![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
are essentially fnords. Often these days, the media or politicians use neologisms or neologism phrases (dunno how to call that), which serve exactly the same purpose fnords do. I consciously take the effort to ignore all such new words and phrases altogether, so it took me til now when a random lightbulb moment enlightened me to their actual purpose - to confuse, annoy and spread uneasiness.
For No Other Reason Dischord
Should this really be a redirect to Illuminatus? "Fnord" pre-dates Illuminatus by some fifteen years!
None forthcoming, it seems.
I dispute that this word needs an article of its own. Wikipedia is not a dictionary and the subject canbe (and is) covered in the article on the Illuminati Trilogy. If someone writes 10K+ on the subject then by all means we can think about splitting them up, but until that time I believe we should avoid the creation of stubs... Martin
Well, I dispute that. Fnord is not a word with a definition. It is a concept from a science fiction book. OTOH, do we really want a wikipedia page for every fictional construct? Pmurray bigpond.com 00:08, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
(1) Can everybody please remember to sign your talk entries?
(2) Discordianism, and specifically the Principia Discordia, predates Illuminatus! by 10-15 years (depending in part on whether you count publication date or date of writing). Fnord does not appear in the Principia, however.
Vicki Rosenzweig
What do you mean? Fnord appears in the Principia, what thinkest thou, Fnord, that it dost not? Moo. -J.P Marshall III
We have to keep this page alive, forever! If we fail to contain the fnords here, we run the risk of them slipping out into the mainstream and wreaking havoc with sheep, goats, and other cloven animals. Think of our furry friends, who do not know how to read, please! Bonus, fnords have been in use since the early 1800's: Fnords Everywhere! You're humble servant, Pauljbenedict ( talk) 18:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Can we keep at least some fnords in the article, please? Even if only to keep the Alligator Control folks happy? -- The Anome 22:43, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Yes! The popularization of Fnord! by Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea in the 1975 The Illuminatus! Trilogy is the only reason why there is a Fnord article in Wikipedia at all. If you've read that book, you know that fnords are included throughout the text as an example of the phenomena. Let's include one here, so we are not considered raving hypocrites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauljbenedict ( talk • contribs) 20:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
62.49.130.172 added what would eventually become this book reference, originally under "Related":
With edit summary:
But failed to update the article itself to reflect this. Then the book was moved to "References", giving the misleading impression that the book mentions fnords or was used in any way to form the article content, which it doesn't and wasn't. Looking at a summary of the book [3], it's a self-help book promoting effective communication, a topic that seems only very strenuously related to fnords. On these grounds, I've removed it. JRM 20:36, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
Oh. Fnord. (Almost forgot.) JRM 20:36, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
I originally added the Drop the Pink Elephant to the related part of the page. I thought it was related because they seem to be fnords without the discordianism spin. For example, in some professional fields, certain methods or practices become really faddish and people begin to follow them verbatim. Instead of adding to the vocabulary of the field and helping people discuss and act -they begin to harm through distraction from the original purpose. People start having to say they are 'Blah qualified' or 'using XYZ methodologies' instead of saying 'I did it.'
I thought that the book was about this. I didn't read it and the Amazon page seems to say that it is not about this at all so thanks for removing it. AnonymousCoward
How do you say 'fnord'? *Kat* 00:07, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
The Bored Dude 6:49, 20 June 2006
Maybe the 'F' is silent, like the K in knock, knife, etc, or the T in tsunami. Then it'd be pronounced |norde|. Anyone know a language where the F and N combination make a distinct sound? Maybe it's just not meant to be said at all.....Oh, and hi, Ghelæ. Remember me? -- Wikiwow (a.k.a. DiZ) Yes, I have sold out.
It's similar to fjord (where you say "fee - yourd"). So, "fuh-nord," except more like "f'nord," so "finord." Yeah, that's it, "finord." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.118.73.116 ( talk) 09:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The 'fnord' is silent. McGehee ( talk) 21:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, it's not always silent; it depends on the context. The 'f' should stay silent if the word is used first in a sentence. Otherwise, /f.nɔrd/ is acceptable, though in a literal context, /f.nerd/ or /f.nérd/ while rounding the mouth is of better usage [1] [2]. Enigma55 ( talk) 00:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't say fjord or f**** in two syllables, or make the f silent. Do you pronounce "few" and "future" as "fee-yew" and "fee-you-ture"? I didn't think so, and so you should be able to pronounce fjord as "fyord", in one syllable without any trouble, though you may have a hard time breaking the habit.
Um, is it just me or is this section a bunch of vandalist junk? --*ralian*
Yes, it is just you.
Fnord is the lint inside your bellybutton,
Fnord is green tea without the tea
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
138.130.40.187 (
talk)
The key, creation and meaning of Fnord is poodle-school simple when implied in the following context;
$20 (same as in town)
added by maabof and "the teacher told us Wikipedia isn't a trusted source dad" sons : 9.3.2010
It might be useful if someone could provide a pronunciation and cite some reference to an actual origin/etymology for this created word. Judging by its supposed meaning, I would suggest it might be a portmanteau of " fjord" (a narrow sea islet between steep slopes) and " canard" (a deliberately false story); however, I'm not knowledgeable about Illuminati fandom, so I wouldn't pursue such Original Research. Someone might check Wilson or Shea's writings/interviews to see if they provide any illumination. — Leflyman Talk 02:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I remember reading this Fnord definition back in the days of BBSs Fnord by Binky, April 19, 1989, would it be worth linking? Steve Jackson Games also used the word fnord to refer to angle brackets:"< >" in one of their publications. And then if you've ever wanted to see the fnords in the New York Times: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nytimes/results.html?st=advanced&datetype=0&sortby=RELEVANCE&restrict=articles&QryTxt=fnord Schizombie 06:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Let's examine the grammar of this sentence: "The Illuminati program children, while still in grade school, are taught to be unable to consciously see the word 'fnord'." To break it down, the subject is "The Illuminati", the verb is "program", and the direct object is "children". The verb "are taught" is a mistake. Instead, "to be unable to conciously see the word 'fnord'" describes what is programmed into children. The verb "are taught" does not work in the sentence structure. If someone is hung on the words "are taught", then this is a viable sentence: "Under the Illuminati program, children are taught, while still in grade school, to be unable to consciously see the word 'fnord'."
I'm considering implementing a template/user category: Category:Fnording Wikipedians for Wikipedians who have fnorded their userpage. Thoughts? samwaltz 23:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Why is the entire history of this article riddled with gaps of whitespace? Such shocking typography and/or repeated, localised blanking vandalism is making me feel uneasy. -- LionsPhil 00:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually... what exactly is the title of this article?-- 84.57.90.212 ( talk) 05:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Fnords are like Beetle Bailey's eyes: you are probably not aware that you have never seen them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.251.194.18 ( talk) 19:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Ave Discordia! I was idly Googling for things related to my misspent youth, and what should turn up but this! I don't know whether I was the first person to adorn Anarchy Bridge with Discordian ejaculations, but... ah well. Fame, of a kind. Kay Dekker ( talk) 23:30, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
The deletionists can get rid of good articles but not this. Yeah, no, wikipedia isn't a failed project. Clearly this page would be more fnordified if it didn't exist. -- 66.188.84.217 ( talk)fnord~ —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC).
I find the lead sentence to be very convoluted and confusing. My head just about exploded after trying to understand it. 67.1.49.191 ( talk) 08:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Is it just me, or is this article blank for some reason? I mean, the hyperlink I clicked on didn't have any text in it (although it was about 5 characters long, give or take), so I'm not entirely sure what I was expecting, but I certainly wasn't expecting a blank page. I don't get it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.16.59.26 ( talk) 01:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Why is there link to the film 'They Live?' in the 'See Also' section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.66.81.124 ( talk) 20:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.66.81.124 ( talk) 01:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
The link was there because the movie "They Live" is centered around a very similar idea of invisible things placed all over by a ruling conspiracy. Basically all the consumerist propaganda the main character sees with his special glasses are Fnords. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.38.16.69 ( talk) 15:14, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
The article twice states that "seeing the fnords" is similar to "reading between the lines". This is uncited and, to me, erroneous. To read between the lines means to comprehend an author's unstated intention, which is not present in the text. To see the fnords means to see something that IS present in the text, but was previously unnoticed due to prior conditioning. These seem to me to be completely separate concepts, except that they both involve realizations that occur while reading text. Mnudelman ( talk) 15:21, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
One time at the Arisia sf convention, in the 10–minute period between events that allowed for going from one room to another, I was part of the hall crowd as we passed a couple of guys standing against a wall, one of them wearing a F**** T-shirt. Just after passing them I suddenly stopped and put a hand to my forehead as if in intense concentration, held it a few seconds, and shook my head as if in extreme frustration. As I resumed walking, I heard the T-shirt wearer say to his companion, "That's the best reaction I've had yet!" -- Thnidu ( talk) 17:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
In hopes of keeping this article on point.
There was an article in a major metro newspaper, about how two drunk yahoos had been driving around out in the far fringes (rural, really) firing their guns in the air, and a spent bullet fatally wounded a woman standing on her porch. Tragic, certainly. Though the paper regularly flaunted its high journalistic standards, in this case they went for the yellow journalism credo: "If it bleed, it leads." The front-page above the fold headline was
(Notice free use of " murder," even though the yahoos had not been formally charged, let alone convicted.)
On seeing this, I was bemused to observe my own visceral reactions, all occurring before I was even close enough to begin reading the body text. Until that moment, I'd never appreciated how REAL the fnrd is.
Weeb Dingle (
talk)
15:18, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Clarinetguy097, I noticed you issued a SYNTH challenge to a sentence or two on the Fnord page. This was a new concept for me, so I read through the definition of SYNTH, and ask that you consider SYNTH is not obvious and review all the references made in that paragraph, as these are not my conclusions, they are deeply supported by the history of the matter. Especially review this reference Download The True Story of the Internet - Browser Wars which clearly lays out the history of Microsoft's monopolistic efforts to dominate the fledgling internet through suppressing open source software and illegally acting against a direct competitor in Netscape Navigator. My assertion in this paragraph is that the free and open-source Fnord! web server was affected by the same monopolistic atmosphere that sealed the fate of Netscape Navigator and that Netscape fought back by open sourcing it's browser code and establishing the Mozilla foundation, which laid the foundation for all modern, open source browsers. Pauljbenedict ( talk) 22:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
In the Gallery section, there is an altered Ford Motors logo - does it need to be there? Sir Magnus has spoken! ( So can you!) 19:58, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
A highly effective tool for displacing social control, excerpted from The Zenarchist’s CooKBook [1], which is published under the authority of the Paratheoanametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric(POEE) Council of the Twenty-Third Degree, for the jurisdiction of The Legion Of Dynamic Discord, and of the House Of The Apostles Of Eris, by the Pope and Poo-Bah-Pontif, under the grand command of the office of his High Reverence, the Benevolent Polyfather, and is now published by its/their/hir direction. It has been CopyLefted, to promote its free publication elsewhere, and the CopyLeft, like those of all the other works prepared for the Council, has been assigned to the trustees of POEE (which works out well, as POEE has no treasury).
File:Fnord-Bomber-Instructions.jpg File:Fnord-Bomber-Bombs-Away!.jpg
This article is about a fictional phenomenon and an invented word. The article should not treat it as a real phenomenon (e.g. the "Can You See the Fnords?" and the bomber), and any examples of the word's usage should be clearly marked as such. Moreover, not every usage of the word merits mention (e.g. the typeface). Mere insertions of the word, whether in the article's text or as images, add no value to the article whatsoever. 136.228.100.144 ( talk) 18:53, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
are essentially fnords. Often these days, the media or politicians use neologisms or neologism phrases (dunno how to call that), which serve exactly the same purpose fnords do. I consciously take the effort to ignore all such new words and phrases altogether, so it took me til now when a random lightbulb moment enlightened me to their actual purpose - to confuse, annoy and spread uneasiness.
For No Other Reason Dischord
Should this really be a redirect to Illuminatus? "Fnord" pre-dates Illuminatus by some fifteen years!
None forthcoming, it seems.
I dispute that this word needs an article of its own. Wikipedia is not a dictionary and the subject canbe (and is) covered in the article on the Illuminati Trilogy. If someone writes 10K+ on the subject then by all means we can think about splitting them up, but until that time I believe we should avoid the creation of stubs... Martin
Well, I dispute that. Fnord is not a word with a definition. It is a concept from a science fiction book. OTOH, do we really want a wikipedia page for every fictional construct? Pmurray bigpond.com 00:08, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
(1) Can everybody please remember to sign your talk entries?
(2) Discordianism, and specifically the Principia Discordia, predates Illuminatus! by 10-15 years (depending in part on whether you count publication date or date of writing). Fnord does not appear in the Principia, however.
Vicki Rosenzweig
What do you mean? Fnord appears in the Principia, what thinkest thou, Fnord, that it dost not? Moo. -J.P Marshall III
We have to keep this page alive, forever! If we fail to contain the fnords here, we run the risk of them slipping out into the mainstream and wreaking havoc with sheep, goats, and other cloven animals. Think of our furry friends, who do not know how to read, please! Bonus, fnords have been in use since the early 1800's: Fnords Everywhere! You're humble servant, Pauljbenedict ( talk) 18:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Can we keep at least some fnords in the article, please? Even if only to keep the Alligator Control folks happy? -- The Anome 22:43, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)
Yes! The popularization of Fnord! by Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea in the 1975 The Illuminatus! Trilogy is the only reason why there is a Fnord article in Wikipedia at all. If you've read that book, you know that fnords are included throughout the text as an example of the phenomena. Let's include one here, so we are not considered raving hypocrites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pauljbenedict ( talk • contribs) 20:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
62.49.130.172 added what would eventually become this book reference, originally under "Related":
With edit summary:
But failed to update the article itself to reflect this. Then the book was moved to "References", giving the misleading impression that the book mentions fnords or was used in any way to form the article content, which it doesn't and wasn't. Looking at a summary of the book [3], it's a self-help book promoting effective communication, a topic that seems only very strenuously related to fnords. On these grounds, I've removed it. JRM 20:36, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
Oh. Fnord. (Almost forgot.) JRM 20:36, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
I originally added the Drop the Pink Elephant to the related part of the page. I thought it was related because they seem to be fnords without the discordianism spin. For example, in some professional fields, certain methods or practices become really faddish and people begin to follow them verbatim. Instead of adding to the vocabulary of the field and helping people discuss and act -they begin to harm through distraction from the original purpose. People start having to say they are 'Blah qualified' or 'using XYZ methodologies' instead of saying 'I did it.'
I thought that the book was about this. I didn't read it and the Amazon page seems to say that it is not about this at all so thanks for removing it. AnonymousCoward
How do you say 'fnord'? *Kat* 00:07, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)
The Bored Dude 6:49, 20 June 2006
Maybe the 'F' is silent, like the K in knock, knife, etc, or the T in tsunami. Then it'd be pronounced |norde|. Anyone know a language where the F and N combination make a distinct sound? Maybe it's just not meant to be said at all.....Oh, and hi, Ghelæ. Remember me? -- Wikiwow (a.k.a. DiZ) Yes, I have sold out.
It's similar to fjord (where you say "fee - yourd"). So, "fuh-nord," except more like "f'nord," so "finord." Yeah, that's it, "finord." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.118.73.116 ( talk) 09:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The 'fnord' is silent. McGehee ( talk) 21:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, it's not always silent; it depends on the context. The 'f' should stay silent if the word is used first in a sentence. Otherwise, /f.nɔrd/ is acceptable, though in a literal context, /f.nerd/ or /f.nérd/ while rounding the mouth is of better usage [1] [2]. Enigma55 ( talk) 00:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't say fjord or f**** in two syllables, or make the f silent. Do you pronounce "few" and "future" as "fee-yew" and "fee-you-ture"? I didn't think so, and so you should be able to pronounce fjord as "fyord", in one syllable without any trouble, though you may have a hard time breaking the habit.
Um, is it just me or is this section a bunch of vandalist junk? --*ralian*
Yes, it is just you.
Fnord is the lint inside your bellybutton,
Fnord is green tea without the tea
—Preceding
unsigned comment added by
138.130.40.187 (
talk)
The key, creation and meaning of Fnord is poodle-school simple when implied in the following context;
$20 (same as in town)
added by maabof and "the teacher told us Wikipedia isn't a trusted source dad" sons : 9.3.2010
It might be useful if someone could provide a pronunciation and cite some reference to an actual origin/etymology for this created word. Judging by its supposed meaning, I would suggest it might be a portmanteau of " fjord" (a narrow sea islet between steep slopes) and " canard" (a deliberately false story); however, I'm not knowledgeable about Illuminati fandom, so I wouldn't pursue such Original Research. Someone might check Wilson or Shea's writings/interviews to see if they provide any illumination. — Leflyman Talk 02:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I remember reading this Fnord definition back in the days of BBSs Fnord by Binky, April 19, 1989, would it be worth linking? Steve Jackson Games also used the word fnord to refer to angle brackets:"< >" in one of their publications. And then if you've ever wanted to see the fnords in the New York Times: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nytimes/results.html?st=advanced&datetype=0&sortby=RELEVANCE&restrict=articles&QryTxt=fnord Schizombie 06:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Let's examine the grammar of this sentence: "The Illuminati program children, while still in grade school, are taught to be unable to consciously see the word 'fnord'." To break it down, the subject is "The Illuminati", the verb is "program", and the direct object is "children". The verb "are taught" is a mistake. Instead, "to be unable to conciously see the word 'fnord'" describes what is programmed into children. The verb "are taught" does not work in the sentence structure. If someone is hung on the words "are taught", then this is a viable sentence: "Under the Illuminati program, children are taught, while still in grade school, to be unable to consciously see the word 'fnord'."
I'm considering implementing a template/user category: Category:Fnording Wikipedians for Wikipedians who have fnorded their userpage. Thoughts? samwaltz 23:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Why is the entire history of this article riddled with gaps of whitespace? Such shocking typography and/or repeated, localised blanking vandalism is making me feel uneasy. -- LionsPhil 00:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Actually... what exactly is the title of this article?-- 84.57.90.212 ( talk) 05:48, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Fnords are like Beetle Bailey's eyes: you are probably not aware that you have never seen them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.251.194.18 ( talk) 19:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Ave Discordia! I was idly Googling for things related to my misspent youth, and what should turn up but this! I don't know whether I was the first person to adorn Anarchy Bridge with Discordian ejaculations, but... ah well. Fame, of a kind. Kay Dekker ( talk) 23:30, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
The deletionists can get rid of good articles but not this. Yeah, no, wikipedia isn't a failed project. Clearly this page would be more fnordified if it didn't exist. -- 66.188.84.217 ( talk)fnord~ —Preceding undated comment added 18:40, 10 September 2009 (UTC).
I find the lead sentence to be very convoluted and confusing. My head just about exploded after trying to understand it. 67.1.49.191 ( talk) 08:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Is it just me, or is this article blank for some reason? I mean, the hyperlink I clicked on didn't have any text in it (although it was about 5 characters long, give or take), so I'm not entirely sure what I was expecting, but I certainly wasn't expecting a blank page. I don't get it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.16.59.26 ( talk) 01:47, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Why is there link to the film 'They Live?' in the 'See Also' section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.66.81.124 ( talk) 20:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.66.81.124 ( talk) 01:07, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
The link was there because the movie "They Live" is centered around a very similar idea of invisible things placed all over by a ruling conspiracy. Basically all the consumerist propaganda the main character sees with his special glasses are Fnords. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.38.16.69 ( talk) 15:14, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
The article twice states that "seeing the fnords" is similar to "reading between the lines". This is uncited and, to me, erroneous. To read between the lines means to comprehend an author's unstated intention, which is not present in the text. To see the fnords means to see something that IS present in the text, but was previously unnoticed due to prior conditioning. These seem to me to be completely separate concepts, except that they both involve realizations that occur while reading text. Mnudelman ( talk) 15:21, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
One time at the Arisia sf convention, in the 10–minute period between events that allowed for going from one room to another, I was part of the hall crowd as we passed a couple of guys standing against a wall, one of them wearing a F**** T-shirt. Just after passing them I suddenly stopped and put a hand to my forehead as if in intense concentration, held it a few seconds, and shook my head as if in extreme frustration. As I resumed walking, I heard the T-shirt wearer say to his companion, "That's the best reaction I've had yet!" -- Thnidu ( talk) 17:37, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
In hopes of keeping this article on point.
There was an article in a major metro newspaper, about how two drunk yahoos had been driving around out in the far fringes (rural, really) firing their guns in the air, and a spent bullet fatally wounded a woman standing on her porch. Tragic, certainly. Though the paper regularly flaunted its high journalistic standards, in this case they went for the yellow journalism credo: "If it bleed, it leads." The front-page above the fold headline was
(Notice free use of " murder," even though the yahoos had not been formally charged, let alone convicted.)
On seeing this, I was bemused to observe my own visceral reactions, all occurring before I was even close enough to begin reading the body text. Until that moment, I'd never appreciated how REAL the fnrd is.
Weeb Dingle (
talk)
15:18, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Clarinetguy097, I noticed you issued a SYNTH challenge to a sentence or two on the Fnord page. This was a new concept for me, so I read through the definition of SYNTH, and ask that you consider SYNTH is not obvious and review all the references made in that paragraph, as these are not my conclusions, they are deeply supported by the history of the matter. Especially review this reference Download The True Story of the Internet - Browser Wars which clearly lays out the history of Microsoft's monopolistic efforts to dominate the fledgling internet through suppressing open source software and illegally acting against a direct competitor in Netscape Navigator. My assertion in this paragraph is that the free and open-source Fnord! web server was affected by the same monopolistic atmosphere that sealed the fate of Netscape Navigator and that Netscape fought back by open sourcing it's browser code and establishing the Mozilla foundation, which laid the foundation for all modern, open source browsers. Pauljbenedict ( talk) 22:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
In the Gallery section, there is an altered Ford Motors logo - does it need to be there? Sir Magnus has spoken! ( So can you!) 19:58, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
A highly effective tool for displacing social control, excerpted from The Zenarchist’s CooKBook [1], which is published under the authority of the Paratheoanametamystikhood Of Eris Esoteric(POEE) Council of the Twenty-Third Degree, for the jurisdiction of The Legion Of Dynamic Discord, and of the House Of The Apostles Of Eris, by the Pope and Poo-Bah-Pontif, under the grand command of the office of his High Reverence, the Benevolent Polyfather, and is now published by its/their/hir direction. It has been CopyLefted, to promote its free publication elsewhere, and the CopyLeft, like those of all the other works prepared for the Council, has been assigned to the trustees of POEE (which works out well, as POEE has no treasury).
File:Fnord-Bomber-Instructions.jpg File:Fnord-Bomber-Bombs-Away!.jpg
This article is about a fictional phenomenon and an invented word. The article should not treat it as a real phenomenon (e.g. the "Can You See the Fnords?" and the bomber), and any examples of the word's usage should be clearly marked as such. Moreover, not every usage of the word merits mention (e.g. the typeface). Mere insertions of the word, whether in the article's text or as images, add no value to the article whatsoever. 136.228.100.144 ( talk) 18:53, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |