Talk:Understatement

Okay, now that's hilarious. Sometimes I really wish Uncyclopedia didn't have a thing against shortness or listiness... ~ *shifty eyes* (talk) (stalk) -- 20101104 - 12:26 (UTC)

It's weird, really, considering how Wikipedia is such a big fan of shortness and listiness. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 12:31, 4 November 2010

Well, it's also a fan of excessively long wads of useless crap, so I'm glad we're not mimicking that for the most part... ~ *shifty eyes* (talk) (stalk) -- 20101104 - 20:41 (UTC)

That's the irony of Wikipedia. They want all of their articles to be excessively long, but because it's a wiki, only the popular topics get long articles. However, over 99% of their articles are not popular topics, and are thus epically short stubs (the reason why most of these articles exist is because they were created by a bot). And then there are the lists, typically created by and for the trivia-obsessed. Some of them are nice though. I personally like the one about largest organisms. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 21:02, 4 November 2010

Heh, nice... and it has no practical purpose, either. Does it? ~ *shifty eyes* (talk) (stalk) -- 20101104 - 21:13 (UTC)

None that I can think of. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 22:52, 10 December 2011