Fun talk:You have two cows/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 9 October 2021. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

What now?

? Blue (pester) 21:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Bronze? Silver?

I think it could also scrape in to gold with a copyedit. DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 21:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I concur, some serious funny here. Talented peeps have we here. --PsyGremlin講話 16:30, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, this (and my own ? above) was written when the article was just two sentences. As a joke. Blue (pester) 16:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Yea, that was then, but now this fun page is pretty good! This could be our first funpage with an award! 71.29.172.145 (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It's "best of fun" which makes it front paged randomly. Since it isn't really an article I don't think the metallic brains are appropriate here. ħuman 18:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. Those aren't really meant to be used outside the mainspace. Possibly the CP space at a push. ^{d hominem} 22:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It's just a list of funnies. Am I right in assuming that the "brain" logos are for on mission articles? Se7en^Eight 22:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes. They are loosely defined somewhere. So, idea - how about a similar set of three markers for fun articles? We just need something "iconic" we can colorize and copy the way the brains work to implement, with "gold" being an indicator for "best of fun"? ħuman 23:15, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Colored balloons? Se7en^Eight 23:17, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I think that's a good option, and I've found a public-domain SVG of some balloons that can be used. I'll edit them in a second to present a possible option. ~SuperHamster Talk 00:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

We have here already. How about just putting it on all the best of amusement arkitles? ħuman 00:15, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

It was very funny last week. Now it has turned into a repository for bad "jokes". I deleted a section that seemed particularly lame. ħuman 02:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

CP stuff

I may be fairly (very) new but I did find the Ed Poor "You have two cows" pretty funny. Se7en^Eight 22:00, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

True, but a sizable CP wank section on an otherwise funny article just made me shudder. I really don't like articles that have entire CP sections.... ^{d hominem} 22:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I guess you are right. I understand RW was a reaction to CP in the first instance but now, coming from a new user perspective, it seems to have outgrown CP and become a resource in itself. Se7en^Eight 22:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I am having way too much fun on this page

When I should probably be working, but hey, it's Friday, and I've already put in six hours extra this week. MDB (talk) 11:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Birther logic

Islam does allow eating beef. It's pork they don't eat. Hindus don't eat beef. Unless the joke was that Birthers don't know the difference between Muslims and Hindus, in which case I'll shut up. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, and the joke says "Islam does not condemn eating beef". MDB (talk) 14:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah. My brain isn't working today. I need beer. Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 14:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Some names I thought we could add but i can't think of anything funny and i want to finish watching the bond film before bed

• Ayn Rand
• George Orwell
• Milton Friedman
• Gandhi
• Reagan

Totnesmartin (talk) 20:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Oooh, good selection. But I agree, I can't think of any. Of course, we have objectivism already, but I think that one would go nicely for Rand more than the "philosophy" itself. ^{d hominem} 23:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Star Trek

The TNG one is pretty lame, IMO. Should have something about Q, maybe. Blue (pester) 05:00, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Twilight

I was going to do a twilight one but my brain threatened to jump under a train if I did. Totnesmartin (talk) 09:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

You have two cows. They sparkle. ^{d hominem} 12:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Luckily my brain is still non compost menthols, so I'll risk it... --PsyGremlinSiarad! 14:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Order

I appreciate that keeping this stuff in alphabetical order is the best for the most part, but wouldn't the Heinlein-Card-Robinson gag be better if it's all kept together? --Kels (talk) 16:45, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, progressive jokes should be kept together. It's just a different type of order. Totnesmartin (talk) 16:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, being funny is more important then being alphabetical. --Onion <talk> 16:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Oracle

Ok, you'll have to explain the joke. I Googled and got how to install Oracle, Character Mu Oracle.png and The Oracle - Phi Mu Delta Fraternity. Clearly this is a very in joke. --PsyGremlin話しなさい 12:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Clarifying now by changing to Internet Oracle and linky.--Brendiggg (talk) 12:35, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Quayle

Totnesmartin's "merger" is not a merger but a deletion and a revision of the remaining item. Thorvelden (talk)

I was trying to be diplomatic. The undiplomatic version is available on request. Totnesmartin (talk) 19:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Um...wait a minute...

This has been done before. Tetronian ^{you're clueless} 20:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I feel betrayed. Bastard stupid Hoover! 20:04, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You have two "you have two cows" lists. One is funnier than the other. Totnesmartin (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

No one's pretending we invented the meme, I think. It's been pretty well known for a while, starting, I believe with Communism, capitalism, socialism, and other economic systems, and growing from there. I think ours are original. I took a quick look at Uncyclopedia's and even when we cover the same themes, it seems ours are different. I'll look some more. DickTurpis (talk) 20:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Besides, our list is less likely to be trashed by old memes and Chuck Norris jokes. --Onion <talk> 20:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Plus ours references Vagrant Story so ex vi termini our list must be better.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 20:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I think this is like Russian Reversals--been around for a while. Blue (pester) 20:22, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

^{d hominem} 21:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

ASCII

What does 59 6F 75 : 68 97 76 65 : 74 77 6F : 63 6F 77 73 look like for people who don't read code in their heads? Totnesmartin (talk) 20:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

You mean you don't read code in your head? Pfffffft. Get off the wiki, n00b!!!!! DickTurpis (talk) 20:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

It's hex. It reads "You have two cows" in ASCII. Well, it's meant too.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 20:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Hells Bells.

Dunno about anyone else but the damn page is getting almost unreadable. Se7en^Eight 20:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and some of these jokes are so "in" they are invisible.--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 21:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

It is starting to look pretty ridiculous. Then again, I am only "new guy". Se7en^Eight 21:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

All the computer game stuff is over my head, but then my Steve Reich one is probably over other peoples' heads. It's hard to guess what other people will like. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't suppose the Ernest Hemingway one will ring a bell with a lot of people, but if you happen to know about the six-word story you get to feel all smug because you get the joke. I reckons if you don't get them ask here on the Talk Page.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 22:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I had been trying to think of a Hemingway one with bullfighting. As for "ask here if you don't get them" - could somebody explain all the computer games ones?--Bob^{Spring is sprung!} 22:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I think we've built enough. It's time to start pruning. Anyone have a suggestion on how to trim the proverbial fat (short of up or down voting)? There are quite a number of these that really aren't funny. DickTurpis (talk) 22:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Hemingway: You write "The old cow and the sea" and "The cow also rises" before shooting yourself in the face. Se7en^Eight 22:35, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I deleted a large section of tripe. And, Seven, that's not funny. It's just stretching too far. ħuman 02:35, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I know its not funny, that's why I didn't put it in. Asshole. Se7en^Eight 02:48, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Someone did, maybe. In the tripe I deleted. Sphincter. ħuman 03:22, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You have two GOATS

What wiki are you people on? Goats! Goats! sterile ectoplasm 21:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

But...but... there is only one goat. the Goat that is Goat. And shall be Goat hereafter. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Sterile has a very good point. To make this truly an RW joynt, it should be "you have two goats"... ħuman 03:21, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! All the bovinophilia is driving me nuts. sterile ectoplasm 21:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Joyce

Kudos to whoever did the James Joyce one. Just sayin' 01:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

My personal favorite is the Orson Scott Card one. --The Emperor _{Kneel before Zod!} 01:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The problem with this page

Everybody wants to add a "joke". Trouble is, many of them either aren't funny, or are so arcane only three Star Wars addicts get the joke. I removed the balloons because this thing is out of control. Now, I'm not saying "out of control" is a bad thing, but it's not a main page thing. ħuman 02:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

NO MORE BALLOONS! THERE SHALL BE NO MORE BALLOONS!

-Human

(Just kidding.)

But yes, I agree, it's not "best of amusement" anymore. Blue (pester) 02:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Just a comment, I can't find anywhere on the main page where there are links to the best of amusement. (although maybe I did not look hard enough) --Onion <talk> 03:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Onion, bottom left, it just links to a couple of them. Don't worry, we'll get this back to balloon status once everyfreakingpersonontheinternet stops adding lame jokes. ħuman 03:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree that there is a lot of mediocre (at best) humor here. I'm not sure if the decree of Human is the best way to purge the sub-par material, but something should be done. I'm of the opinion that the biggest problem is too much obscure esoteric geekiness (I'm mostly looking at the sci-fi, games, and computer section here). How does the mob want to address this? DickTurpis (talk) 03:40, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks, Toast. Joyce is a load of fun to parody. DickTurpis (talk) 03:41, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't mean to bring my hardcore axe to this, but it's either gonna be "best of fun" and really good (like it was), or a silly place full of geek jokes - and not featured on the main page. Either way is fine with me, but it's got to be one or the other. This may be our first "serious" argument over a fun page's contents! Cool. ħuman 03:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Instead of arguing and edit warring about this, we could do subpages. Totnesmartin (talk) 15:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Every single game joke?

Really, Huw? You didn't think any of those were funny? The section full of arcane references to programming jargon is kosher, but nothing about gaming at all? Honestly, it looks like you're just scrapping every joke you don't personally understand. Colonel of Squirrels^{禁止不是法西斯} 03:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The programming ones weren't hard to follow, even as a non-programmer. Gaming? Funny? Really? Lame. Feel free to improve, of course, see my above comments, this article can go in two directions - horns or arse. ħuman 04:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It would have been polite to discuss it before deleting everything. I've reinstated it, since you seem to be back in your usual position of a minority of one. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 09:21, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll be honest, the Final Fantasy jokes are pretty crappy. And that's from someone who agrees with most of what they say. --Kels (talk) 01:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Delete

It's articles like this that serve to be nothing more than typical liberal distractions from goat. Therefore, I say we delete this liberal garbage! Conservative Punk (talk) 04:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

You have two cows. They are not goats so you shoot them. Totnesmartin (talk) 07:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Parking Michael Caine here until there's an appropriate section

*Michael Caine: You didn't have two cows. If you did you could have balanced the bus at the end of the film. **You have two cows. It gave the Zulus the edge they needed in the Director's Cut.

NB this is not a request for a section on celebrities. Totnesmartin (talk) 09:33, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, there was a proper section, it was called British Politicians and Figures. Now we'll have to move Alan Sugar as well, as he's not a politician.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 14:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

*Sir Alan Sugar: You have had a multitude of cows. They weren't great milkers and not one of them has ever won a rosette. And yet this hasn't stopped you from being seen as one of the most successful British farmers around.

Und getan.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 15:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

(cough) wp:Lord Sugar(cough) Totnesmartin (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Ugh. "Lord Sugar". Sounds like a pimp now. Bring back "Sir Alan". Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 21:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Lord isn't the same as politician. In this case Sugar was put into the cabinet as a business czar by the previous government, a post that carries no ministerial responsibility, no power and essentially no dept but, because it's part of the government, means that Sugar had to be elevated to the Lords. The fact that he doesn't stand in election on or holds too any party manifesto, or even have a published manifesto of his own means that, although he is a Lord, he isn't a politician.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 19:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Until he takes part in house of lords debates, and casts a vote. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:00, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Break it up?

I've been trying my best to keep it all properly categorized. Perhaps someone more wiki-literate than I could split it into multiple pages? MDB (talk) 12:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

good idea. Totnesmartin (talk) 15:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

If someone will set up empty the sub-pages, and create an overall index page, or whatever it would be called, I'll take care of the moving. MDB (talk) 15:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree, I think somehow the beast needs to be trimmed. Maybe and "on-mission" section and a "rest" section. So we could say you have two you have two cows pages. That said, it would take somebody with more wiki fu that I to do this thing. --PsyGremlinRunāt! 15:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what the point of subpages is. The problem, it seems to me, is that too many are far to esoteric and/or not really funny. Subpages won't fix that, though I guess it will put all the really obscure geekitude in one place. DickTurpis (talk) 16:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Dick on this. Many of the sci-fi authors and most of the political figures make no sense to me. Even most of the games are just rabid fanboyism. There is no need for subpages, because that's just pointless links to click on - length isn't an issue. ^{d hominem} 16:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The only other way, then, is have prior approval of new ones - we already do this for e.g. the random RW slogan. Or a complete stop on new ones, even if they're really good. Totnesmartin (talk) 16:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Agree with a moratorium on new entries. I'd also suggest trimming each header to the six or seven best known examples plus all the ones I did. That way it should still win both from a funny and a brevity point. --PsyGremlinTala! 16:21, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not even new ones I'm worried about; it's many of the existing ones. Admittedly, some might be pretty funny if I had any idea what they were about, but it's pretty clear some aren't. I think we should try to avoid really obscure people and things, and should take a good look at purging a few sections (mostly sci-fi and games). I'd be in favor of more leniency with some of the more on-mission examples. I also see no need to trim to 6 or 7. Some sections have quite a few really funny ones. DickTurpis (talk) 16:22, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

My earlier reinstatement of a huge deletion notwithstanding, I agree that the page should be trimmed to the on-mission ones. Having said that, I don't think there's anything wrong with having another page (You have two MORE cows?) for the more esoteric examples. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 17:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Seems like a worthwhile move. Also, to be fair, the on mission ones could even go in the mainspace, because they are quite illustrative. ^{d hominem} 17:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

So on-mission would be just the political, science, and religion stuff, basically (with some of the internet stuff too)? I guess we could do that, although, in my opinion, much of of the best material isn't in those categories. In fact, those are probably some of the least original ones, considering Captialism, Communism, et al. are where this meme originated, and we haven't really added all that much new to them. I'm still of the opinion that the more significant distinction isn't on-mission/off-mission but funny/not funny. Of course, that's more subjective. DickTurpis (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The on mission stuff was about where it was a week or so ago, when I was editing this page from Paris. That was when it wasn't yet bloated to hell and back. The original webosphere stuff and the psuedoscience section, at least. ^{d hominem} 17:26, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with keeping the best stuff here and linking to fun:you have two more cows at the bottom for the arcane or less funny stuff. That's what I should have done when I axed the game section, I guess. ħuman 20:07, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Now all we have to do is define "funny". So without further ado, LET'S PLAY FUNNY/NOT FUNNY! DickTurpis (talk) 20:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I would say for the purposes of splitting this article into balloons/not balloons, "funny" would mean a high percentage of those who care 1. "get" the joke and 2. think it's funny. But that's gonna be hard to evaluate. Voting arrows? ħuman 21:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

voting arrows would have been good from the start, but we can do it from now on the talk page. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:07, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I still don't really see the point of splitting the article up, particularly if it's going to be divided among pretty funny/not so funny lines. If something just plain isn't funny we should get rid of it, with some sort of discussion. If we want to divide it along on and off mission lines that makes a little more sense, but still involves keeping the poorer material, much of it in the primary article. I don't think space is much if an issue, and if we want to highlight the on mission part we can put them at the top, as we've started doing. Perhaps we should start pinpointing the less funny material here on the talk page, and see who comes to its defense. I think much of the sci-fi author stuff is a bit too esoteric, and much seems not terribly funny (but then again, alot of it is jokes I don't get because I rarely read sci-fi and fantasy). The American politics section I find pretty weak (and these ones I do get) but since they're more on-mission I'm willing to cut them more slack than am for the authors and such. DickTurpis (talk) 21:13, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I very much like the idea of voting arrows... Blue (pester) 21:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

When did this move the fuck out of the fun section?!?! Just leave it all in. There's no need to trim, the sheer size of the page is a joke in itself. ^{d hominem} 21:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

(EC)If it's not too much trouble to add voting to all items, I'd say that's the best way to resolve this. Let it run for a week or so, ask everyone to vote only on jokes he gets and otherwise neutral. Then just remove all those entries that are painted predominantly red or yellow (no point in keeping jokes that few people understand). Röstigraben (talk) 21:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

^{d hominem} 21:20, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The more esoteric ones don't have to be deleted--but a section at the top for the ones with a high amount of funny could be created. Blue (pester) 21:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I think we're overthinking this. If we just use the talk page to discuss ones we think don't add anything to the list we can probably reach some decisions. I'll start: I don't think the Hunter S Thompson one is very good. I get it, but just replacing the word "drugs" with "cows" doesn't strike me as particularly clever. It's not on mission, it doesn't fit the parameters of the joke (ideally some sort of variation on "you have 2 cows" should appear in these, except in cases where the joke relies on something different), and it just seems like we could end up with a hundred famous quotes in which we replace a random noun with "cow". No offense to the person who added it. Anyone disagree with its removal? DickTurpis (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Voting arrows are probably the only way to go if there is any trimming to be done. It's no good trying to argue what to keep based on what is mainstream as you'll never get an agreement on what is mainstream. Hell, if we were to go with what is mainstream with the public then we would have to get rid of the sections regarding political systems, politicians and literature because, lets face it, there are very few people who actually understand what Marxism or Socialism really is, or have actually read Austen outside of English Lit lessons, compared to the number of people who would know exactly what you meant when you say "the cheerleader in Heroes".-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 19:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Or, to put it another way, if we are to start stripping stuff out because some people don't get the reference or don't follow the particular genre then we might as well delete the entire page, create a new one with:

• You have two cows: You had two cows. You shot one because you didn't get it. Somebody else shot the other one because it wasn't a goat.

And then protect the page.-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 19:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

"Mainstream" isn't my concern; entries being funny are much moreso. Capitalism, Communism, Jane Austen, etc. are at least concepts the average educated person is familiar with, Brian Aldiss and Norman Spinrad a bit less so. Not that I necessarily want to remove those, but I suspect we're getting out of the range of what we can reasonably expect anyone really to be able to get. I could probably come up with a bunch about minor bands no one's heard of (ifanyone wants some two cow jokes about Citizen Fish, The Crucifucks, or Crucial Youth I can try to accommodate them, but I'm guessing not); I'm not going to though. Now, I don't know who Spinard is, but I'm guessing he did drugs and so did a number of his characters. The more obscure and esoteric the off-mission entries the funnier they ought to be to justify their presence. If what I just said is the basic joke behind the Spinrad entry, and it isn't something more subtle, then it doesn't strike me as particularly clever, amusing, or relevant. But I am hesitant to give my opinion on entries I'm unfamiliar with. I'm a little ambivalent about the ones I am familiar with but don't get (Schubert, Michael Caine), and those that I do get but strike me as lackluster (Thompson, many of the US politics) should be considered for removal. Humor being subjective, and my person sense of humor being slightly off-kilter Im not inclined to remove them without further input. DickTurpis (talk) 22:09, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm inclined to err on the side of saying keep things in rather than chuck them out. Sense of humour is highly individualistic and just because I don't find something funny doesn't mean that somebody else won't, and vice versa. A friend of mine would find the second Michael Caine entry to be a floor-wetter. The idea that in the Director's Cut of 'Zulu' the Zulus would win is frackin' hilarious given that every year growing up we would have seen the regular semi-historically accurate version (which basically glorified the slaughter of shedloads of natives by the whiteman, museum in Brecon if anybody is interested).-- ^{Spirit of the Cherry Blossom} 18:50, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Funny/Nonfunny is a non-starter. Mission/Off-mission should be doable - the current top 5 (Science, Pseudoscience, Political economy, Political philosophy and Religion) should probably stay, although I've had bigger laughs when stubbing my toe than when reading the Political economy and Political philosophy sections. The others contain some funny bits but aren't really on-mission. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 20:05, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Dickens

• Charles Dickens: In the village of Gower-upon-Frome, a nearly unknown hamlet in the midst of Dorset, you had two cows - and no common cows, but cows of such merit and breeding that the very sight of such beasts would cause a mere passer-by to acclaim their quality without prompt nor inquiry to any man, be he of strict consequence or not, stating that without a doubt, this pair of cows was amongst the finest ever to trod the grim pastures of southern Albion. As a verification of this seemingly remarkable claim, one need only approach the man known to his compatriots simply as 'Old Frimm', the farrier of Gower-upon-Frome, who from his youth was so acquainted with cows that one might remark that husbandry of these creatures ran through his blood, having been reared among them during his formative years in the farmlands of Northumbria, whence he learnt of their most intimate nature, and would attest to their superlative status not merely of his own testimony, but would swear that even the most docile of men would affirm this claim: the sort of man who, upon finding himself lost in the dismal alleys of Knightbridge in the dreary evenings following Michaelmass when the fog settled heavily upon the city, would not ask the kindly old man in the tobacconist to point him in the proper direction, but rather from a meek disposition would wander the streets of London until he happened upon that familiar lamp-post or cobblestone way that would point him toward Charing Cross, and from there back to his native abode wherein his meager bowl of porridge awaited him (by now long since cold) - yes even such longanimous man as this would, given the opportunity, proudly and with prestigious spirit proclaim before the House of Lords that these two cows were the paragon of virtue and indeed amongst the most beneficent in all the land.

Cut for discussion - we *were* going to start doing that, right? Also, is a bit long. Totnesmartin (talk) 10:45, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Is there an issue other than the length? The length is part of the humor in this case. If you don't find it particularly good, fair enough, though I'd argue that there are many other far worse ones (having written it I'm obviously prejudiced in its favor, but I'm not going to be adamant about it). I wasn't sure we were going to start cutting any out, and that the discussion was more about subpaging the off-mission ones. DickTurpis (talk) 13:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

It was mainly the length. Totnesmartin (talk) 13:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Come on! It's only two sentences long! But on a serious note, is the length that much of an issue? No one's forced to read it. If there were a trend to start doing ones of this length that could be an issue, certainly, but one outlier in which the verbosity is the joke doesn't seem like a much of a problem in my view (my admittedly biased view). If it's even slightly amusing it's better than quite a few others, and I don't think its length should be prohibitive. If it's long, boring, and stupid then, yeah, we should go ahead and remove it. Though I'd like a couple more opinions first, if that's the case. DickTurpis (talk) 13:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

You could always fade it out with an ...etc... - the Tolkien one does this. But let's see what other people my other socks think. Totnesmartin (talk) 13:42, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Dick. Tick Durpis (talk) 13:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

For me part of the humour is the way this whole article heads over the top and keeps on going. For this reason I have no problem with verbose entries, with obscure entries or with entries which appeal only to cult members. The more the merrier and, with Dickens, it's the verbosity which counts. Jack Hughes (talk) 14:45, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh all right then, put it back and as Zooguard just added William Gibson without even being aware of the ask-here-first rule, I give up monitoring this page. Totnesmartin (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Was there an "ask here first" plan? It seems you sort of instigated it below. I thought all we have is a discussion about adding new entries and the state of old ones without any real consensus. If you look at the history you'll see more than 50 edits to the article in the past day without any discussion. (Personally, though I like quite of few of the new RW ones, I'm of the opinion people shouldn't write their own.) All I'd like is some sort of quality control so we can remove any if we can get some sort of consensus that they're not funny. I haven't really been in favor of the up-and-down voting idea, but if it can be done easily I suppose it could be a way to get an idea of what people find funny or not (anything with a positive score would stay, anything negative would be deleted). Or we could just leave it be. It seems to me we can sum up 95% of these with the formula: <category x>: You have two cows. They display a trait associated with <x>, which is getting a little old. DickTurpis (talk) 18:06, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Thomas Hardy

how 'bout this:

• Thomas Hardy: You have two cows. They are going to die tragically, no matter what you do to prevent it.

Totnesmartin (talk) 10:45, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Dylan Thomas

Surely there's an Under Milk Wood joke begging to be made? Dylan Thomas: You have two cows. If you could under milk them, you would (lame attempt)... This whole page is udder nonsense anyway... ħuman 01:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

this article is fucking hilarious.

Thank you to all of you that wrote it, and I'm sorry for crapping it up with those two edits I made a few weeks back--User:Brxbrx/sig 21:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Appalling puns

I have just read the "mili-dairy/industrial complex" joke and would like to issue a formal complaint. ADK^{...I'll deport your homotopy!} 14:21, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Noted. Further complaints will be answered with Andy Zaltzman's Edith Piaf joke (apologies to you if you've seen him at the Fringe or listen to the Bugle). Blue (pester) 04:42, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

That's one of the best appalling puns I've ever seen. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:46, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

That's appallingly bad, but there's still no topping this one. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 04:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Sam ^Tally-ho! 05:01, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Am I really the only one who burst out laughing at both those puns? I seriously did.--User:Brxbrx/sig 05:22, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I've heard the second one before, but I'll admit I lol'd at "mili-dairy/industrial complex." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Sadly I didn't actually make that one up myself. Blue (is useful) 05:23, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

"Random meme"

Who's the humorless and clearly anally impacted half-wit that put that down?--68.230.64.189 (talk) 05:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

In Soviet Russia ...

Two cows have YOU! 74.89.212.27 (talk) 01:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I hope that meme dies a painful death. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Would it be too out of line to relentlessly delete all instances of it from RW? Count me in. Secret Squirrel (talk) 02:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Not at all. I'd go ahead and start when the New Years festivities are over, but the search function is broken, so I don't think it'll be possible to look for any. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:30, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Google still works. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 02:33, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Huh, hadn't thought of that. Good idea, Mara. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 02:34, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I checked - most are on talk pages. Secret Squirrel (talk) 02:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey!

I don't eat beef[1], the wife would kill me! Crundy^{Talk nerdy to me} 15:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Should we create a "You have two sheep" page, just for you? Sophie^{because liberals} 20:49, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I kind of like sheep, but only because they give me wool. I suppose I like goats intellectually, but sometimes sheep for their money. Angora goats are best goats though. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{garrulous en guerre} 21:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm a wood and brick person myself. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 21:41, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible minecraft player detected. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{free guybrush threepwood! no new taxes! down with porcelain!} 21:52, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Settlers of Catan joke failed. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 21:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

You don't eat beef Crundy? I swore off pork a couple months ago. Mentioning this to my dad a few days ago he called it, and I quote, "weird." El Taj^{Don't make me do stuff} 22:08, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Hot damn, that was too obscure even for me. I'd better brush up on my boardgames. Or at least stop talking to people who talk about Minecraft all the time. ±KnightOfTL;DR^{longissimus non legeri} 22:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

If it's any help, I picked up on the Settlers reference. I have wood, does anyone have any sheep for my wood? ^sshole 10:16, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

At a wood port. Will exchange any wood you have for sheep, in return for for you not putting the Thief on any of my areas. Radioactive afikomen ^{Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments.} 18:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

As long as this page has some traffic again...

Anyone think we should be trying to remove the less funny entries here? Turpis 3:16 19:03, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm sulking about two of my funny ones being removed earlier. I may go mad with a hatchet if I click edit. Sophie^{because liberals} 19:40, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I like most of 'em actually. Тy^Talk 19:51, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I admit I don't get a lot of them because I don't read sci-fi or play video games much, but it seems there are quite a few whose level of humor is basically no better than "Michael Jordan: You have two cows. They are good at basketball." Turpis 3:16 (talk) 20:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

That's true enough. I've tried to keep tabs one one that are just "Random franchise or band: You have two cows. LOOK HOW MUCH I HATE THIS FRANCHISE/BAND BECAUSE I'M TOO FUCKING COOL FOR IT!!!!!!111" ^pathetic 12:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It's about time...

...there was a Gamergate one. Any ideas? Sophie^Wilder 09:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

• You have 2 cows, and insist that all the hundreds of cows other people have aren't real cows.
• You have 2 cows but hate their milk because females have no place in milking.
• You have 2 cows with massive, unrealistic udders but god help anyone who tries to make them less ridiculous.
• You have 2 cows, but they're actually ethics in game journalism.
• You have 2 cows and threaten to rape them.
• You have 2 cows and rail against all these experienced dairy farmers who keep muscling into you private fiefdom of milking.
• You have 2 cows and but create twitter accounts for seven, plus three sheep and a goat.

Any of these hit the mark? Queex_{chthonic murmurings} 10:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

aaargh, somebody else was working at the same time i was. i'm tired. maybe we can include them all? Abed Nadir (talk) 10:16, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I think the last one fulfills both criteria of makes sense and is funny. Fourth one is a bit simple and blunt, but sometimes that can add to the humour, so that one's ok as well. First one has potential, but needs tweaking. Nullahnung (talk) 10:23, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

* You have 2 cows, but people with other cows aren't real dairy farmers? Queex_{chthonic murmurings} 10:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Maybe like this: You have two cows. You keep denying the existence of one to avoid having to take care of it. Nullahnung (talk) 10:32, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

• You have 2 cows, but it's really about ethics in games journalism. Zero ^{(talk - contributions)} 11:26, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The accurate version

SOCIALISM: You have 2 cows The state kindly takes both and puts them in a barn with everyone else's before milking them and giving a trickle of the milk to you and all of the other farmers. You magically have plenty of milk. COMMUNISM: You have 2 cows The State forces you to milk them before giving the milk to everyone else. FASCISM: You have 2 cows The State takes both and sells you some milk. NAZISM: You have 2 cows The State takes both and shoots you. BUREAUCRATISM: You have 2 cows The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away… TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM: You have two cows You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows so that everyone can afford a cow. You sell them and retire on the income. SURREALISM: You have two giraffes The government requires you to take harmonica lessons. AN AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow has dropped dead. ENRON VENTURE CAPITALISM: You have two cows You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release. The public then buys your bull. A FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows. A JAPANESE CORPORATION: You have two cows You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk. You then create a clever cow cartoon image called ‘Cowkimon’ and market it worldwide. A GERMAN CORPORATION: You have two cows You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves. AN ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows, but you don’t know where they are You decide to have lunch. A RUSSIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows You count them and learn you have five cows. You count them again and learn you have 42 cows. You count them again and learn you have 2 cows. You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka. A SWISS CORPORATION: You have 5000 cows None of them belong to you. You charge the owners for storing them. A CHINESE CORPORATION: You have two cows You have 300 people milking them. You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity. You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation. AN INDIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows You worship them. A BRITISH CORPORATION: You have two cows Both are mad. AN IRAQI CORPORATION: Everyone thinks you have lots of cows You tell them that you have not one. No-one believes you, so they bomb the shit out of you and invade your country. You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of a Democracy… AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows Business seems pretty good. You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate. A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION: You have two cows The one on the left looks very attractive… ISLAM: You have two cows You shag one of them and give the meat to your neighbour. AN IRISH CORPORATION: You have two cows Both are drunk. NORTH KOREA: You reject cows because they are a symbol of Capitalist decadence, pay no attention to the mooing coming from the large wooden crate near the palace of Supreme Leader, Kim Jong-un. --Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 20:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

|₹Λ¥$€₦₦ ^{THAT IS STILL LEGAL TENDER. I AM SANDWICH LAWYER.} 23:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Lol, funny video. 141.134.75.236 (talk) 23:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

What I think of that video:

PacWalker 00:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Your edit summary says otherwise. :P 141.134.75.236 (talk) 00:30, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

...I really didn't think that through very well, did I? PacWalker 00:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Nope, you didn't. ;) 141.134.75.236 (talk) 00:33, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Ascii numbers confusion

Hey i just put the numbers for the ascii on this doc put into a converter and the numbers 59 6F 75 20 68 61 76 65 20 74 77 6F 20 63 6F 77 73 means T�Di���l| tehse numbers are probably not desired, the numbers 089 111 117 032 104 097 118 101 032 116 119 111 032 099 111 119 115 means You have two cows (source [2]) Bubba41102^{Taste the shortness} 19:05, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Other users

Stupid question. Are we allowed to make a 2 Cows joke about other users? CorruptUser (talk) 20:03, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I would've argued against it, but there already seems to be a precedent for it, so knock yourself out. ;) 141.134.75.236 (talk) 20:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

THANK YOU!

Whoever put that Lila Downs reference, thank you so much!

I mean, she got on this list with legendary artists? She's a freaking legend in my parent's native home state! Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 23:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)Zexcoiler Kingbolt

Who? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 11:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Just a regional folkloric singer from Oaxaca. Whoever added her with her singing style complete in Spanish, good show old chap. Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 15:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)Zexcoiler Kingbolt

Another Politico

Hey, for International Politics, can I add Enrique Pena Nieto?

"You once couldn't name three cows you ate. You are still elected the farmer of the ranch. The cows regret this."

Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 00:47, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Zexcoiler Kingbolt

Sounds good. How about "once all cows were painted in your colors, you are the farmer mostly because of your colors" (alluding to the former PRI dominance and the fact that being a member of PRI is the only thing EPN has going for him...) Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 11:18, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually, pretty neat. How about the both of them? Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 16:01, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Zexcoiler Kingbolt

Sure, though a little polishing can do no harm imho Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 22:32, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Aye aye, Avenger. I'll polish it. Though I am proud of that liner, if I must say so myself...

Oh God. I think it needs more than just polishing. Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 22:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Zexcoiler Kingbolt

Why? Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 23:12, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

bu-but, joke, man...Zexcoiler Kingbolt (talk) 03:13, 24 September 2015 (UTC)Zexcoiler Kingbolt

Friends Reunited

I've no idea if there's an incredibly clever and subtle joke revolving around this occurring twice in a short space. I'm sure ITV will buy it though. Annquin (talk) 12:10, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

This is a riot!^{— Unsigned, by: WaitingforGodot / talk / contribs} 21:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Put 'em out to pasture

...or shoot them before they start anymore bad jokes.^{— Unsigned, by: Albannach / talk / contribs} 21:40, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

No Taiwan

I should think Taiwan or the Republic of China or Chinese Taipai or whatever you want to call that Island should get its own entry. After all, if we're flexible enough to give Daesh an entry as a real country that totally is a sovereign nation, like, for realzies, then Whatever the big Island off the coast of southeastern China is deserves an entry.^{— Unsigned, by: 67.189.127.160 / talk / contribs} 10:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Umm...

How did this whole article even start?ChikinRamen (talk) 04:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Ay

Permission to add Boris Johnson and/or Michael Gove? Ɀexcoiler Кingbolt Noooooooo! ^{Look! Up there!} 03:26, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Certainly. Add anything your two cows like.--JorisEnter (talk) 11:40, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Glaring omission

The Sky Moos. Anna Livia (talk) 19:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Sad cow disease

A lot of jokes on here are buffalo chips at best. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 05:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Probability

The "probability" one said "You 2 cows". Is this intentional? I found a Reddit thread which would appear to indicate that this is not a typo.--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 07:30, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Anyone?--Кřěĵ (ṫåɬк) 10:44, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

You have two cows

And have to deal with the incel-bull support group talking about how they are intending to go on the 'running of the bulls' and show those cows but (non-excuses). Anna Livia (talk) 12:30, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

What

... no reference to mootatis mootandis? Anna Livia (talk) 19:31, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Out of curiosity...

Is the /r/The_Donald entry sarcastic or just being contrarian for the hell of it? I might be a pinkocommieleftist but I wouldn't describe an opposing party as "the enemy" just for running. Apologies if this comes across as whining, just wanted to make sure. Towards-the Unknown (talk) 23:27, 17 April 2019 (UTC)