouTube and source it solely to YouTube links and YouTube videos? No, we can not. The same applies here, and this is why a cite to YouTube for something happening on YouTube isn't really the best cite. Cirt (talk) 07:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Geezus dude, don't get your panties in a bunch. I only added the "cite" because someone over on the Google hoaxes page used it. I'm sure there will be plenty of news stories about this tomorrow, so there will be suitable cites for this thing. As for now, I don't think anyone is going to challenge this "fact" just because I didn't add the "appropriate citation." If it makes you happy, I found a news story about the UK YouTube april fools day joke... I can add that one if you like? Naah, who cares about the UK? --ErgoSum88 (talk) 08:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No, please, what is this cite you have about the UK YouTube hoax? I'd certainly like to add that to the article. Cirt (talk) 08:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Here you go... and no, its not a rickroll. [1] --ErgoSum88 (talk) 08:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

ErgoSum88 (talk · contribs), thanks! I replaced the direct cite to YouTube with that cite you just gave, hope that's okay with you. Cirt (talk) 08:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Although this page seems to be getting a lot of attention right now, so good luck to you. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 08:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. At least the AfD is over. Cirt (talk) 08:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Best AfD ever. Z00r (talk) 10:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. Cirt (talk) 10:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Additional sources

I have added some additional sources that could be used in the article, formatted properly as cites, to a Further reading section. As these get incorporated into the article the cites can be moved to the article text. Cirt (talk) 06:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Potential Sources

BBC News - April 1 2008. [2] SomeNonaSaint (talk) 11:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

LA Times interview with Rick: [3] 75.57.190.1 (talk) 18:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

gamefaqs april's fools

www.gamefaqs.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.203.200.166 (talk) 17:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the rickroll

I seem to recall a sentence or two talking about the family guy episode Meet the Quagmires which first aired May 20, 2007 but it's not there anymore. The episode finished with a "Never gonna give you up" montage and I think it was that episode that reminded people of the song and led to it being used as a rick roll. People who saw the episode recalled that scene when they were rickrolled and ensured the rickroll comments stayed alive.

Similarly, shouldn't the Meet the Quagmires article be changed to indicate it led to the rickroll phenomena rather than being an homage to it.

So is that part of the origin, or were rickrolls around before that episode? (keep in mind that the episode would have been produced several months before airing so I don't know about it being a homage to the rickroll phenomena).--Will2k (talk) 18:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Family Guy generally doesn't create jokes like this; it comments on them. The article itself says "By May 2007, the practice had become widespread", which definitely fits with your example. I'd be happy to see the link put back in, if it can be sourced. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Rickrolling comes from 4chan's /v/. The Family Guy episode was a complete coincidence, as it was aired after the GTAIV trailer came out (a fake link to the trailer was the first Rickroll).65.6.213.12 (talk) 03:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It came from 4chan's /v/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.217.122.158 (talk) 23:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Western countries only?

I checked jp.youtube.com (Japan) and tw.youtube.com (Taiwan), which do not redirect featured videos to Never Gonna Give You Up, so apparently the joke is limited to western countries. Will I require sources, as some Wikipedian purists are gonna nag about Original Research (Wikipedia, this is why I hate you), or is this considered obvious enough to just add this info? Vindictive Warrior (talk) 19:00, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Last night (USA time) it was the other way around, with some of the international sites having the joke but the US site being normal. I think they set it up so that the joke would be active during April 1st local time. So, since it's already April 2 in East Asia, the Japanese and Taiwanese sites are back to normal. Dave6 ^talk 19:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)