PickiPedia:Satire

Is everything on PickiPedia true?

Yes, every word and symbol is accurate within a precision of 99.9999%, and we know this because site administrator Bill Monroe personally verifies all edits, with the exception of Jimmy Martin's Theory of Bluegrass Pythagoras, which is administered by Carton Haney.

Yeah, fine - that's funny. But seriously, some of this is satire, right?

No. 100% serious.

OK, but like, you can't keep saying that forever. People aren't gonna be cool putting genuine content here if they can't figure out if it's satire.

...ugh, fine.

But first, one simple rule: whatever scrutiny you apply to PickiPedia by dint of it being non-trivially a shitposted farce, apply that same scrutiny to all wikis. Understand that this scrutiny is a bedrock of wiki collaboration. Wikis are not sources of truth; they are sources of sources.

Hmm. OK.

Don't get it twisted: we love WikiPedia; it's one of the most important and heartfelt ventures in the short history of the human animal. But PickiPedia:Is Not Wikipedia. A wiki can only thrive in an environment where the actual text of the page is treated as fallible consensus, not as assured (or even in some sense, asserted) truth.

All the trolling, satire, and farce you'll find on PickiPedia exists on every wiki in the world, but it's dressed up as processes and whitepapers. And instead of being patently ludicrous and hopefully a little funny, it tells of a world as seen by industries and interests that can afford not only to brigade and bot farm, but to carefully study the effects of brigades and bot farms.

So, how can I pursue the truth of a claim I read on PickiPedia

There's a lot to say about this, and eventually we'll say some of it on PickiPedia:Sources, but we have a lot of other things to build and maintain (like, basic operational status for this website and its database, and caching, and various integrations) first.

I'm a little drunk and high and I'm thinking about writing a bunch of nonsense on PickiPedia - is that a good idea?

Uhhh, heck yeha.

OK, so what _are_ the rules of what satire is allowed?

Hard to say for sure, but some things that seem obvious:

• Make at least some part of it sufficiently over-the-top as to be obvious satire in the minds of a sufficiently-informed reader.

• It needs to _actually_ be funny. If it's not funny, somebody is gonna delete / revert / change it immediately.

• If possible, it needs to relate to Cory WalkerError creating thumbnail: File missing in some way.

• All satire has a message; a heart. Make sure it's calibrated and clean.

• Be even more careful with structured data than encyclopedic content.