Talk:Rule 34: Difference between revisions
Douggiejones (talk | contribs) →Unreliable sources: There is no way these posts "confirming" rule 34 go back to 1993. It should be removed. |
Elvis untot (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
:Even more than that, there is a link to Photobucket on that source that was provided. Photobucket literally didn't exist until 2005. The claim that these posts were made in 1993 are absolutely ridiculous. |
:Even more than that, there is a link to Photobucket on that source that was provided. Photobucket literally didn't exist until 2005. The claim that these posts were made in 1993 are absolutely ridiculous. |
||
:also it is not even a link to 4chan but 4-ch -> http://4-ch.net/guide/view/introduction [[User:Elvis untot|Elvis untot]] ([[User talk:Elvis untot|talk]]) 13:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Where is the List of all the other rules, I Clearly remember reading it years ago, It stretched into the hundreds <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.64.197.112|173.64.197.112]] ([[User talk:173.64.197.112|talk]]) 19:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Where is the List of all the other rules, I Clearly remember reading it years ago, It stretched into the hundreds <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.64.197.112|173.64.197.112]] ([[User talk:173.64.197.112|talk]]) 19:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 13:53, 11 November 2018
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
New page
A page with this title was previously deleted and restored. I've used it for a new article. Any help would be appreciated. Keahapana (talk) 02:15, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
- Prior discussions, that may be relevant, or may contain references that you can use.
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rule 34 (Internet meme) (2009)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rule 34 of the Internet (Feb 2010)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rule 34 (Mar 2010) (Unrelated topic)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 July 22#Rules 34 (Jul 2010)
- Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion/Archive 19#Rule 34 (Sep 2010)
- I'll withhold from commenting further, and wish you luck in finding more Reliable sources. –Quiddity (talk) 03:40, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Quiddity, and thanks for providing these helpful links. Although I've just started with the low-hanging refs, there appear to be enough recent sources to meet WP:N. I noticed that you added a book review from wirenh.com, which I'm unfamiliar with. Should we add that? Keahapana (talk) 01:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
- I tracked down the updated link, but it's just a passing joke, so I'm afraid it isn't useful in any way. I'm not sure why I mentioned it in that old discussion (perhaps making a bad joke myself?). Sorry. –Quiddity (talk) 03:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Quiddity, and thanks for providing these helpful links. Although I've just started with the low-hanging refs, there appear to be enough recent sources to meet WP:N. I noticed that you added a book review from wirenh.com, which I'm unfamiliar with. Should we add that? Keahapana (talk) 01:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
OK, but there's no need to apologize for aptly joking about a Net joke <grin>. I'll add some more refs today from Google Books. Keahapana (talk) 22:29, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Unreliable sources
This article has a whole bunch of references to back up the claims made. But they are mostly urban dictionary, news sites, and 4chan (!). This is really not the way to go, wikipedia. 92.151.213.229 (talk) 09:16, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
4chan was not online before 2003, so 1993 timestamps must be some internal joke. There needs to be better sources, someone should look from BBS / newsgroups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.193.165.122 (talk) 17:52, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Even more than that, there is a link to Photobucket on that source that was provided. Photobucket literally didn't exist until 2005. The claim that these posts were made in 1993 are absolutely ridiculous.
- also it is not even a link to 4chan but 4-ch -> http://4-ch.net/guide/view/introduction Elvis untot (talk) 13:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Where is the List of all the other rules, I Clearly remember reading it years ago, It stretched into the hundreds — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.197.112 (talk) 19:25, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
- The problem with stuff like this is that it's notoriously difficult to find reliable sources for them. Rules 1, 2, 34, 35, and 63, as well as Godwin and Poe, are fairly well-known, but even then, it's tricky. In the article, as 229 said, the sources are dubious at best. I don't have the time right now to find better ones, but within the next few days I'll be able to do a refhunt. Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 02:01, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Requested moves
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Calidum Talk To Me 16:07, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
"If it exists..."
Rule 34 is: "There is porn of it, no exceptions." not: "If it exists there is porn of it". See http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/rules-of-the-internet (direct link to the archived page from Encyclopedia Dramatica was not possible). 134.2.251.34 (talk) 13:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
– The most popular use of the term is for the internet meme. The only other Rule 34 with an article is a novel, that got the name from the internet meme. Emptyviewers (talk) 18:14, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose. The qualifier of 'Internet meme' is suitable. Tutelary (talk) 18:23, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- But it is the WP:PRIMARY TOPIC. Emptyviewers (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - there is no primary here, the Google Books has as primary Rule 34 for production of evidence in US Federal legal code which is where this dab originally went, see Talk:Rule 34, plus in Google Books there are dozens of other random meanings for "Rule 34", so the current title is fine. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:07, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
- Don't be absurd Dicklyon (talk) 05:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Leaning oppose, given the importance of Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. bd2412 T 15:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
If someone is interested in adding material and citations:
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/is-rule-34-actually-true-an-investigation-into-the-internet-s-most-risqu%C3%A9-law-1.403108 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.49.211 (talk) 06:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class Internet articles
- Unknown-importance Internet articles
- WikiProject Internet articles
- Start-Class Internet culture articles
- Mid-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- Start-Class Pornography articles
- High-importance Pornography articles
- Start-Class High-importance Pornography articles
- WikiProject Pornography articles