Talk:Blinkenlights

message: I'm adding a psuedo-translation of sorts: how a German-speaker might "read" the message. P 15:32, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  German translation 

message: For many years my father had a framed copy of this hanging in his ham shack. One difference, however, is that he must have obtained it prior to the invention of computers, as the second word of the second paragraph after the Achtung! line was MASCHINE, rather than KOMPUTERMASCHINE. I guess it was intended as a warning to visiters to his ham shack to not mess with the transmitters as they contained very high voltage which could cause spitzensparken.ChardingLLNL 21:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Or maybe he modified it to apply to HAM radios rather than computers. jej1997 (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Older, other versions of Blinkenlights 

message: ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS!
Das Internet is nicht fuer gefingerclicken und giffengrabben.
Ist easy droppenpacket der routers und overloaden der backbone
mit der spammen und der me-tooen. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei
das dumpkopfen! Das mausklicken sichtseeren keepen das bandwit-spewin
hans in das pockets muss; relaxen und watchen das cursorblinken.
Ommos (talk) 21:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internet version of Lookenpeepers 

message: It would be nice if someone could explain the usage of "COTTONPICKEN" in the German and subsequently the translation.  I'm not sure if that is intentional or if it has some other meaning in German, but it does seem to have vaguely racial undertones, at least in American culture.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.227.130.5 (talk) 09:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't. It's just a common variation of "frickin'" or similar meaningless emphatics. 153.42.170.64 (talk) 23:06, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

text: My grandpa used to say "cotton-pickin'" instead of "gosh-darned" or "blasted", e.g. "I can't make the cotton-pickin' thing work!" without any racist overtones.  People of all races have picked cotton through the years. jej1997 (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cotton Picking 

message: The use of specialty formatting and giant boxes really isn't in keeping with Wikipedia's style.  I think I understand the point, but for an encyclopedia it makes more sense to explain the thing first and then add some historical background/origin material in a seperate section.  At first brush, the giant lettering right near the beginning of the article actually feels like a cross between a warning message and the kind of text one expects of recently vandalized articles.
Perhaps the use of a quote template would be better at offseting that text rather than the custom formatting?  Dragons flight (talk) 00:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I've removed it. — Hex (❝?!❞) 15:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting/presentation 

message: Shouldn't this article mention that the faux-German writing style is a written form of vaudevillian "double-talk," which existed well before computers or even the start of WWII?  Examples of it can be seen in many of the "Three Stooges" shorts of the early 1930's, as well as Marx Brothers routines of the same period and the performances of many of the classic humorists who came from or were heavily influenced by the vaudeville era (Sid Ceasar, Mel Brooks, etc.).  I could cite some specific cases in classic humor if needed.
69.198.132.18 (talk) 23:26, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly, if that's true, then it would be a great addition to this article.  I'm not sure anyone is more qualified to add it than you, though. jej1997 (talk) 15:48, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style Evolution 

message: Blickenlights have a very long history in science fiction cinema and television. If memory serves, they really got rolling in the '50s. There were certainly earlier lit, blinking gauges before WWII! kencf0618 (talk) 18:51, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Science Fiction 

message: @Altenmann Please explain the exchange of an very good explaining photo with an an extremely outdated picture. 
Also there is nothing deleted at all, actually i did the opposite since i created an all new category at commons and put all blinkelight images into it.  -- Angerdan (talk) 19:48, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not "extremely outdated": it illustrates the historical origin of the concept. Modern picturea are anachronistic. I Would also question whether these things are called blinkenlight in reliable sources other than in humorous profesional slan. I dont see them in article and I am going to butcher it of accumulated original research after waiting for a reasonable time. - Altenmann >talk 19:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplained change of image 

message: @Altenmann You didn't edit the article since 2016, so please follow the rules and don't start two editwars. 
Actually you didn't even care 9 years about unreferenced content, so instead of deleting it just keep it and reference it. -- Angerdan (talk) 19:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, disagreed with your opinion about the rules of wikipedia editing. - Altenmann >talk 19:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stop messing up the article 

message: IMNSHO this article was neither improved, nor became more likely to get improved by anyone else through the addition of a second identical  template – added too, without any attendant talk as to what ailed the editor. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: <snip-snip> coming soon. That's why tags are placed, as a warning before the merciless trim. - Altenmann >talk 23:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: What good does a "warning" (or two) do if it gives no specific indication as to what is being objected to? That just seems like an adversarial tactic to soften up the target before exerting "merciless" punishment for perceived but hitherto undisclosed infractions. It just feels like a CYA-before-ambush tactic to get your way. How is that constructive editing? Even if you have valid concerns, this makes it very hard for the editor on the bus ;-) to approach consensus and accommodate them. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 06:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  One {{tl|or1}} or two {{tl|or1}} too, that is the question. 

message: Further to the edit summary on my most recent revert, I actually think the blinkenlights article could do with a history section – in addition to its existing Etymology section. A history section might be focussed on the history of computerised blinking lights, and could lead up to the present day, where many a blinking light UI has evolved into no longer just monochromatic but colour-changing LEDs, powered by ever-cheaper driver ICs and PWM. That's becoming more common. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 14:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology v History 

message: I note, as per the hatnote on this article, there already is a separate article for the aforementioned Project Blinkenlights, so that ground, though adjacent, need not be covered here.I also realise however that a distinction could (but IMHO need not necessarily strictly and strongly) here be drawn between the thing itself ([computerised/electronic] blinking lights) and the term for it (blinkenlights). If it turned out that a broad consensus were to emerge for rewriting and renaming this into a (lamer) blinking lights article in generic non-hacker NPC luser terminology, then I would not oppose such a change, however I believe the hacker jargon term still at least ought to redirect and be included too, along with its etymology. That said, coverage of the term's etymology and memetic hacker humour origins need not be overegged to the point of off-topicness, as it presently still is; see the above sections. Note by the way that the normie comprehensibility of the term blinkenlights is greatly enhanced by its being near-homophonous with blinking lights. PS: I wonder if blinkenlights has yet entered the OED. Not that that's the be all and end all, but is someone in a position to check real quick? —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 14:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article focus, part deux 

message: The inclusion of an autoplaying animated GIF in the Actual blinkenlights section, while not unique to this article, is distracting and IMNSHO worthy of criticism, here and wherever else like GIFs are found in article space. Is there a way to change animating GIFs to be click-through instead of autoplaying? (If not, then isn't that a feature MediaWiki maybe should have? Who do I kvetch to?) —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 15:24, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autoplaying animated GIF