Talk:Finland
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Request[edit source]
Can someone add a link to Finnish language in this article, preferably under "Culture"? Thanks. 94.234.42.68 (talk) 10:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Maybe it's time to give finland the kind of article it deserves?[edit source]
The Finland topic seems to be a funny joke, but it's gone for a it too long imo. The protection comment in 2017 was made with the following text:
(as empty as the article is it is also featured so it really can't be changed outside of extenuating circumstances or its old and it sucks or new stuff happens or....)
I think it's now to the point where it's old and it sucks, compared to what it could be. A lot of new stuff has happened in Finland, there's a lot of new jokes that could be made.
In short: Make Finland (article) Great Again. – Preceding unsigned comment added by ColdAF (talk • contribs)
- It's also Top 10, so basically it should stay as close as possible to the original. Most of the joke is in the pictures, too. ~ 19:13, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- @ColdAF: the article's emptiness is the joke of the article. plus, this was featured and voted as a top 10, so it's definitely staying as it is. if you feel there are more jokes that could be made at the expense of Finland, you could create a new article about it (i.e. "History of Finland", "Finnish people", etc.); as long as the article complies with UN:HTBFANJS, of course. 🎄🎄🎄DaniPine3 (talk)🎄🎄🎄 19:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- I mean I understand the perspective for sure, but at what point does the article staying in its current form just stop the possibility of further jokes at Finland's expense. I'll definitely consider making one for "Finnish People", "History of Finland", etc., but there is an argument to be made for it having taken long enough. After all, it's stood for a decade, one can easily see the original format when it won the award, and there are still plenty of jokes to be made at our extent. Also, the pictures are definitely excellent, I don't know if one can really add to that. Besides with a picture of mämmi to show the glory of our cuisine. --ColdAF (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- @ColdAF: the "it stood for a decade" argument would make sense if this was an average article. but this is a featured article, meaning several users voted for this article to be featured on the main page, and for that reason it shouldn't be treated like an average article. the joke of this article only works if it's as minimalistic as possible; adding more things ruins the joke. I don't really get the problem with this article being so minimalistic; similar articles like Cigarette butt and Nihilism have their lack of content as their joke and they've never caused any problem to the rest of users. 🎄🎄🎄DaniPine3 (talk)🎄🎄🎄 22:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- I mean that's admittedly a fair point, and I don't necessarily disagree out of principles. Also thank you for your wonderful examples, however, I feel as though Cigarette butt is a bit of a false equivalence, as it's less of a main topic, so to say. That said, Nihilism is absolutely an amazing comparison, and is very much equivalent in terms of being a large topic, with a lot of jokes to make, that has very much been reduced to a single point. I guess it's not as much a case of the minimalism in and of itself in my opinion, but rather the determination to leave that as the main and almost only joke.
- In addition, I think that the two articles you mentioned were clearly a joke, and there was no question of their being anything but an intentional choice. With the Finland article however, while amusing, is not as clear to be made intentionally. On first glance, while amusing, it seems a slightly slapped together article made by a bored, drunk Finn. It's greatest value is most visible upon the time at which it is viewed from the lens of an experienced visitor, who have mostly seen this already.
It being in the top 10 is also a bit of a false point. If it was truly one of the best 10 articles on the site currently, I would have to agree, but as a top 10 from over a decade ago, it's sure to get old in the tooth.
I am also not saying I am so talented as to be able to make something better than this article on my own. However, I feel as though we have reached a local maximum for this joke. I would really want to see what other jokes could be made at Finland's expense, given the absolute wealth of ability and literary skill found here. --ColdAF (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2026 (UTC)- First off, we don't normally change featured articles very much without community consensus. Normally it's asking an admin or two, then going ahead with it, as long as it keeps the quality of the article. Basically means most FAs are kept in a feature-ready state (with some exceptions)
Second, Top 10 articles are normally changed even less than regular FAs, because they're good enough by multiple people's standards to be in that position. Normally we never allow rewrites of Top 10s. I don't think it's ever happened.
Basically, nothing's going to change about this article, because it's written to look the way it is, modern events aside. ~ 23:32, 8 March 2026 (UTC)- @ColdAF: what Turb0-Sunrise said, pretty much. this article is fine the way it is now; there's no need to change much about it. you can always create a new article called "Finnish people" where you can talk about cuisine, culture, and whatnot about Finland without having to change a featured article. at the end of the day, Uncyclopedia's most important attribute in an article if its funny value, and an article that's funny but short is much better than an article goes on too long and eventually loses its funny. 🎄🎄🎄DaniPine3 (talk)🎄🎄🎄 23:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- Fair, honestly the funny value being best when it's short is the best argument for it. Would you say it's fine to try improve the article in its current form or would it be better to leave as is?--ColdAF (talk) 23:48, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- Leave it as is. The entire joke of the article is that the text is extremely concise and non-descriptive, and adding stuff might actually ruin it significantly because of that.
00:27, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
- Leave it as is. The entire joke of the article is that the text is extremely concise and non-descriptive, and adding stuff might actually ruin it significantly because of that.
- Fair, honestly the funny value being best when it's short is the best argument for it. Would you say it's fine to try improve the article in its current form or would it be better to leave as is?--ColdAF (talk) 23:48, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- @ColdAF: what Turb0-Sunrise said, pretty much. this article is fine the way it is now; there's no need to change much about it. you can always create a new article called "Finnish people" where you can talk about cuisine, culture, and whatnot about Finland without having to change a featured article. at the end of the day, Uncyclopedia's most important attribute in an article if its funny value, and an article that's funny but short is much better than an article goes on too long and eventually loses its funny. 🎄🎄🎄DaniPine3 (talk)🎄🎄🎄 23:36, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- First off, we don't normally change featured articles very much without community consensus. Normally it's asking an admin or two, then going ahead with it, as long as it keeps the quality of the article. Basically means most FAs are kept in a feature-ready state (with some exceptions)
- @ColdAF: the "it stood for a decade" argument would make sense if this was an average article. but this is a featured article, meaning several users voted for this article to be featured on the main page, and for that reason it shouldn't be treated like an average article. the joke of this article only works if it's as minimalistic as possible; adding more things ruins the joke. I don't really get the problem with this article being so minimalistic; similar articles like Cigarette butt and Nihilism have their lack of content as their joke and they've never caused any problem to the rest of users. 🎄🎄🎄DaniPine3 (talk)🎄🎄🎄 22:45, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- I mean I understand the perspective for sure, but at what point does the article staying in its current form just stop the possibility of further jokes at Finland's expense. I'll definitely consider making one for "Finnish People", "History of Finland", etc., but there is an argument to be made for it having taken long enough. After all, it's stood for a decade, one can easily see the original format when it won the award, and there are still plenty of jokes to be made at our extent. Also, the pictures are definitely excellent, I don't know if one can really add to that. Besides with a picture of mämmi to show the glory of our cuisine. --ColdAF (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- @ColdAF: the article's emptiness is the joke of the article. plus, this was featured and voted as a top 10, so it's definitely staying as it is. if you feel there are more jokes that could be made at the expense of Finland, you could create a new article about it (i.e. "History of Finland", "Finnish people", etc.); as long as the article complies with UN:HTBFANJS, of course. 🎄🎄🎄DaniPine3 (talk)🎄🎄🎄 19:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)
- There's no strict rule (more of a guideline) that each subject must have only one corresponding article. You could make something like Finland (country) as a separate article. MUGA Intern Sandeep (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
