That rice is yucky

Posted on by

It’s no secret that I adore Wikipedia, after all, I inflict my preference for it on you whenever I can. 😉 SM tipster bl00t sends me somewhere that looks and feels familiar, but only in structure. Confused? Let me quote from the “wiki” on India:

Under Culture:

India has a rich cultural Heritage, but it doesn’t really matter because it is quickly being displaced by the more evolutionarily fit American Culture. The Taj Mahal, a burial plot for some woman who died a long time ago, is important because it is featured in many American Saturday morning cartoons.

Under Origin of Name:

Christopher Columbus named India after the Native Americans who first colonised the region. Some people claim that the Vikings discovered India first, but they aren’t really an oppressed minority so we can ignore them.
Because India’s name had to rhyme with Pakistan, it was given the name Hakistan in the finest tradition of Hackensack, NJ. (It is also called Hindustan by some ignorant fools).

Under Trivia:

Indian food is known internationally for its spiciness and funny names such as sari, salwar kameez, Buddha, and condoleeza rice.

Under Economy:

India is currently involved in a takeover bid for the region of Kashmir, a key garment district which is home of the famous sweater.

Right.

Now after reading all that, I can’t decide if it was funny, slightly amusing or almost insulting. If only it had some Asian-looking Orcs in it to make it obvious for me. Alas, it lacks such glaring evidence of prejudice. What say you, dear readers? Did it tickle your phunny bone? Do any of you feel like editing it?

19 thoughts on “That rice is yucky”

  2. Ha! I was most insulted until I decided to go edit and noticed the subtle differences. You got me there!

  3. I posted on this a couple of months ago.

    The old entry for India, much shorter, was actually much funnier:

    “India is a software giant based in Toronto. The company achieved overnight success in 1986 when founder Al Gore invented the internet. Today, India is one of the largest companies in the world, with 1 billion employees and yearly profits of over $10.”

    That was it.

    For me, the most impressive thing in Uncyclopedia is still the “You Have Two Cows” meme page. Also check out Wikipedia’s sociological analysis of “You Have Two Cows” jokes.

    Truly, a monument to Too Much Time On Your Hands.

  4. Good find, Anna… this site is FUNNY!!

    Scientists researching global warming have discovered George W. Bush is 78% less likely to admit he has a problem, compared to recovering alcoholics, chronic bedwetters and serial killers combined.

  6. It’s funny. I read it and laughed out loud – it’s thoroughly ridiculous.

    Love it.

  8. The scary thing is, that there are people that really on Wikipedia for ACCURATE information, never realizing that it’s purely subjective!!!

  10. The scary thing is, that there are people that really on Wikipedia for ACCURATE information

    If you didn’t notice, this is not the real wikipedia – it is a satire that uses MediaWiki.

  11. people that really on Wikipedia for ACCURATE information, never realizing that it’s purely subjective!!!

    I second Hanuman (assuming he meant the “real” Wiki) – Wiki is just passionate/bored-to-death folks writing what they think about stuff they think about. Its great as a collaborative forum for Web-wide co-operation and all that, but how on earth did it end up as THE defenitive reference all things sundry?

  12. Wiki is just passionate/bored-to-death folks writing what they think about stuff they think about. Its great as a collaborative forum for Web-wide co-operation and all that, but how on earth did it end up as THE defenitive reference all things sundry?

    Sadly, you have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. It is not meant to be the definitive reference for anything. It’s a storehouse for the collective knowledge of everyone around us. It is meant as a source of information – but you don’t quote it as a reference if you are writing a paper. The utility of Wikipedia is in the range of topics it covers – stuff which you will not find in mainstream encyclopedias. Also, it tends to display a lack of bias since you can always check the history of a page and see all the revisions – which usually cover all ranges of opinion. If you use it as a definitive reference, you are looking at it the wrong way.

    BTW, there is no definitive reference for anything. Commercial encyclopedias suffer from the bias of the editors and publishers. Even peer-reviewed papers contain plenty of mistakes. If you want to research something, you need to consult multiple sources and judge the truth for yourself. Wikipedia is one such tool.

  13. Well….if you thought that was funny….just go to the USA page on that….it’s hillarious….

    But, on a more sober note…i shudder to think of how many naive school kids around the world end up on this site and take the info there as fact and not spoof. It’s all very funny…but it might result in a hell of a lot of unintentional damage…

  14. Sadly, you have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia.

    I don’t know why, but this sentence had me giggling out loud 🙂 Something about the image of a wistful Anil feeling depressed about the world’ lack of understanding of wikipedia’s true nature 🙂

    I think I’ve been on the computer too long.

  16. HI-larious. It reminds me of (one of) my biggest pet peeve: when people ask me questions about India, or being Indian…and then answer their own question…incorrectly.

  17. Hee, I think the India article is hilarious. But yes, the Pak article is even funnier. And the funniest thing ever is when the leader of a Hindu Nationalist Party responsible for busting mosques goes to Pakistan and calls Jinnah secular, and nobody in his party stands up for him! said Nelson-style HA-HA

  18. But you must check out France. To whet your collective appetites:

    …This prompted the end of French military might. (Note: a search for French Military Victories on Google prompts the query “Do you mean ‘French military defeats?'”)…