Wikipedia talk:The Truth

Essays Low‑impact

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.EssaysWikipedia:WikiProject EssaysTemplate:WikiProject EssaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

Add Truthiness?[edit]

Any objections to adding Truthiness to the See Also: section? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 12:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So glad I'm not the only one who sees Stephen's hand in this page... since nobody seems to object, I'll add it. Rissa (talk) 19:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before reading this talkpage, I added it to the lead. Spooky. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The page is false[edit]

I dispute the factual accuracy of this page. However, I don't want to vandalize it, because that would be against the rules and violate consensus.

Instead, as a suggestion on how we could build consensus around this issue, I created a workshop at WP:The truth sandbox. Thank you. ☯ Zenwhat (talk) 22:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, The Truth is that everyone alive is alive. There's no doubt about it. I'm alive. You're alive. We're alive. Ian (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is worthless[edit]

This is fucking horrible, why ruin something with so much potential? I hate this page, it contains no valid inforation, and is a joke. Yes it belongs in Uncyclopedia.

Its worthless, and a waste of time.

Your opinion is what's actually worthless. The proof is simple: you failed to sign your edit. David Spector 00:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genetic fallacy. Who someone is has nothing to do with the person being right or not, so it is your proof that is worthless :).

Tiago Becerra Paolini (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page is absolutely amazing[edit]

5 stars! I could've sworn that I was reading one Uncyclopedia's rare well-written articles. Esn (talk) 06:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amen. David Spector 00:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. Well done. -- Alexf^(talk) 12:10, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. It is koan-like and leads to enlightenment.

Zezen (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion[edit]

I would like to know if someone has an argument against deletion of this article. From what I can tell, this article fails to comply with any of the requirements listed on Wikipedia:Humor namely:
1- Neutral POV: The article is an opinion, solely.
2- Until proven otherwise, it constitutes original research.
3- Reliable sources: as there isn't any source listed at all, reliable sources have yet to be found.
4- verifiability doesn't really apply here (because the article doesn't meet the previous three requirements).

Are there any reason this article should be kept?

Olivier Diotte (talk) 05:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're actually proposing the deletion of an essay by applying the recommendations of another essay to it as requiremens? You're 27 days early. --illythr (talk) 11:58, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I missed the fact the link I referred was an essay. Still, those requirements do are part of Wikipedia's policy per Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view. Also, I started contributing to Wikipedia a bit earlier than last month though I doubt this is relevant here.

That being said, here there reasons --which I fail to see obviously-- against proposing this article for deletion?

Olivier Diotte (talk) 07:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Essays, being their authors' opinion pieces they are, do not need to adhere to NPOV, OR, RS, V and such. Early - for a specific day, that is more appropriate to start the deletion request of this article than any other day in the year. Other than that, there are no reasons at all against proposing this High-impact essay for deletion. Doing it on the day I suggested would reduce the, uh, high impact, though. --illythr (talk) 09:37, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see, apparently I missed the fact the page is an essay. I thought (wrongly) such pages (essays) would be located in their respective authors' user namespace not on the 'wikipedia' namespace, my bad. Out of curiosity though: is it me or is the talk page the actual high-impact page? Or is it the essay itself? Olivier Diotte (talk) 04:53, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Seems like Wikipedia:WikiProject_Essays provides answers to some of my questions. Olivier Diotte (talk) 04:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The essay itself. These WikiProject templates are placed on talk pages to avoid cluttering the main article space. --illythr (talk) 19:08, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant[edit]

Especially point 5. Right on the nose. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 02:51, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]