Talk:The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

message: If someone has read the book PLEASE put an explanation for what an "I'd Really Rather You Didn't" is.
Thanks :)
--Revision as of 23:08, 5 April 2006
JoeBlowfromKokomo
:This is Just my understanding of the "I'd Really Rather You Didn't".  If it qualifies as original reserch it may not be able to go into the articel
Would it be total copyright infringement for me to simply include the eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts"? After finishing what was interesting of the book (which was most of it, I assure you) I came here and was surprised by their absence. Is there reason for that? Metalrobot
Someone with more Wikipower than me needs to change the numerals on #6 to letters A, B, and C which is how they appear in the book. Metalrobot 15:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I concur that the Title Case Capitalization is difficult to read in a paragraph of text. I can't seem to find a reference for "The Eight Condiments" anywhere, so I certainly wouldn't oppose a nondisruptive edit to change the capitalization. David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 20:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "I'd Really Rather You Didn't" 

message: "I'd Really Rather You Didn't" (I think) could be referring to the Ten Commandments (8+2=10).  (I think) This could be expanding on the old joke that Moses had 15  commandments and dropped one when saying "I give you these 15.....10 commandments" in History of the World: Part I - 1981 which (I think) could be making fun of the real event where Mosses Broke the original 10 commandments after seeing the golden calf. Ten_Commandments#Breaking_and_replacement_of_the_tablets.  Why the last to are omitted (I think) could be because “These last two commandments govern private thoughts.” Ten_Commandments#Christian_understanding Because everybody should have a the right to think what they want to think (My take on the whole point of the religion) like believing in the flying spaghetti monster.
This is only my initial response to the joke.  I came up with this myself.  If you came up with this same though yourself then congratulations (I assume you all did think of this on you own and That’s why it’s funny) if you just figured the joke out because of me then please credit me as Yskyflyer for my analysis.
Note I am explaining a joke.  I am not stating my opinion on whether it is tasteful or not.  I am not saying my description above is accurate ether.  I have not read the book so I do not know the official analysis.  Please tell me if I should include this in the article or if I should post It on a website and then include in the article or it is Original Research and so not qualifying including in a verifiable article.  Wikipedia is not a place to include every bodies interpretations.  I only posted my views because somebody requested it  Due to farness I guess it would be appropriate to post your opinions under mine and not whether or not you are building off of mine or already though it out before reading mine.  Be honest or the FSM will tell me your are lying and I will feel really sorry for you.--E-Bod 22:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ten Commandments]] 

message: do the "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" appear in the source material with the first letter in every word capitalized?  makes it kind of hard to read. 192.223.226.6 18:25, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I concur that the Title Case Capitalization is difficult to read in a paragraph of text. I can't seem to find a reference for "The Eight Condiments" anywhere, so I certainly wouldn't oppose a nondisruptive edit to change the capitalization. David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 20:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization? 

message: Does this deserve mention? Has any secondary source referenced this? It probably belongs in external links, but I'm not sure it merits mention in the article itself. I'm going to remove it unless there are objections. --Nscheffey(T/C)</Sup> 18:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schneider and Frederick 

message: The eight "I'd Really Rather You Didn'ts" are copied directly from the text. I may be mistaken, but isn't this blatant copyright infrigement? --Iamunknown 19:38, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems cool with  "It's ok with me if you're using the FSM images/content as long as it's not for profit, and you're doing it to further the Cause of the church." - If not, I'd say we still may reasonably claim fair use for the excerpt in the context of the article. Femto 20:28, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation? 

message: This is probably incorrect, since a Google search turns up only two results.  Maybe a McGriddle?  I don't have the book, but maybe somebody who does could look up McDonalds?  I'm deleting the reference for now, and somebody can correct it later.  Tomhormby 05:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  McPidgin? 

message: The image of the book cover looks like it's a red, hardcover book with an in-built page marker. Do not be fooled. It's a common-or-garden paperback book, with a picture of a red, hardcover book with an in-built page marker on the cover. As great as the FSM might be, surely He should have come up with a better quality book. JIP | Talk 21:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book cover 

message: I'm not sure how to include it, but the gospel was released by HarperCollins UK in hardcover, as depicted on the US cover. The other version is unavailable here and this has a different ISBN. 
 
 
- Quolnok 01:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK / Australian hardcover version 

message: I've removed this excellent  Contents  section since (a) it clashes with the autowikily generated contents and (b) it seems to have nothing to do with the, er, contents of the article. If I'm missing the jok^h^h^hpoint may His Noodliness forgive me --John Stumbles 18:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm unsure if the section is needed, however that is the book's contents. - 124.189.138.172 12:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Aah! Maybe you'd like to restore the section with a note or section heading indicating that it's the contents of the book, not the article? (I'm suggesting you do it as I take it that yoou do have the book which I <cough!> don't.) --John Stumbles 23:20, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contents (section) 

message: The first i'd really blah blah blah thing says don't say you are "holier than thou ass". Normally, I would change this back to "art" but I know it's a parody religion. If this is vandalism, could someone let me know so I can delete it.211.30.132.2 08:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism?

message: The Excerpts section contains quotes not from the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but rather from The Loose Canon, a congregation-compiled text. Not that The Loose Canon isn't worth reading, mind you, but it's not from the Gospel. --96.252.126.169 (talk) 18:11, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Excerpts" section not from the Gospel 

message: Should not the last chapter of the Gospel include a promise of "eternal salivation"? :-) George963 au (talk) 01:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revelations 

message: It isn't all that long, and would only lengthen the article by about 3 lines.  I think it'd help to explain the book, and hence the religion as a whole. Mister Sneeze A Lot (talk) 13:19, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a reason we aren't listing the 8 "I'd Really Rather You Didn't"'s? 

message: I've restored the long-standing lead description of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as a parody religion rather than a religion. I'm mentioning it here because this change was snuck in 16 months ago here , by a currently-blocked IP, and missed. Prior to that all attempts to change from "parody religion" had been undone. Note the notice on this page concerning this being  a parody. Meters (talk) 20:16, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and thanks. I'm dope-slapping myself for having missed that all this time. I'm glad that you caught it. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I only bothered mentioned it because it had been in there so long. On my list now, so one more set of eyes. Meters (talk) 06:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: And yet another IP ignoring the talk page consensus to remove "satirical" and "parody". Meters (talk) 23:19, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

text: Still no discussion about this, or justification for ignoring the consensus mentioned in Talk:Flying Spaghetti Monster/FAQ. Restoring the status quo. Meters (talk) 23:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  parody religion 

message: Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute, the hub of the Intelligent Design movement, labeled the Gospel "a mockery of the Christian New Testament".
I notice that the Jews don’t give a flying matza ball. Similarly the Muslim don’t give a flying pita. That begs the question, why are Christians offended by this silliness? 75.127.208.18 (talk) 21:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't the place to discuss the "why" of it, but, with a source, that's something that might be worth reporting on the page. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Offensive to some