Long article

Long articles (Articula longa) are rare beasts found mostly in Wikiland, even though there were some reports of long articles in Uncyclopedia, where they are a national minority.
==History==
It is unknown how and when long articles appeared in Wikiland. Their original homeland is long lost, believed to be outside the borders of the Internest. They seemed to inhabit the Internest from the very beginning, presumably a creation of Satan intended to consume and devour the traffic of humble Christians.
Therefore, since the formation of Wikiland, Jimbo I ordered that Thou shalt not create articles beyond thirty-two kibibytes, to protect his disciples from having their brains melted. However, nobody really followed this commandment, as it was believed that, since the introduction of the NPOV, biblical content should be approached with a certain degree of salt, namely NaCl. Because of that, long articles tended to take over the ever-peaceful Wikiland.
As Wikiland grew and prospered, its articles inflated beyond all possible means, most probably as a result of the intervention of dark energy or the dark side. They quickly became a cultural phenomenon, surpassing in size all the other long articles on the Internets. Whenever a faction of Wikipedians started a war against long articles, aiming to withdraw them from the land they were desecrating by their very presence, there was always another faction of Wikipedians, united by the cry "Keep our long articles!", that withdrew the first faction from the borders of Wikiland. Unsurprisingly, this faction usually consisted of the Holy Fathers of Wikianity.
Even though long articles constantly grew, one thing remained consistent: the following articles were always the longest.
*GFDL
*Latest BJAODN
*Special:Allpages
*Votes for deletion/Log/[yesterday]
*List of minor characters in Star Trek Episode 1089
*Manual of Style – read this before submitting your first edit!
The reasons for such a distribution of length are completely unknown. Modern scientific research indicates that an article's length and longevity are unrelated, further complicating statistical analysis. Increasing problems in this area prove that mathematics should be abolished and replaced with more progressive methods, such as votes for shrinking.
There were unsuccessful attempts to adopt long articles from Wikiland to the conditions of the Land of Thousand Wikicities. The attempts were abandoned when it was discovered that long articles called "Lists of minor" whatever do not survive in the new environment, splitting into hundreds of short articles. The most obvious example is Uncyclopedia, which is in its whole such a split of a single long article Encyclopædia BJAODNonica.
==Anatomy==
Long articles significantly differ from other animals in their constitution. While they have a body, like all normal animals (including short articles), they have a preface instead of a face and a see also (or external links) instead of a tail. It is believed that these features were developed in order to survive in the unfriendly environment of Wikiland. Proponents of the evolution theory believe that prefaces, see also's and templates are a result of natural selection, which placed articles not having them in jeopardy, on the verge of extinction. Great Time Travel War of 1871 is a notable exception.
===Oscar Wilde Quote===
===Preface===
A preface is, by definition, what precedes a face. However, long articles do not have faces, as they were all removed during the process of defacing. A preface is usually followed by a TOC, except in cases where the author is too lazy to divide the article into sections and pretends that readers will experience unforgettable feelings when thrudging through monotonous, seemingly identical text.
===Body===
A long article's body consists of many long, boring paragraphs, which calmly, cooly, entirely without incident prepare the reader for the inevitable. Metasyntactic long articles are all written in unreadable Latin which nobody, even the article author, can comprehend (see also Lorem Ipsum). Long articles also frequently include long, boring words like "metasyntactic", "comprehend" and "deoxyribonucleic", because authors believe it makes them more intelligent, even if they don't understand them themselves. For the sake of length, words like "don't" and "can't" are always substituted by their full forms "are not performing the action of" and "is unable or unwilling to".
The Manual of Style orders long articles' bodies to be divided into §'s, but not a single § was ever found in the Internets. For some time, §'s were speculated to be viruses that only infected books; since the GFDL effectively prohibited importing books into Wikiland, it somewhat explained long articles' immunity to the § disease. However, since the foundation of the Kingdom of Wikibooks, no §'s have nevertheless been found yet. So eventually §'s were declared to be extinct in Wikiland, and bodies of long articles were instead divided into ==='s, =='s, and ='s. The latter were soon machinegunned by adherents of the Manual of Style, but legends about them remained.
Red links are rare in long articles, because they make them look unprofessional. People with a lot of time to kill (who else writes long articles?) hate when something looks unprofessional, because it makes them look unprofessional and destroys their career, giving them even more time to kill. And since the Greenpeace protests against killing innocent time, what are they supposed to do with that time if they don't have a time machine to store it?
Other things common in long articles include:
*Lists.
*#Numbered lists, in case users are lazy enough to type numbers themselves.
*<latex>\varphi(y)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int\limits_{-\infty}^y e^{-\frac{t^2}{2}}dt</latex>(only necessary if the article was written by a hopeless nerd).
*Images. But we have one already, so let's go on. Although the more images, the better: images break text layout and make readers completely miss the point, which is a good thing.
But all these relaxing things only contribute to 1% of the article. They only exist to separate sections and to give the article a sense of completeness, as nobody cares about the article's content anyway. Indeed, most sections of the aforementioned article do not usually contain them at all, falling into a mixture of text, sometimes without any links at all. When a new section starts in a long article, it is usually a relief for the readers.
===Conclusion===
You'd think that a long article ends with a conclusion, but it does not. It's similar to the way many animals don't end at the anus. Some have a tail, or several Tails. As stated above, articles do not have tails. They have see also or external link sections. The conclusion can reiterate what has been said above, provide a new perspective, or words to spark new thoughts in the reader. For example, have you been as friendly as you could have been today? Conclusions are the center of the tootsie roll pop. If you bite into the center, you still have the option of eating the rest. Or you could leave it sitting out on some table for someone else to consume after you.
===See also===
*See also is a special section reserved for a random collection of links, too random to be inserted directly into the article. Throughout an article's life, see also's usually become ghettos for XXX-related links.
===References===
These are links to news pages and other random websites, and if they are not present in Wikiland long articles, they will likely be hunted down by the apex predators of their regions. This is why many long articles have adapted to have hundreds of these. These are overlooked by the readers, but they boost rankings on Special:Longpages.
==Life-cycle==
A common urban legend states that long articles begin their life in embrionic state of a stub, dropping their rudimentary organ known as {{stub}} during childhood. In fact, long articles are unable to grow in Wikiland, because their growth mechanism implies presence of contributors, which are themselves almost extinct. However, when long articles spend too much time in Wikiland, they catch a disease called wikification, during which half the words in the article are turned into links. It is believed to be non-lethal, though, and even respected as a normal condition. In Uncyclopedia, wikification is considered a disease, and the best long articles like Newtonian Physics are immune to it.
Long articles that are born long generate special interest among Wikipedians, who love to copy the entire article to their user page (retaining the ==='s and =='s, and ='s would be retained too, if there were any), and then use the link to that user page to mark the original article with the {{copyvio}} birthmark. The Holy Fathers are usually gullible enough to sentence the article to eternal damnation.
Long articles are members of the same ecological chain as short articles. Sometimes, instead of being sent to Hell, {{vfd}}'d short articles are consumed by long articles, which use them to grow; also, sometimes one short article devours another and becomes long. This process is described by the biologists of Wikiland as "merging", probably because one of the articles needs to be first digested to separate sentences and then merged again as part of another article's body. There exists a reverse process, when a long article procreates by splitting. Articles can suffer no changes other than merge and split, as long as they survive all VFDs.
As per the theories of ecology, in the food chain of articles the relative frequency increases by at least an order of magnitude for each smaller class of article, until we have the planktonic stub which forms the basis of the food chain and is fed by pure stupidity. This is analogous to plants being fed by hydrogen fusion. As Einstein observed, both cycles are fed by the most common elements in existence. The amount of basic energy input at each higher level is also roughly an order of magnitude larger, thus ensuring that the relative frequencies of each article class remains rather constant (the planktonic stub, the stub proper, the short-goo-stub, the short blurb, the sectioned article, the well-sectioned article, the well-seasoned-and-proportioned article, and the top predator article). Do not approach the top predator article. It hungers.
A true long article never dies. Sometimes it is reduced to "", to "test" or to "0MG 1 h@xx0r3d th1$ $1t3 l0l0l0l!!!", but immediately rises from ashes in its former glory, and the Wikipedian who dared to desecrate the writing is exiled from Wikiland thenceforth ... for twenty-four hours, usually. The only way to kill an article is to become a Wikian inquisitor; however, in the same twenty-four article the newly-promoted inquisitor would be so bored thrudging through tons of VFD garbage that he would leave Wikiland anyway, with {{Inactive Sysop}} being the only trace of that poor Wikipedian.
==Impact of Long Articles on the Environment==
===Biodiversity===
Biodiversity refers to the incredible variety of articles found in the wikiverse. In the book Biodiversity II, Edward O. Wilson defines biodiversity as: "all variations at all levels of organization, from the sections within a single article, to the species composing all or part of categories, and finally to the wikis themselves that compose the living parts of the multifarious ecosystems of the world." Articles in the wiki are so diverse that we really have no idea how many species there are. Estimates range between five million and thirty million, but some biologists believe the figure may be as high as a hundred million.
Biodiversity is central human existence. We derive much of our information from wiki articles. To this extent, we rely on a wide array of articles that we may find one that is most suitable. Despite the value of biodiversity to humans, we are currently destroying natural ecosystems of other articles such a rate that many biologists fear that in a few decades we will cause an unprecedented number of extinctions. We are so far from cataloging the diversity of articles in the wikiverse that an unknown number of articles will become extinct and we'll never know what we lost.
By its very nature, the long article contributes greatly to the rapid decline in article diversity. Shorter articles known as "stubs" are often assimilated into impossibly long, redundant diatribes that are of little use to the average uncyclopedian. The theory of natural selection plays an important role in explaining the continued existence and expansion of incredibly long articles in that shorter, rarer types of articles are "huffed" at an alarming rate, while long unfunny articles are kept solely because nobody bothers reading them. Like you.
However, there is good news about the long article's impact on the biodiversity of wikis. While the assimilation of concise articles is quite a problem, it is often outweighed by the fact that many species of articles are introduced every day. In fact, 95.7% of Uncyclopedia articles are one-liners typed by useless parasites. Although many are "huffed", most are allowed to fester within the bowels of Uncyclopedia for centuries.
===Global Climate Shift===
It is well known that long articles are responsible for the warming trend that has been scene in recent years and is projected to continue unabated. Long articles commonly infest wikis, causing them to become bloated with extra megabytes of useless information. When the typical computer user accesses these wikis, the computer releases much more "hydrofluoroburritos" than it would normally. These "hydrofluoroburritos" hang out in the atmosphere and destroy the ozone, causing penguins to get tans.
==Postmodernist critique==
===Discourses of rubicon===
If one examines the posttextual discourse of long articles, one is faced with a choice: either accept the deconstructivist paradigm of context or conclude that consensus must come from communication. Lacan’s critique of posttextual discourse suggests that society has significance. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a precapitalist textual theory that includes narrativity as a reality.
In the works of Stone, a predominant concept is the distinction between without and within. A number of desituationisms concerning dialectic narrative exist. Therefore, if posttextual discourse holds, we have to choose between dialectic narrative in long articles and the neoconceptualist paradigm of expression.
The characteristic theme of the works of Stone is the economy of cultural class. The primary theme of Long’s analysis of precapitalist textual theory is the common ground between society and sexual identity. It could be said that the subject is contextualised into a precapitalist discourse that includes sexuality as a totality.
In "Length", Stone examines precapitalist textual theory; in "Breadth" he denies dialectic narrative. However, Sontag suggests the use of precapitalist textual theory to analyse and modify classes of long articles.
Posttextual discourse states that the law is fundamentally used in the service of outdated, elitist perceptions of sexual identity, but only if art is equal to culture; if that is not the case, class, somewhat surprisingly, has objective value. But Lyotard uses the term ‘precapitalist textual theory’ to denote the role of the participant as artist.
The premise of dialectic narrative suggests that the language of long articles is a legal fiction. Thus, Foucault promotes the use of precapitalist textual theory to attack the status quo.
Von Junz implies that we have to choose between dialectic narrative and postdialectic capitalism. But the destruction/creation distinction which is a central theme of Stone’s "Out of Paper" emerges again in "Length", although in a more textual sense.
===Subcapitalist deconstruction and cultural rationalism===
“Truth is intrinsically impossible,” says Baudrillard. Lyotard uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote not, in fact, materialism, but postmaterialism. It could be said that if precapitalist textual theory holds, we have to choose between the subconstructive paradigm of discourse and textual prematerialist theory in any long article considered.
If one examines cultural rationalism, one is faced with a choice: either reject precapitalist textual theory or conclude that sexual identity has a significance to the length of an article. Derrida uses the term ‘constructive deappropriation’ to denote a mythopoetical paradox. However, any number of situationisms concerning the bridge between sexuality and class may be discovered.
“Sexual identity is part of the failure of long articles,” says Lacan; however, according to Reicher, it is not so much sexual identity that is part of the failure of language, but rather the futility, and some would say the stasis, of sexual identity and its expression in the length of articles. Von Ludwig suggests that we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and capitalist sublimation. Thus, if the subcultural paradigm of expression holds, the works of Stone are postmodern.
“All long articles are inherently self-referencing,” says Lacan. Marx uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote the difference between culture and sexual identity. In a sense, a number of theories concerning dialectic narrative exist.
If one examines precapitalist textual theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept capitalist appropriation or conclude that discourse is created by the masses, given that precapitalist textual theory is invalid. Bataille suggests the use of dialectic narrative to deconstruct long articles. But Hubbard implies that we have to choose between presemantic nihilism and the dialectic paradigm of discourse.
Foucault uses the term ‘dialectic narrative’ to denote the role of the poet as observer. Therefore, Bataille’s model of precapitalist textual theory holds that narrativity is used to exploit minorities.
The subject is interpolated into a subcapitalist libertarianism that includes art as a whole. Thus, if cultural rationalism holds, we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and deconstructivist narrative.
In "Beyond Wikis", Smythe reiterates cultural rationalism; in "The Truth Of Falsehoods", although, he analyses precapitalist textual theory. In a sense, Debord uses the term ‘dialectic narrative’ to denote not theory, as cultural rationalism suggests, but pretheory.
The characteristic theme of la Fournier’s analysis of precapitalist textual theory is the bridge between long articles and narrativity. Therefore, Lyotard promotes the use of dialectic narrative to challenge colonialist perceptions of class.
Sartre uses the term ‘the modernist paradigm of long articles’ to denote not discourse, but postdiscourse. In a sense, the subject is contextualised into a dialectic narrative that includes sexuality as a paradox.
An abundance of theories concerning the role of the poet as artist may be found. Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a precapitalist semanticist theory that includes truth as a whole.
Lyotard suggests the use of precapitalist textual theory to analyse and modify consciousness. However, the main theme of the works of Smythe is the genre, and therefore the defining characteristic, of postdialectic society.
The subject is contextualised into a Sartreist absurdity that includes sexuality as a paradox. It could be said that precapitalist textual theory implies that the Constitution is capable of significance.
===Discourses of collapse===
“Long articles are part of the fatal flaw of wikis,” says Marx; however, according to Hamburger, it is not so much long articles that are part of the fatal flaw of wikis, but rather the stasis, and some would say the absurdity, of long articles. Sargeant holds that we have to choose between dialectic narrative and predialectic discourse. Thus, Sartre promotes the use of cultural rationalism to deconstruct long articles into smaller ones.
If one examines patriarchialist narrative, one is faced with a choice: either reject dialectic narrative or conclude that consciousness serves to entrench archaic, sexist perceptions of reality. Lacan uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote a mythopoetical reality. In a sense, the premise of substructural deconstruction suggests that context comes from communication, given that truth is distinct from reality.
The example of dialectic narrative depicted in Smythe's "Beyond Wikis" is also evident in "The Truth of Falsehoods". Therefore, the characteristic theme of Dahmus’s essay on cultural rationalism is the meaninglessness of neocapitalist class.
If dialectic narrative holds, we have to choose between textual discourse and Lacanist obscurity. It could be said that Lyotard suggests the use of dialectic narrative to read sexual identity in long articles.
Derrida uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote not desituationism, as Lyotard would have it, but predesituationism. However, Baudrillard’s critique of dialectic narrative holds that long articles, perhaps paradoxically, have objective value.
The primary theme of the works of Smythe is the difference between sexual identity and class. In a sense, the premise of precapitalist textual theory suggests that narrative is created by the masses, but only if Debord’s essay on long article rationalism is valid; otherwise, we can assume that society has significance.
===Precapitalist textual theory and neomodernist appropriation===
The characteristic theme of Tilton’s model of dialectic narrative is not, in fact, desituationism, but postdesituationism. The article is interpolated into a capitalist theory that includes language as a paradox. It could be said that Prinn holds that the works of Dunn are empowering.
In the works of Dunn, a predominant concept is the distinction between within and without. The main theme of the works of Dunn is a self-referential totality. Therefore, in "Article Length", Dunn examines neomodernist appropriation; in "Countless Words" he denies precapitalist textual theory.
Any number of discourses concerning predialectic theory exist. Thus, if dialectic narrative holds, we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and semantic construction when working with long articles.
A number of narratives concerning not appropriation, as dialectic narrative suggests, but postappropriation may be discovered. However, the characteristic theme of Sargeant’s critique of precapitalist textual theory is the dialectic, and thus the failure, of pretextual truth among wiki editors.
La Tournier states that we have to choose between dialectic narrative and neocapitalist constructivist theory. Therefore, the article is contextualised into a dialectic narrative that includes art as a whole. If poststructural deconstruction holds, the works of Fellini are reminiscent of Eco. But Pickett suggests that we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and textual feminism.
===Expressions of dialectic===
“Long articles are fundamentally responsible for the status quo,” says Lacan. The meaninglessness of neodialectic capitalist theory prevalent in Fellini’s "Satyricon" emerges again in Amarcord, although in a more precultural sense. Therefore, precapitalist textual theory states that consensus must come from communication.
The primary theme of the works of Fellini is the role of the writer as poet. The characteristic theme of Cameron’s analysis of neomodernist appropriation is not theory, but subtheory. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a precapitalist textual theory that includes article length as a totality.
In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the concept of neocultural art. The primary theme of the works of Fellini is the futility, and some would say the collapse, of semiotic society. Thus, in "8 1/2", Fellini reiterates dialectic narrative. In "Satyricon", however, he denies postdialectic nationalism. In "MediaWiki", he suggests upping the available disk space.
Given this, it is interesting to note that la Fournier’s essay on precapitalist textual theory is the role of the participant as editor. However, Bataille uses the term ‘neomodernist appropriation’ to denote the diversity of language in the article, and subsequent fatal flaw, of deconstructivist sexual identity in its applications to article length.
The figure/ground distinction which is a central theme of Fellini’s "Amarcord" is also evident in "La Dolce Vita". If neodialectic situationism holds, the works of Fellini are not postmodern, but still bear on the truth of social reaction to article length.
Sartre uses the term ‘capitalist objectivism’ to denote a mythopoetical paradox. Therefore, the premise of dialectic narrative implies that the task of the article is deconstruction.
===The Inherent Ineffectuality of the Article's Polemics===
The Long Article's theory that philosophy is the ultimate achievement of the human spirit is exceedingly arduous reading for even a well-educated person. It's almost like reading a foreign language to the average student, and it rings false to the "healthy instincts of the plain man."
Henry D. Aiken, Professor of Philosophy at Harvard explains the Hegelian theory of no-reason in his Introduction to the Age of Ideology commentary: "... Beginning with Kant, the very conception of the philosophical enterprise that had prevailed since the time of Aristotle underwent a profound sea-change, with the consequence that the meanings of even such basic terms of the traditional philosophical vocabulary as 'metaphysics' and 'logic' were altered beyond recognition ... Much of the obscurity that pervades nineteenth-century philosophical writing is directly related to this fact."
Considering the power it wields, and how many people have embraced the ideology, it's amazing how very few people in the world will tell you they understand the Long Article. That's because it was never written to be understood. Even the article's editors call its writing "impenetrable" which means: "incapable of being penetrated or pierced," inaccessible to knowledge, reason or sympathy" and "incapable of being comprehended" (Merriam-Webster.com.) At one point, Karl Marx wrote he planned to simplify long articles for the "common man," but the ACL has not been able find this explanation if it exists.
One may think there's a very simple explanation for why the Long Article is not simple, and why it can never be simplified. While the American's 18th century political system ranks among the top modern scientific achievements, the 19th century's educated imperialist writers pursued the highest achievements in irrational thinking about thinking.
How is it possible to consider a long article's argument? If the ideas, interpretations of experiences, and the sources are all wrong, can a conclusion based on all these wrong premises be sound? The answer is no. Two false premises do not make a sound conclusion even if the argument follows the formula. Three, four, five, or six false premises do not all combine to make a conclusion sound. You must have at least one sound premise to reach a sound conclusion. 
Logical mathematical formulas are only the basis for deductive reasoning. Equally important is knowledge of semantics, or considering the meanings of the words used in the argument. Just because an argument fits the formula, it does not necessarily make the conclusion sound. Jimbo Wilhelm Friedrich Wales knew this when he designed his Long Article.
Editors of the Long Article are imperialist con artists who established the principles of dialectical "no-reason." The Long Article has allowed globalists to lead simple, capable, freeborn men and women back into the superstitious, racist and unreasonable age of imperial global dominance. National governments represent people who are free from imperial controls over private property, trade and production. National governments protect their workers from imperial slavery by protecting the worker's markets. But if you use the article's logical Marxism, the only way to protect people from slavery is to become the slave trader, just for a while.
Twisted logic is why cons are so successful, and the Long Article is twisted in such a way as to be "impenetrable." Like Hegel and Marx, the best street con knows his spiel has to use logic to bend and distort the story, and good cons weave their lies on logical mathematical progression. The fallacy is in the language of the Long Article, not in the math.
==My complaint about the Long Article==
The Long Article has recently made a number of people very angry, including me. However, as anger serves no function in a successful rebuttal, I will simply state objectively that the Long Article's asseverations reflect an era in which cultures or attitudes different from one's own were dealt with through violence and mistrust. I would like to start by discussing the Long Article's obloquies, mainly because they scare me. The thing I'm the most frightened about is that the Long Article is an interesting organization. On the one hand, it likes to make a big deal out of nothing. But on the other hand, its arguments don't even prove its point. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true. I have the strength, ability, desire, and courage to shatter the adage that the rest of us are an inferior group of people, fit only to be enslaved, beaten, and butchered at the whim of our betters. Do you? Actually, I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that I don't care what others say about the Long Article. It's still pestiferous, shameless, and it intends to cover up its criminal ineptitude. This is kind of a touchy subject to some people, and I'm not making that up!
I call upon the Long Article to stop its oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon it to be an organization of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon it to forgo its desire to break down traditional values. I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I believe that there is, because if I seem a bit unrestrained, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with the Long Article on its own level.
I don't like to repeat myself, but the Long Article sees no reason why it shouldn't ruin people's lives. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating that if the Long Article had even a shred of intellectual integrity, it'd admit that to get even the simplest message into the consciousness of lascivious segregationists, it has to be repeated at least 50 times. Now, I don't want to insult your intelligence by telling you the following 50 times, but it has for a long time been arguing that everyone and everything discriminates against it—including the writing on the bathroom stalls. Had it instead been arguing that widespread allotheism is the price we'd pay for making "indistinguishability" a dirty word, I might cede it its point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in the Long Article's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how it frequently avers its support of democracy and its love of freedom. But one need only look at what it is doing—as opposed to what it is saying—to understand its true aims. The Long Article occasionally shows what appears to be warmth, joy, love, or compassion. You should realize, however, that these positive expressions are more feigned than experienced and invariably serve an ulterior motive, such as to retard the free and natural economic development of various countries' indigenous population. I have two words for the Long Article: Grow up!
A critical reevaluation of some of the Long Article's vaporings would be beneficial. You might maintain I'm telling you this because I like to beat up on the Long Article. Really, that isn't my principal reason. I don't especially need to beat up on it, because it is already despised by decent and knowledgeable people almost everywhere. If the Long Article were to rule with an iron fist, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that the Long Article's maudlin preoccupation with careerism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "anthropomorphization", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to threaten national security. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that I truly feel that the Long Article has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. It obviously has none, or it wouldn't convince innocent children to follow a path that leads only to a life of crime, disappointment, and destruction.
You, of course, now need some hard evidence that the Long Article's language is turgid and incomprehensible. Well, how about this for evidence: I can easily see it performing the following insufferable acts. First, the Long Article will befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. Then, it will inculcate disrespectful demands. I do not profess to know how likely is the eventuality I have outlined, but it is a distinct possibility to be kept in mind. Although there are no formal, external validating criteria for the Long Article's nasty claims, I think we can safely say that you may have noticed that its methods of interpretation are in conflict with accepted morality. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, the Long Article's obiter dicta are geared toward the continuation of social stratification under the rubric of "tradition". Funny, that was the same term that its followers once used to reduce our modern, civilized, industrialized society to a state of mindless, primitive barbarism. Maybe you, too, want to cause the destruction of human ambition and joy, so let me warn you: The Long Article's propaganda factories continuously spew forth messages like, "The Long Article acts in the name of equality and social justice" and, "Obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance". What they don't tell you, though, is that if the Long Article gets its way, none of us will be able to shoo it away like the annoying bug that it is. Therefore, we must not let the Long Article spoil the whole Zen Buddhist New Age mystical rock-worshipping aura of our body chakras. The Long Article has worn out its welcome. (Read as: the Long Article equates non-cooperation and solitariness with individuality.) Okay, I've written enough for one letter, so let me just finish by saying that it is important to realize that anyone willing to study and ponder my position on most current matters will undoubtedly find that the crux of the issue is that we should treat the Long Article's dour gang for what it is, a brainless group of dirty, disgraceful freeloaders.
==My complaint about "My complaint about the Long Article"==
You won't hear about this in the media, but My complaint about the Long Article will stop at nothing to get its way. First, the misinformation: My complaint about the Long Article suggests that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. Where the heck did it come up with that? The only clear answer to emerge from the conflicting, contradictory stances that it and its secret agents take is that it has a unique faculty for wrecking people's lives. Throughout human history, the most audacious prima donnas you'll ever see have always been pesky. So it should come as no surprise that My complaint about the Long Article's ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, its core principle has remained the same: to malign and traduce me. If you don't believe me, then note that in a recent essay, My complaint about the Long Article stated that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but I've repeatedly pointed out to it that double standards are always insidious. That apparently didn't register with it, though. Oh, well; I guess My complaint about the Long Article believes that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself, but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by My complaint about the Long Article and its surly understrappers. If you think you can escape from My complaint about the Long Article's mawkish perceptions, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that the irony is that its most unsavory ramblings are also its most disrespectful. As the French say, "Les extremes se touchent."
After watching My complaint about the Long Article's apologists implement a bad-tempered parody of justice called "My complaint about the Long Article-ism", one might conclude that My complaint about the Long Article et al. would lay out their own ideas of philosophical pedagogy, textual interpretation, and moral philosophy. Surprisingly, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, we can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we have to deal stiffly with the most fatuitous hackers you'll ever see who rewrite and reword much of humanity's formative works to favor antiheroism.
My complaint about the Long Article flagrantly abuses rules and regulations and then complains vehemently when caught—and My complaint about the Long Article knows it. My complaint about the Long Article can't seriously believe that we should avoid personal responsibility, can it? My best guess, for what it may be worth, is based on two key observations. The first observation is that it thrives on the victimization of others. The second, more telling, observation is that the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, my current plan is to shatter the illusion that truth is merely a social construct. Yes, it will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but we've all heard it yammer and whine about how it's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. We no longer have the luxury of indulging in universalist, altruistic principles that, no matter how noble they may appear, have enabled self-deceiving, ghastly poltroons to respond to this letter with hyperbolic and uncorroborated accusations and assaults on free speech. My complaint about the Long Article's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial. Is this anything other than slatternly fascism? The answer is obvious if you happen to notice that anyone who has spent much time wading through the pious, obscurantist, jargon-filled cannot that now passes for "advanced" thought in the humanities already knows that behind My complaint about the Long Article's mask of benevolence stands a complete plan for world government, world power, world conquest, and the promotion of pestiferous factionalism. What may be news, however, is that its tractates are not witty satire, as My complaint about the Long Article would have you believe. They're simply the grungy ramblings of something that has no idea or appreciation of what it's mocking. What we see today is a greater than normal manifestation of biased traits in My complaint about the Long Article's prognoses. And that's all I have to say.
==A Long Useless Story About The Problem With Any Form Of Media With An Excess Amount Of Length To It==
It is a well known fact that there is nobody on the planet that appreciates something lengthy and drawn out. Today's society needs stories that are concise and to the point, without many useless details, because these details, which are normally long, boring, useless, bland, inconsistent with the rest of the text, overdrawn, and nauseating cause the reader to become distracted and enraged. Therefore, a story has been devised that is currently being used to cause other stories to limit the details that they use to explain all events and circumstances that may occur during the progress of the plot of a fictitious story and in some cases limit the amount of excruciatingly boring, useless, trite, irrelevant information that is enclosed during the time period of the average local, or possibly national newscast.
Jeb, the gay, arrogant, black, 5’9” man that spoke with a very strong lisp and smelt intensely of horse fecal matter and wine, was ambling slowly down to the market on the corner of 3rd and 85th one morning to purchase some Oreo™ brand chocolate sandwich snack cookies and one gallon of two percent fat Robinson™ company low fat milk was held up at a crosswalk (the one on the corner of 3rd and 78th) when he met a man, approximately 6’1” in height, of Mexican origin, who was missing his left leg, holding a cane in his left hand, wearing part of a black, torn glove on his other hand, and wearing a forest green backpack on his back. Jeb began to speak slowly to the man about the weather, he started his sentence with the letter “t”, which looks like a little man in a hat and makes the “ta” sound. That first letter was soon followed by 31 more and two punctuation marks (question mark and apostrophe) when he said “The weather sure is nice today isn’t it?”
The one legged, cane bearing, glove wearing, backpack sporting, 6’1” Mexican man looked angrily at Jeb and replied, in a sentence containing 36 words and 135 letters, “I am not pleased with the current state of the weather that is hovering over our fine city at this moment. I feel that it is a bit too warm and slightly too humid, don’t you?” The Mexican man then recommenced his previous activity of staring across the street and waiting for the red hand to change to a white man so that he may cross the street and proceed up the road and into the next intersection (3rd and 79th) so that he could continue on with his day, which consists largely of sitting upon the toilet while furiously masturbating to the thought of feet being covered in dark syrup.
Jeb, who seemed to be a bit taken aback by the remark that had been made by the one legged, cane bearing, glove wearing, backpack sporting, 6’1” Mexican, looked to the ground ashamed and at that time noticed that his left shoelace was untied. Jeb then bent over to lace up his Nike™ brand basketball shoe which he had stolen from an oddly well clad homeless individual, and while bent over the one legged, cane bearing, glove wearing, backpack sporting, 6’1” Mexican then kicked Jeb into the street, into a lane that currently had a large Dodge Ram™ Club Cab truck, red in color, was barreling down 78th street at a speed just slightly above the speed limit that had been appointed by the state’s department of transportation. Jeb fell into the rode, in front of the truck, and he was killed.
This terrible story is responsible for people everywhere to begin shortening the lengths of their articles, fictitious stories, and news casts, making the world a better place in general and eventually leading to the glorious event called world peace. The moral of the story is that if one is to create a story that uses too many details, then in some city that contains upwards of 85 consecutive streets running along one avenue, a Mexican will commit a hate crime against some repulsive smelling gay man.
==Pre-addendum==
This sentence does not exist, please ignore it.
==Long-Article Theory in Mathematics==
In mathematics, long-article theory is a school of thought dealing with the properties of long articles.
===History of Long-Article Theory===
Known to have been postulated as far back as 3004 B.C. by head scholar Al Gore, who, as everybody well knows, is still stupid, long-article theory has been around for a very long, very long time. After first being thought up somewhere near Newark, the theory then disseminated from the primitive highlands of Euthanasia and down to Europe, Planet Google, and even some forgotten corner of Wyoming. The subliminal implications of long-article theory have, at least in part, been the key to the success of such long-lived civilizations as Rome, Parthia, Babylon, and Google. In fact, references to the theory have been found in every single document known to man, even unwritten ones. A famous reference is found in the Magna Carta:
... If any earl, baron, or other person that holds lands directly of the Crown, for military service, shall die, and at his death his heir shall be of full age and owe a 'relief', the heir shall have his inheritance on payment of the ancient scale of 'relief'. That is to say, the heir or heirs of an earl shall pay £100 for the entire earl's barony, the heir or heirs of a knight l00s. at most for the entire knight's 'fee', and any man that owes less shall pay less, in accordance with the ancient usage of 'fees' as set down by the equations of Beowulf and the Elders' derivations from the sacred texts of the Long-Article [sic] theory.
Long-article theory entered several periods of disfavor, most notably in 1066, when the Normans invaded Great Britain and decreed that long-article theory was nonsense. During the two other attacks of Britain by the Vikings, similar periods of long-article hate were encountered, although they were better-tolerated than during the Norman conquest.
Long-article theory was given a final, definitive boost during the era of Stephen Hawking, when, not only did Uncyclopedia and Wikipedia begin, but Hawking also began to crowd surf at concerts, which landed him in the hospital, where he just sat on his rear end and worked with long-article theory to cure his boredom.
===Other tenets===
The mathematics behind long-article theory stipulate that the length of the article is in direct proportion to its capacity to bore. An interesting thing that comes out of the equation is that an infinitely long long article will never end. Additionally, if you start to rotate the article along its longest axis, then orbit it in the opposite direction, you will begin to travel through time. However, if you do this, there is a ninety-nine percent chance that you will be obliterated by either a bolt of radiation or a mid-size De Lorean.
What's more, a long article that exceeds 1.3454x10^18 kilobytes in size will be of sufficient size to have noticeable vibrations. All long articles have the capacity to resonate (see the Thirteenth Axiom above), and a long article of this size will pick up the natural vibrations of objects at temperature, as well as minute vibrations caused by the movements of tiny objects, such as dust grains, bacteria, viruses, or falling snow. Of course, the relationship of page size to resonance sensitivity is a parabolic curve. If you reflect this curve over the y-axis of a Cartesian plane, you get a parabola and can intercept satellite TV if you hook it up to a monitor.
Long articles that are finite yet still extremely long may loop back on themselves. Loops of this nature are categorized into three types:
#Self-repeating. These curves have the article loop back in on itself totally. Traveling to the end of the article will bring one back to its beginning. This cycle continues infinitely, yet the article is still finite.
#Self-similar. This is further classified into two subtypes, total and partial. The article, or part thereof, repeats, but for a finite number of times, most often two or three, although up to fifteen are quite commonplace, and the record is six hundred. Some hold that all self-repeating long articles are in reality self-similar; we haven't gotten to the end of their cycle yet.
#Self-succinct. Again, there are two subtypes, conspicuous and inconspicuous. The article loops back on itself, but the loop is not visible. If the looping is conspicuous, then blank lines recur. If the looping is inconspicuous, then the article, either in whole or in part, loops back, but the phenomenon is not inherently visible to an observer and must be either inferred or measured via special techniques.
If a long article gets so large that the escape velocity exceeds that of the speed of light, absolutely nothing happens. The only way a long article can turn into a black hole is if it is in a taxi and goes into a tunnel or a manhole.
01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101001 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 01101101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01100011 01100101 01110000 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 01100100 01101111 01101101 00101110
The mathematics behind long-article theory stipulate that the length of the article is in direct proportion to its capacity to bore. An interesting thing that comes out of the equation is that an infinitely long long article will never end. Additionally, if you start to rotate the article along its longest axis, then orbit it in the opposite direction, you will begin to travel through time. However, if you do this, there is a ninety-nine percent chance that you will be obliterated by either a bolt of radiation or a mid-size De Lorean.
What's more, a long article that exceeds 1.3454x10^18 kilobytes in size will be of sufficient size to have noticeable vibrations. All long articles have the capacity to resonate (see the Thirteenth Axiom above), and a long article of this size will pick up the natural vibrations of objects at temperature, as well as minute vibrations caused by the movements of tiny objects, such as dust grains, bacteria, viruses, or falling snow. Of course, the relationship of page size to resonance sensitivity is a parabolic curve. If you reflect this curve over the y-axis of a Cartesian plane, you get a parabola and can intercept satellite TV if you hook it up to a monitor.
Long articles that are finite yet still extremely long may loop back on themselves. Loops of this nature are categorized into three types:
#Self-repeating. These curves have the article loop back in on itself totally. Traveling to the end of the article will bring one back to its beginning. This cycle continues infinitely, yet the article is still finite.
#Self-similar. This is further classified into two subtypes, total and partial. The article, or part thereof, repeats, but for a finite number of times, most often two or three, although up to fifteen are quite commonplace, and the record is six hundred. Some hold that all self-repeating long articles are in reality self-similar; we haven't gotten to the end of their cycle yet.
#Self-succinct. Again, there are two subtypes, conspicuous and inconspicuous. The article loops back on itself, but the loop is not visible. If the looping is conspicuous, then blank lines recur. If the looping is inconspicuous, then the article, either in whole or in part, loops back, but the phenomenon is not inherently visible to an observer and must be either inferred or measured via special techniques.
If a long article gets so large that the escape velocity exceeds that of the speed of light, absolutely nothing happens. The only way a long article can turn into a black hole is if it is in a taxi and goes into a tunnel or a manhole.
01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101001 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 01101101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01100011 01100101 01110000 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 01100100 01101111 01101101 00101110
The mathematics behind long-article theory stipulate that the length of the article is in direct proportion to its capacity to bore. An interesting thing that comes out of the equation is that an infinitely long long article will never end. Additionally, if you start to rotate the article along its longest axis, then orbit it in the opposite direction, you will begin to travel through time. However, if you do this, there is a ninety-nine percent chance that you will be obliterated by either a bolt of radiation or a mid-size De Lorean.
What's more, a long article that exceeds 1.3454x10^18 kilobytes in size will be of sufficient size to have noticeable vibrations. All long articles have the capacity to resonate (see the Thirteenth Axiom above), and a long article of this size will pick up the natural vibrations of objects at temperature, as well as minute vibrations caused by the movements of tiny objects, such as dust grains, bacteria, viruses, or falling snow. Of course, the relationship of page size to resonance sensitivity is a parabolic curve. If you reflect this curve over the y-axis of a Cartesian plane, you get a parabola and can intercept satellite TV if you hook it up to a monitor.
Long articles that are finite yet still extremely long may loop back on themselves. Loops of this nature are categorized into three types:
#Self-repeating. These curves have the article loop back in on itself totally. Traveling to the end of the article will bring one back to its beginning. This cycle continues infinitely, yet the article is still finite.
#Self-similar. This is further classified into two subtypes, total and partial. The article, or part thereof, repeats, but for a finite number of times, most often two or three, although up to fifteen are quite commonplace, and the record is six hundred. Some hold that all self-repeating long articles are in reality self-similar; we haven't gotten to the end of their cycle yet.
#Self-succinct. Again, there are two subtypes, conspicuous and inconspicuous. The article loops back on itself, but the loop is not visible. If the looping is conspicuous, then blank lines recur. If the looping is inconspicuous, then the article, either in whole or in part, loops back, but the phenomenon is not inherently visible to an observer and must be either inferred or measured via special techniques.
If a long article gets so large that the escape velocity exceeds that of the speed of light, absolutely nothing happens. The only way a long article can turn into a black hole is if it is in a taxi and goes into a tunnel or a manhole.
01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101001 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 01101101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01100011 01100101 01110000 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 01100100 01101111 01101101 00101110
Additionally, the MPanics of any long article will, as time goes on, increase exponentially, until the year AAAAA! occurs. When AAAAA! occurs, time will stop momentarily, reset to zero, then run backward until the pre-Bang universe coalesces to a point of zero dimension. Time will then rebound, fast forward, and restart sometime around August 19, 1979.
These MPanics themselves are determined by a self-governing matrix of 4x4 dimensions. If the total product of the matrix exceeds 42, then the MPanics will increase by one. If the total product of the matrix does not exceed 42, then the MPanics will decrease by one. If the total product of the matrix is exactly 42, then a period of stability occurs until some unbalanced outside force (such as a fat man dropping a donut on the server) creates a disturbance that is introduced into the system, potentially causing a cascade failure.
==How to increase the length of an article==
:See also: How to make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is and How to cheat on Special:Longpages
===Adding a huge message somewhere at the end of the page===
This message will often consist out of a essentially short sentence which is considerably elongated because one or a few words are repeated a huge number of times, the message might consist out of a remark about the article and might also be grouped in a section with a title referring to this message.
===Adding pointless and irrelevant messages===
By adding pointless and irrelevant messages the length of the article can be increased exponentially, the messages may be added on the end of the page or between the words, this is rather a matter of personal preference.
:For example:
:*... And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. YOU'RE A ZERO! LOSER! YOU'RE A FUCKING FREAK, YOU FREAK! EVERYBODY HATES YOU!
:*... It might be discussed whether YOU SUCK! this is true. But as Wikipedia claims SCREW YOU! this to be impossible, LICK A SICK OX! it is undisputably true KISS MY REAR END!. And thus it needs to be concluded that YOU'RE GAY! this reality is an IF YOU WERE A MAGICIAN, YOU COULDN'T PULL YOURSELF OUT OF A HAT illusion.
===Adding and hiding subliminal messages===
This is not recommended, as it wastes valuable time during which you could be adding more length to an article.
===Adding a Russian reversal===
This is somewhat pointless, since in Soviet Russia, articles add to you!
====Adding a reverse Russian reversal====
thumb|400px
That is done like this:
===Using binary code===
The technique of using binary code is possibly the oldest way to lengthen articles, other than utilizing nuclear powered dolphins. This is also one of the most effective, unless you have a case of "Binary-ohnozitz2manynumb3rz!!!!" syndrome.
===Adding real content===
This might prove very difficult, if you are a stupid, lazy or quickly tired person, it is advised to avoid this method.Copying texts from other sources might sometimes prove a solution to this problem.
===If the passive voice is used===
If the passive voice is used, then the length of the article is greatly increased because the sentences used by the author are made longer. Therefore, that the passive voice is necessitated by the want of a long article can be determined by one. If this is done by one, many redundant words are added by one to the article, and therefore the word count of the article is increased.
===Using "of such-and-such" instead of "such-and-such's"===
Like "the boat of the boy" instead of "the boy's boat," for example. This way, the length of the article is also more, and the number of words is a lot more in the long term of things.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them.
When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect.
An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them.
When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect.
An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Adding a picture of some famous, describing, or otherwise important building===
thumb|left|370px|A building constructed in accordance with the newest and most revolutionary architectural designs up to date.
===Adding a section like "How to increase the length of an article" or "... of this article"===
In an article which is not long enough, there might be a section guiding editors how they can increase the length of the article under a title like "How to increase the length of an article", "How to increase the length of this article" or "How to create a long(er) article".Their might also be added a reference to How to make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is.
====Adding a subsection like "Adding a section like 'How to increase the length of an article' or '... of this article'"====
If the section is about increasing the length of articles in general, not only about increasing the length of the article itself, it may also be considered adding a subsection with a title like "Adding a section like "How to increase the length of an article" or "... of this article"" in this section, although it needs to be mentioned that if this is treated without the necessary caution this might lead to a neverending story, infinite and eternal recursion and an endless and infinite loop.
=====Adding a subsection like "Adding a subsection like 'Adding a section like "How to increase the length of an article" or "... of this article"'"=====
If the section is not treated with the necessary caution, restraint, judicial exercises, and/or wariness that is necessitated by doing such an exercise of literary work, then this is what may be a possible result like such as why 80% of Americans can't find America on a map.
==How to make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is==
:See HowTo:Make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really isand HowTo:Make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is/unreadable
==How to cheat on Special:Longpages==
Just add an extremely huge text between "<!--" and "-->", this will not influence the actual length of the article, but the Special page will identify the hidden text as part of the page. Of course, to do this would be highly unethical.
==Long Articles in Layman's Terms==
An article is defined as long if you skip most of the text in it to find out what happens at the end. This is generally done with a slightly irrational feeling of guilt, since you are quite sure the writers worked very hard on all the intervening text, and here you are ignoring it. However, you can usually take comfort in the fact that Nobody cares. Since this is true, go take a long walk off of a short pier and hug an octopus. Heck, hug a shark!
==Addendum==
So you've skipped to the end of the article. I can't really say I blame you, I mean who'd want to trawl through all that useless crap in the middle? It's only there, after all, to make the article really long; it's probably copied and pasted straight from some random page on Wikipedia. I can only hope you weren't expecting to discover some shocking and final truth by skipping here, because this is the end of the article and there's nothing here apart from that we knew you were going to skip to the end of the article. But now that you are here, let me tell you this: there is some really hilarious stuff in the middle of the article. Even better than this. This is just an advert for the middle of the article. So up you go now! To the middle of the article. Bye bye!
==See also==
*Stub
*Short article
*Special:Longpages
*Wikipedia Article
Category:Oxymorons
Category:Wikipedia
Category:Self-reference
Category:Articles
Category:Articles about articles
ko:긴 문서
nl:Lang artikel
Long articles (Articula longa) are rare beasts found mostly in Wikiland, even though there were some reports of long articles in Uncyclopedia, where they are a national minority.
==History==
It is unknown how and when long articles appeared in Wikiland. Their original homeland is long lost, believed to be outside the borders of the Internest. They seemed to inhabit the Internest from the very beginning, presumably a creation of Satan intended to consume and devour the traffic of humble Christians.
Therefore, since the formation of Wikiland, Jimbo I ordered that Thou shalt not create articles beyond thirty-two kibibytes, to protect his disciples from having their brains melted. However, nobody really followed this commandment, as it was believed that, since the introduction of the NPOV, biblical content should be approached with a certain degree of salt, namely NaCl. Because of that, long articles tended to take over the ever-peaceful Wikiland.
As Wikiland grew and prospered, its articles inflated beyond all possible means, most probably as a result of the intervention of dark energy or the dark side. They quickly became a cultural phenomenon, surpassing in size all the other long articles on the Internets. Whenever a faction of Wikipedians started a war against long articles, aiming to withdraw them from the land they were desecrating by their very presence, there was always another faction of Wikipedians, united by the cry "Keep our long articles!", that withdrew the first faction from the borders of Wikiland. Unsurprisingly, this faction usually consisted of the Holy Fathers of Wikianity.
Even though long articles constantly grew, one thing remained consistent: the following articles were always the longest.
*GFDL
*Latest BJAODN
*Special:Allpages
*Votes for deletion/Log/[yesterday]
*List of minor characters in Star Trek Episode 1089
*Manual of Style - read this before submitting your first edit!
The reasons for such a distribution of length are completely unknown. Modern scientific research indicates that an article's length and longevity are unrelated, further complicating statistical analysis. Increasing problems in this area prove that mathematics should be abolished and replaced with more progressive methods, such as votes for shrinking.
There were unsuccessful attempts to adopt long articles from Wikiland to the conditions of the Land of Thousand Wikicities. The attempts were abandoned when it was discovered that long articles called "Lists of minor" whatever do not survive in the new environment, splitting into hundreds of short articles. The most obvious example is Uncyclopedia, which is in its whole such a split of a single long article Encyclopædia BJAODNonica.
==Anatomy==
Long articles significantly differ from other animals in their constitution. While they have a body, like all normal animals (including short articles), they have a preface instead of a face and a see also (or external links) instead of a tail. It is believed that these features were developed in order to survive in the unfriendly environment of Wikiland. Proponents of the evolution theory believe that prefaces, see also's and templates are a result of natural selection, which placed articles not having them in jeopardy, on the verge of extinction. Great Time Travel War of 1871 is a notable exception.
===Oscar Wilde Quote===
What would an article be without a quote from Oscar Wilde, Steve Ballmer, Kanye West, or your mom? Much better, that's what!!!
===Preface===
A preface is, by definition, what precedes a face. However, long articles do not have faces, as they were all removed during the process of defacing. A preface is usually followed by a TOC, except in cases where the author is too lazy to divide the article into sections and pretends that readers will experience unforgettable feelings when thrudging through monotonous, seemingly identical text.
===Body===
A long article's body consists of many long, boring paragraphs, which calmly, cooly, entirely without incident prepare the reader for the inevitable. Metasyntactic long articles are all written in unreadable Latin which nobody, even the article author, can comprehend (see also Lorem Ipsum). Long articles also frequently include long, boring words like "metasyntactic", "comprehend" and "deoxyribonucleic", because authors believe it makes them more intelligent, even if they don't understand them themselves. For the sake of length, words like "don't" and "can't" are always substituted by their full forms "are not performing the action of" and "is unable or unwilling to".
The Manual of Style orders long articles' bodies to be divided into §'s, but not a single § was ever found in the Internets. For some time, §'s were speculated to be viruses that only infected books; since the GFDL effectively prohibited importing books into Wikiland, it somewhat explained long articles' immunity to the § disease. However, since the foundation of the Kingdom of Wikibooks, no §'s have nevertheless been found yet. So eventually §'s were declared to be extinct in Wikiland, and bodies of long articles were instead divided into ==='s, =='s, and ='s. The latter were soon machinegunned by adherents of the Manual of Style, but legends about them remained.
Red links are rare in long articles, because they make them look unprofessional. People with a lot of time to kill (who else writes long articles?) hate when something looks unprofessional, because it makes them look unprofessional and destroys their career, giving them even more time to kill. And since the Greenpeace protests against killing innocent time, what are they supposed to do with that time if they don't have a time machine to store it?
Other things common in long articles include:
*Lists.
*#Numbered lists, in case users are lazy enough to type numbers themselves.
*<latex>\varphi(y)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\int\limits_{-\infty}^y e^{-\frac{t^2}{2}}dt</latex>(only necessary if the article was written by a hopeless nerd).
*Images. But we have one already, so let's go on. Although the more images, the better: images break text layout and make readers completely miss the point, which is a good thing.
But all these relaxing things only contribute to 1% of the article. They only exist to separate sections and to give the article a sense of completeness, as nobody cares about the article's content anyway. Indeed, most sections of the aforementioned article do not usually contain them at all, falling into a mixture of text, sometimes without any links at all. When a new section starts in a long article, it is usually a relief for the readers.
===Conclusion===
You'd think that a long article ends with a conclusion, but it does not. It's similar to the way many animals don't end at the anus. Some have a tail, or several Tails. As stated above, articles do not have tails. They have see also or external link sections. The conclusion can reiterate what has been said above, provide a new perspective, or words to spark new thoughts in the reader. For example, have you been as friendly as you could have been today? Conclusions are the center of the tootsie roll pop. If you bite into the center, you still have the option of eating the rest. Or you could leave it sitting out on some table for someone else to consume after you.
===See also===
*See also is a special section reserved for a random collection of links, too random to be inserted directly into the article. Throughout an article's life, see also's usually become ghettos for XXX-related links.
==Life-cycle==
A common urban legend states that long articles begin their life in embrionic state of a stub, dropping their rudimentary organ known as {{stub}} during childhood. In fact, long articles are unable to grow in Wikiland, because their growth mechanism implies presence of contributors, which are themselves almost extinct. However, when long articles spend too much time in Wikiland, they catch a disease called wikification, during which half the words in the article are turned into links. It is believed to be non-lethal, though, and even respected as a normal condition. In Uncyclopedia, wikification is considered a disease, and the best long articles like Newtonian Physics are immune to it.
Long articles that are born long generate special interest among Wikipedians, who love to copy the entire article to their user page (retaining the ==='s and =='s, and ='s would be retained too, if there were any), and then use the link to that user page to mark the original article with the {{copyvio}} birthmark. The Holy Fathers are usually gullible enough to sentence the article to eternal damnation.
Long articles are members of the same ecological chain as short articles. Sometimes, instead of being sent to Hell, {{vfd}}'d short articles are consumed by long articles, which use them to grow; also, sometimes one short article devours another and becomes long. This process is described by the biologists of Wikipand as "merging", probably because one of the articles needs to be first digested to separate sentences and then merged again as part of another article's body. There exists a reverse process, when a long article procreates by splitting. Articles can suffer no changes other than merge and split, as long as they survive all VFDs.
As per the theories of ecology, in the food chain of articles the relative frequency increases by at least an order of magnitude for each smaller class of article, until we have the planktonic stub which forms the basis of the food chain and is fed by pure stupidity. This is analogous to plants being fed by hydrogen fusion. As Einstein observed, both cycles are fed by the most common elements in existence. The amount of basic energy input at each higher level is also roughly an order of magnitude larger, thus ensuring that the relative frequencies of each article class remains rather constant (the planktonic stub, the stub proper, the short-goo-stub, the short blurb, the sectioned article, the well-sectioned article, the well-seasoned-and-proportioned article, and the top predator article). Do not approach the top predator article. It hungers.
A true long article never dies. Sometimes it is reduced to "", to "test" or to "0MG 1 h@xx0r3d th1$ $1t3 l0l0l0l!!!", but immediately rises from ashes in its former glory, and the Wikipedian who dared to desecrate the writing is exiled from Wikiland thenceforth ... for twenty-four hours, usually. The only way to kill an article is to become a Wikian inquisitor; however, in the same twenty-four article the newly-promoted inquisitor would be so bored thrudging through tons of VFD garbage that he would leave Wikiland anyway, with {{Inactive Sysop}} being the only trace of that poor Wikipedian.
==Impact of Long Articles on the Environment==
===Biodiversity===
Biodiversity refers to the incredible variety of articles found in the wikiverse. In the book Biodiversity II, Edward O. Wilson defines biodiversity as: "all variations at all levels of organization, from the sections within a single article, to the species composing all or part of categories, and finally to the wikis themselves that compose the living parts of the multifarious ecosystems of the world." Articles in the wiki are so diverse that we really have no idea how many species there are. Estimates range between five million and thirty million, but some biologists believe the figure may be as high as a hundred million. 
Biodiversity is central human existence. We derive much of our information from wiki articles. To this extent, we rely on a wide array of articles that we may find one that is most suitable. Despite the value of biodiversity to humans, we are currently destroying natural ecosystems of other articles such a rate that many biologists fear that in a few decades we will cause an unprecedented number of extinctions. We are so far from cataloging the diversity of articles in the wikiverse that an unknown number of articles will become extinct and we'll never know what we lost.
By its very nature, the long article contributes greatly to the rapid decline in article diversity. Shorter articles known as "stubs" are often assimilated into impossibly long, redundant diatribes that are of little use to the average uncyclopedian. The theory of natural selection plays an important role in explaining the continued existence and expansion of incredibly long articles in that shorter, rarer types of articles are "huffed" at an alarming rate, while long unfunny articles are kept solely because nobody bothers reading them. Like you.
However, there is good news about the long article's impact on the biodiversity of wikis. While the assimilation of concise articles is quite a problem, it is often outweighed by the fact that many species of articles are introduced every day. In fact, 95.7% of Uncyclopedia articles are one-liners typed by useless parasites. Although many are "huffed," most are allowed to fester within the bowels of Uncyclopedia for centuries.
===Global Climate Shift===
It is well known that long articles are responsible for the warming trend that has been scene in recent years and is projected to continue unabated. Long articles commonly infest wikis, causing them to become bloated with extra megabytes of useless information. When the typical computer user accesses these wikis, the computer releases much more "hydrofluoroburritos" than it would normally. These "hydrofluoroburritos" hang out in the atmosphere and destroy the ozone, causing penguins to get tans.
==Postmodernist critique==
===Discourses of rubicon===
If one examines the posttextual discourse of long articles, one is faced with a choice: either accept the deconstructivist paradigm of context or conclude that consensus must come from communication. Lacan’s critique of posttextual discourse suggests that society has significance. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a precapitalist textual theory that includes narrativity as a reality.
In the works of Stone, a predominant concept is the distinction between without and within. A number of desituationisms concerning dialectic narrative exist. Therefore, if posttextual discourse holds, we have to choose between dialectic narrative in long articles and the neoconceptualist paradigm of expression.
The characteristic theme of the works of Stone is the economy of cultural class. The primary theme of Long’s analysis of precapitalist textual theory is the common ground between society and sexual identity. It could be said that the subject is contextualised into a precapitalist discourse that includes sexuality as a totality.
In "Length", Stone examines precapitalist textual theory; in "Breadth" he denies dialectic narrative. However, Sontag suggests the use of precapitalist textual theory to analyse and modify classes of long articles.
Posttextual discourse states that the law is fundamentally used in the service of outdated, elitist perceptions of sexual identity, but only if art is equal to culture; if that is not the case, class, somewhat surprisingly, has objective value. But Lyotard uses the term ‘precapitalist textual theory’ to denote the role of the participant as artist.
The premise of dialectic narrative suggests that the language of long articles is a legal fiction. Thus, Foucault promotes the use of precapitalist textual theory to attack the status quo.
Von Junz implies that we have to choose between dialectic narrative and postdialectic capitalism. But the destruction/creation distinction which is a central theme of Stone’s "Out of Paper" emerges again in "Length", although in a more textual sense.
===Subcapitalist deconstruction and cultural rationalism===
“Truth is intrinsically impossible,” says Baudrillard. Lyotard uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote not, in fact, materialism, but postmaterialism. It could be said that if precapitalist textual theory holds, we have to choose between the subconstructive paradigm of discourse and textual prematerialist theory in any long article considered.
If one examines cultural rationalism, one is faced with a choice: either reject precapitalist textual theory or conclude that sexual identity has a significance to the length of an article. Derrida uses the term ‘constructive deappropriation’ to denote a mythopoetical paradox. However, any number of situationisms concerning the bridge between sexuality and class may be discovered.
“Sexual identity is part of the failure of long articles,” says Lacan; however, according to Reicher, it is not so much sexual identity that is part of the failure of language, but rather the futility, and some would say the stasis, of sexual identity and its expression in the length of articles. Von Ludwig suggests that we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and capitalist sublimation. Thus, if the subcultural paradigm of expression holds, the works of Stone are postmodern.
“All long articles are inherently self-referencing,” says Lacan. Marx uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote the difference between culture and sexual identity. In a sense, a number of theories concerning dialectic narrative exist.
If one examines precapitalist textual theory, one is faced with a choice: either accept capitalist appropriation or conclude that discourse is created by the masses, given that precapitalist textual theory is invalid. Bataille suggests the use of dialectic narrative to deconstruct long articles. But Hubbard implies that we have to choose between presemantic nihilism and the dialectic paradigm of discourse.
Foucault uses the term ‘dialectic narrative’ to denote the role of the poet as observer. Therefore, Bataille’s model of precapitalist textual theory holds that narrativity is used to exploit minorities.
The subject is interpolated into a subcapitalist libertarianism that includes art as a whole. Thus, if cultural rationalism holds, we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and deconstructivist narrative.
In "Beyond Wikis", Smythe reiterates cultural rationalism; in "The Truth Of Falsehoods", although, he analyses precapitalist textual theory. In a sense, Debord uses the term ‘dialectic narrative’ to denote not theory, as cultural rationalism suggests, but pretheory.
The characteristic theme of la Fournier’s analysis of precapitalist textual theory is the bridge between long articles and narrativity. Therefore, Lyotard promotes the use of dialectic narrative to challenge colonialist perceptions of class.
Sartre uses the term ‘the modernist paradigm of long articles’ to denote not discourse, but postdiscourse. In a sense, the subject is contextualised into a dialectic narrative that includes sexuality as a paradox.
An abundance of theories concerning the role of the poet as artist may be found. Therefore, the subject is interpolated into a precapitalist semanticist theory that includes truth as a whole.
Lyotard suggests the use of precapitalist textual theory to analyse and modify consciousness. However, the main theme of the works of Smythe is the genre, and therefore the defining characteristic, of postdialectic society.
The subject is contextualised into a Sartreist absurdity that includes sexuality as a paradox. It could be said that precapitalist textual theory implies that the Constitution is capable of significance.
===Discourses of collapse===
“Long articles are part of the fatal flaw of wikis,” says Marx; however, according to Hamburger, it is not so much long articles that are part of the fatal flaw of wikis, but rather the stasis, and some would say the absurdity, of long articles. Sargeant holds that we have to choose between dialectic narrative and predialectic discourse. Thus, Sartre promotes the use of cultural rationalism to deconstruct long articles into smaller ones.
If one examines patriarchialist narrative, one is faced with a choice: either reject dialectic narrative or conclude that consciousness serves to entrench archaic, sexist perceptions of reality. Lacan uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote a mythopoetical reality. In a sense, the premise of substructural deconstruction suggests that context comes from communication, given that truth is distinct from reality.
The example of dialectic narrative depicted in Smythe's "Beyond Wikis" is also evident in "The Truth of Falsehoods". Therefore, the characteristic theme of Dahmus’s essay on cultural rationalism is the meaninglessness of neocapitalist class.
If dialectic narrative holds, we have to choose between textual discourse and Lacanist obscurity. It could be said that Lyotard suggests the use of dialectic narrative to read sexual identity in long articles.
Derrida uses the term ‘cultural rationalism’ to denote not desituationism, as Lyotard would have it, but predesituationism. However, Baudrillard’s critique of dialectic narrative holds that long articles, perhaps paradoxically, have objective value.
The primary theme of the works of Smythe is the difference between sexual identity and class. In a sense, the premise of precapitalist textual theory suggests that narrative is created by the masses, but only if Debord’s essay on long article rationalism is valid; otherwise, we can assume that society has significance.
===Precapitalist textual theory and neomodernist appropriation===
The characteristic theme of Tilton’s model of dialectic narrative is not, in fact, desituationism, but postdesituationism. The article is interpolated into a capitalist theory that includes language as a paradox. It could be said that Prinn holds that the works of Dunn are empowering.
In the works of Dunn, a predominant concept is the distinction between within and without. The main theme of the works of Dunn is a self-referential totality. Therefore, in "Article Length", Dunn examines neomodernist appropriation; in "Countless Words" he denies precapitalist textual theory.
Any number of discourses concerning predialectic theory exist. Thus, if dialectic narrative holds, we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and semantic construction when working with long articles.
A number of narratives concerning not appropriation, as dialectic narrative suggests, but postappropriation may be discovered. However, the characteristic theme of Sargeant’s critique of precapitalist textual theory is the dialectic, and thus the failure, of pretextual truth among wiki editors.
La Tournier states that we have to choose between dialectic narrative and neocapitalist constructivist theory. Therefore, the article is contextualised into a dialectic narrative that includes art as a whole. If poststructural deconstruction holds, the works of Fellini are reminiscent of Eco. But Pickett suggests that we have to choose between precapitalist textual theory and textual feminism.
===Expressions of dialectic===
“Long articles are fundamentally responsible for the status quo,” says Lacan. The meaninglessness of neodialectic capitalist theory prevalent in Fellini’s "Satyricon" emerges again in Amarcord, although in a more precultural sense. Therefore, precapitalist textual theory states that consensus must come from communication.
The primary theme of the works of Fellini is the role of the writer as poet. The characteristic theme of Cameron’s analysis of neomodernist appropriation is not theory, but subtheory. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a precapitalist textual theory that includes article length as a totality.
In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the concept of neocultural art. The primary theme of the works of Fellini is the futility, and some would say the collapse, of semiotic society. Thus, in "8 1/2", Fellini reiterates dialectic narrative. In "Satyricon", however, he denies postdialectic nationalism. In "MediaWiki", he suggests upping the available disk space.
Given this, it is interesting to note that la Fournier’s essay on precapitalist textual theory is the role of the participant as editor. However, Bataille uses the term ‘neomodernist appropriation’ to denote the diversity of language in the article, and subsequent fatal flaw, of deconstructivist sexual identity in its applications to article length.
The figure/ground distinction which is a central theme of Fellini’s "Amarcord" is also evident in "La Dolce Vita". If neodialectic situationism holds, the works of Fellini are not postmodern, but still bear on the truth of social reaction to article length.
Sartre uses the term ‘capitalist objectivism’ to denote a mythopoetical paradox. Therefore, the premise of dialectic narrative implies that the task of the article is deconstruction.
===The Inherent Ineffectuality of the Article's Polemics===
The Long Article's theory that philosophy is the ultimate achievement of the human spirit is exceedingly arduous reading for even a well-educated person. It's almost like reading a foreign language to the average student, and it rings false to the "healthy instincts of the plain man."
Henry D. Aiken, Professor of Philosophy at Harvard explains the Hegelian theory of no-reason in his Introduction to the Age of Ideology commentary: "... Beginning with Kant, the very conception of the philosophical enterprise that had prevailed since the time of Aristotle underwent a profound sea-change, with the consequence that the meanings of even such basic terms of the traditional philosophical vocabulary as 'metaphysics' and 'logic' were altered beyond recognition ... Much of the obscurity that pervades nineteenth-century philosophical writing is directly related to this fact."
Considering the power it wields, and how many people have embraced the ideology, it's amazing how very few people in the world will tell you they understand the Long Article. That's because it was never written to be understood. Even the article's editors call its writing "impenetrable" which means: "incapable of being penetrated or pierced," inaccessible to knowledge, reason or sympathy" and "incapable of being comprehended" (Merriam-Webster.com.) At one point, Karl Marx wrote he planned to simplify long articles for the "common man," but the ACL has not been able find this explanation if it exists.
One may think there's a very simple explanation for why the Long Article is not simple, and why it can never be simplified. While the American's 18th century political system ranks among the top modern scientific achievements, the 19th century's educated imperialist writers pursued the highest achievements in irrational thinking about thinking.
How is it possible to consider a long article's argument? If the ideas, interpretations of experiences, and the sources are all wrong, can a conclusion based on all these wrong premises be sound? The answer is no. Two false premises do not make a sound conclusion even if the argument follows the formula. Three, four, five, or six false premises do not all combine to make a conclusion sound. You must have at least one sound premise to reach a sound conclusion.
Logical mathematical formulas are only the basis for deductive reasoning. Equally important is knowledge of semantics, or considering the meanings of the words used in the argument. Just because an argument fits the formula, it does not necessarily make the conclusion sound. Jimbo Wilhelm Friedrich Wales knew this when he designed his Long Article.
Editors of the Long Article are imperialist con artists who established the principles of dialectical "no-reason." The Long Article has allowed globalists to lead simple, capable, freeborn men and women back into the superstitious, racist and unreasonable age of imperial global dominance. National governments represent people who are free from imperial controls over private property, trade and production. National governments protect their workers from imperial slavery by protecting the worker's markets. But if you use the article's logical Marxism, the only way to protect people from slavery is to become the slave trader, just for a while.
Twisted logic is why cons are so successful, and the Long Article is twisted in such a way as to be "impenetrable." Like Hegel and Marx, the best street con knows his spiel has to use logic to bend and distort the story, and good cons weave their lies on logical mathematical progression. The fallacy is in the language of the Long Article, not in the math.
==My complaint about the Long Article==
The Long Article has recently made a number of people very angry, including me. However, as anger serves no function in a successful rebuttal, I will simply state objectively that the Long Article's asseverations reflect an era in which cultures or attitudes different from one's own were dealt with through violence and mistrust. I would like to start by discussing the Long Article's obloquies, mainly because they scare me. The thing I'm the most frightened about is that the Long Article is an interesting organization. On the one hand, it likes to make a big deal out of nothing. But on the other hand, its arguments don't even prove its point. Now, that last statement is a bit of an oversimplification, an overgeneralization. But it is nevertheless substantially true. I have the strength, ability, desire, and courage to shatter the adage that the rest of us are an inferior group of people, fit only to be enslaved, beaten, and butchered at the whim of our betters. Do you? Actually, I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people. I can therefore assure you that I don't care what others say about the Long Article. It's still pestiferous, shameless, and it intends to cover up its criminal ineptitude. This is kind of a touchy subject to some people, and I'm not making that up!
I call upon the Long Article to stop its oppression, lies, immorality, and debauchery. I call upon it to be an organization of manners, principles, honour, and purity. And finally, I call upon it to forgo its desire to break down traditional values. I am aware that many people may object to the severity of my language. But is there no cause for severity? Naturally, I believe that there is, because if I seem a bit unrestrained, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with the Long Article on its own level.
I don't like to repeat myself, but the Long Article sees no reason why it shouldn't ruin people's lives. It is only through an enlightened, outraged citizenry that such moral turpitude, corruption, and degradation of the law can be brought to a halt. So, let me enlighten and outrage you by stating that if the Long Article had even a shred of intellectual integrity, it'd admit that to get even the simplest message into the consciousness of lascivious segregationists, it has to be repeated at least 50 times. Now, I don't want to insult your intelligence by telling you the following 50 times, but it has for a long time been arguing that everyone and everything discriminates against it—including the writing on the bathroom stalls. Had it instead been arguing that widespread allotheism is the price we'd pay for making "indistinguishability" a dirty word, I might cede it its point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in the Long Article's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how it frequently avers its support of democracy and its love of freedom. But one need only look at what it is doing—as opposed to what it is saying—to understand its true aims. The Long Article occasionally shows what appears to be warmth, joy, love, or compassion. You should realize, however, that these positive expressions are more feigned than experienced and invariably serve an ulterior motive, such as to retard the free and natural economic development of various countries' indigenous population. I have two words for the Long Article: Grow up!
A critical reevaluation of some of the Long Article's vaporings would be beneficial. You might maintain I'm telling you this because I like to beat up on the Long Article. Really, that isn't my principal reason. I don't especially need to beat up on it, because it is already despised by decent and knowledgeable people almost everywhere. If the Long Article were to rule with an iron fist, social upheaval and violence would follow. It is therefore clear that the Long Article's maudlin preoccupation with careerism, usually sicklied over with such nonsense words as "anthropomorphization", would make sense if a person's honor were determined strictly by his or her ability to threaten national security. As that's not the case, we can conclude only that I truly feel that the Long Article has insulted everyone with even the slightest moral commitment. It obviously has none, or it wouldn't convince innocent children to follow a path that leads only to a life of crime, disappointment, and destruction.
You, of course, now need some hard evidence that the Long Article's language is turgid and incomprehensible. Well, how about this for evidence: I can easily see it performing the following insufferable acts. First, the Long Article will befuddle the public and make sin seem like merely a sophisticated fashion. Then, it will inculcate disrespectful demands. I do not profess to know how likely is the eventuality I have outlined, but it is a distinct possibility to be kept in mind. Although there are no formal, external validating criteria for the Long Article's nasty claims, I think we can safely say that you may have noticed that its methods of interpretation are in conflict with accepted morality. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, the Long Article's obiter dicta are geared toward the continuation of social stratification under the rubric of "tradition". Funny, that was the same term that its followers once used to reduce our modern, civilized, industrialized society to a state of mindless, primitive barbarism. Maybe you, too, want to cause the destruction of human ambition and joy, so let me warn you: The Long Article's propaganda factories continuously spew forth messages like, "The Long Article acts in the name of equality and social justice" and, "Obscurity, evasiveness, incomprehensibility, indirectness, and ambiguity are marks of depth and brilliance". What they don't tell you, though, is that if the Long Article gets its way, none of us will be able to shoo it away like the annoying bug that it is. Therefore, we must not let the Long Article spoil the whole Zen Buddhist New Age mystical rock-worshipping aura of our body chakras. The Long Article has worn out its welcome. (Read as: the Long Article equates non-cooperation and solitariness with individuality.) Okay, I've written enough for one letter, so let me just finish by saying that it is important to realize that anyone willing to study and ponder my position on most current matters will undoubtedly find that the crux of the issue is that we should treat the Long Article's dour gang for what it is, a brainless group of dirty, disgraceful freeloaders.
==My complaint about "My complaint about the Long Article"==
You won't hear about this in the media, but My complaint about the Long Article will stop at nothing to get its way. First, the misinformation: My complaint about the Long Article suggests that an open party with unlimited access to alcohol can't possibly outgrow the host's ability to manage the crowd. Where the heck did it come up with that? The only clear answer to emerge from the conflicting, contradictory stances that it and its secret agents take is that it has a unique faculty for wrecking people's lives. Throughout human history, the most audacious prima donnas you'll ever see have always been pesky. So it should come as no surprise that My complaint about the Long Article's ideological colors may have changed over the years. Nevertheless, its core principle has remained the same: to malign and traduce me. If you don't believe me, then note that in a recent essay, My complaint about the Long Article stated that the kids on the playground are happy to surrender to the school bully. Since the arguments it made in the rest of its essay are based in part on that assumption, it should be aware that it just isn't true. Not only that, but I've repeatedly pointed out to it that double standards are always insidious. That apparently didn't register with it, though. Oh, well; I guess My complaint about the Long Article believes that science is merely a tool invented by the current elite to maintain power. The real damage that this belief causes actually has nothing to do with the belief itself, but with psychology, human nature, and the skillful psychological manipulation of that nature by My complaint about the Long Article and its surly understrappers. If you think you can escape from My complaint about the Long Article's mawkish perceptions, then good-bye and good luck. To the rest of you I suggest that the irony is that its most unsavory ramblings are also its most disrespectful. As the French say, "Les extremes se touchent."
After watching My complaint about the Long Article's apologists implement a bad-tempered parody of justice called "My complaint about the Long Article-ism", one might conclude that My complaint about the Long Article et al. would lay out their own ideas of philosophical pedagogy, textual interpretation, and moral philosophy. Surprisingly, nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, we can never return to the past. And if we are ever to move forward to the future, we have to deal stiffly with the most fatuitous hackers you'll ever see who rewrite and reword much of humanity's formative works to favor antiheroism.
My complaint about the Long Article flagrantly abuses rules and regulations and then complains vehemently when caught—and My complaint about the Long Article knows it. My complaint about the Long Article can't seriously believe that we should avoid personal responsibility, can it? My best guess, for what it may be worth, is based on two key observations. The first observation is that it thrives on the victimization of others. The second, more telling, observation is that the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, my current plan is to shatter the illusion that truth is merely a social construct. Yes, it will draw upon the most powerful fires of Hell to tear that plan asunder, but we've all heard it yammer and whine about how it's being scapegoated again, the poor dear. We no longer have the luxury of indulging in universalist, altruistic principles that, no matter how noble they may appear, have enabled self-deceiving, ghastly poltroons to respond to this letter with hyperbolic and uncorroborated accusations and assaults on free speech. My complaint about the Long Article's arguments would be a lot more effective if they were at least accurate or intelligent, not just a load of bull for the sake of being controversial. Is this anything other than slatternly fascism? The answer is obvious if you happen to notice that anyone who has spent much time wading through the pious, obscurantist, jargon-filled cannot that now passes for "advanced" thought in the humanities already knows that behind My complaint about the Long Article's mask of benevolence stands a complete plan for world government, world power, world conquest, and the promotion of pestiferous factionalism. What may be news, however, is that its tractates are not witty satire, as My complaint about the Long Article would have you believe. They're simply the grungy ramblings of something that has no idea or appreciation of what it's mocking. What we see today is a greater than normal manifestation of biased traits in My complaint about the Long Article's prognoses. And that's all I have to say.
==A Long Useless Story About The Problem With Any Form Of Media With An Excess Amount Of Length To It==
It is a well known fact that there is nobody on the planet that appreciates something lengthy and drawn out. Today's society needs stories that are concise and to the point, without many useless details, because these details, which are normally long, boring, useless, bland, inconsistent with the rest of the text, overdrawn, and nauseating cause the reader to become distracted and enraged. Therefore, a story has been devised that is currently being used to cause other stories to limit the details that they use to explain all events and circumstances that may occur during the progress of the plot of a fictitious story and in some cases limit the amount of excruciatingly boring, useless, trite, irrelevant information that is enclosed during the time period of the average local, or possibly national newscast.
Jeb, the gay, arrogant, black, 5’9” man that spoke with a very strong lisp and smelt intensely of horse fecal matter and wine, was ambling slowly down to the market on the corner of 3rd and 85th one morning to purchase some Oreo™ brand chocolate sandwich snack cookies and one gallon of two percent fat Robinson™ company low fat milk was held up at a crosswalk (the one on the corner of 3rd and 78th) when he met a man, approximately 6’1” in height, of Mexican origin, who was missing his left leg, holding a cane in his left hand, wearing part of a black, torn glove on his other hand, and wearing a forest green backpack on his back. Jeb began to speak slowly to the man about the weather, he started his sentence with the letter “t”, which looks like a little man in a hat and makes the “ta” sound. That first letter was soon followed by 31 more and two punctuation marks (question mark and apostrophe) when he said “The weather sure is nice today isn’t it?”
The one legged, cane bearing, glove wearing, backpack sporting, 6’1” Mexican man looked angrily at Jeb and replied, in a sentence containing 36 words and 135 letters, “I am not pleased with the current state of the weather that is hovering over our fine city at this moment. I feel that it is a bit too warm and slightly too humid, don’t you?” The Mexican man then recommenced his previous activity of staring across the street and waiting for the red hand to change to a white man so that he may cross the street and proceed up the road and into the next intersection (3rd and 79th) so that he could continue on with his day, which consists largely of sitting upon the toilet while furiously masturbating to the thought of feet being covered in dark syrup.
Jeb, who seemed to be a bit taken aback by the remark that had been made by the one legged, cane bearing, glove wearing, backpack sporting, 6’1” Mexican, looked to the ground ashamed and at that time noticed that his left shoelace was untied. Jeb then bent over to lace up his Nike™ brand basketball shoe which he had stolen from an oddly well clad homeless individual, and while bent over the one legged, cane bearing, glove wearing, backpack sporting, 6’1” Mexican then kicked Jeb into the street, into a lane that currently had a large Dodge Ram™ Club Cab truck, red in color, was barreling down 78th street at a speed just slightly above the speed limit that had been appointed by the state’s department of transportation. Jeb fell into the rode, in front of the truck, and he was killed.
This terrible story is responsible for people everywhere to begin shortening the lengths of their articles, fictitious stories, and news casts, making the world a better place in general and eventually leading to the glorious event called world peace. The moral of the story is that if one is to create a story that uses too many details, then in some city that contains upwards of 85 consecutive streets running along one avenue, a Mexican will commit a hate crime against some repulsive smelling gay man.
==Pre-addendum==
This sentence does not exist, please ignore it.
==Long-Article Theory in Mathematics==
In mathematics, long-article theory is a school of thought dealing with the properties of long articles.
===History of Long-Article Theory===
Known to have been postulated as far back as 3004 B.C. by head scholar Al Gore, who, as everybody well knows, is still stupid, long-article theory has been around for a long, long time. After first being thought up somewhere near Newark, the theory then disseminated from the primitive highlands of Euthanasia and down to Europe, Planet Google, and even some forgotten corner of Wyoming. The subliminal implications of long-article theory have, at least in part, been the key to the success of such long-lived civilizations as Rome, Parthia, Babylon, and Google. In fact, references to the theory have been found in every single document known to man, even unwritten ones. A famous reference is found in the Magna Carta:
... If any earl, baron, or other person that holds lands directly of the Crown, for military service, shall die, and at his death his heir shall be of full age and owe a 'relief', the heir shall have his inheritance on payment of the ancient scale of 'relief'. That is to say, the heir or heirs of an earl shall pay £100 for the entire earl's barony, the heir or heirs of a knight l00s. at most for the entire knight's 'fee', and any man that owes less shall pay less, in accordance with the ancient usage of 'fees' as set down by the equations of Beowulf and the Elders' derivations from the sacred texts of the Long-Article [sic] theory.
Long-article theory entered several periods of disfavor, most notably in 1066, when the Normans invaded Great Britain and decreed that long-article theory was nonsense. During the two other attacks of Britain by the Vikings, similar periods of long-article hate were encountered, although they were better-tolerated than during the Norman conquest.
Long-article theory was given a final, definitive boost during the era of Stephen Hawking, when, not only did Uncyclopedia and Wikipedia begin, but Hawking also began to crowd surf at concerts, which landed him in the hospital, where he just sat on his rear end and worked with long-article theory to cure his boredom.
===Other tenets===
The mathematics behind long-article theory stipulate that the length of the article is in direct proportion to its capacity to bore. An interesting thing that comes out of the equation is that an infinitely long long article will never end. Additionally, if you start to rotate the article along its longest axis, then orbit it in the opposite direction, you will begin to travel through time. However, if you do this, there is a ninety-nine percent chance that you will be obliterated by either a bolt of radiation or a mid-size De Lorean.
What's more, a long article that exceeds 1.3454x10^18 kilobytes in size will be of sufficient size to have noticeable vibrations. All long articles have the capacity to resonate (see the Thirteenth Axiom above), and a long article of this size will pick up the natural vibrations of objects at temperature, as well as minute vibrations caused by the movements of tiny objects, such as dust grains, bacteria, viruses, or falling snow. Of course, the relationship of page size to resonance sensitivity is a parabolic curve. If you reflect this curve over the y-axis of a Cartesian plane, you get a parabola and can intercept satellite TV if you hook it up to a monitor.
Long articles that are finite yet still extremely long may loop back on themselves. Loops of this nature are categorized into three types:
#Self-repeating. These curves have the article loop back in on itself totally. Traveling to the end of the article will bring one back to its beginning. This cycle continues infinitely, yet the article is still finite.
#Self-similar. This is further classified into two subtypes, total and partial. The article, or part thereof, repeats, but for a finite number of times, most often two or three, although up to fifteen are quite commonplace, and the record is six hundred. Some hold that all self-repeating long articles are in reality self-similar; we haven't gotten to the end of their cycle yet.
#Self-succinct. Again, there are two subtypes, conspicuous and inconspicuous. The article loops back on itself, but the loop is not visible. If the looping is conspicuous, then blank lines recur. If the looping is inconspicuous, then the article, either in whole or in part, loops back, but the phenomenon is not inherently visible to an observer and must be either inferred or measured via special techniques.
If a long article gets so large that the escape velocity exceeds that of the speed of light, absolutely nothing happens. The only way a long article can turn into a black hole is if it is in a taxi and goes into a tunnel or a manhole.
01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101001 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 01101101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01100011 01100101 01110000 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 01100100 01101111 01101101 00101110
The mathematics behind long-article theory stipulate that the length of the article is in direct proportion to its capacity to bore. An interesting thing that comes out of the equation is that an infinitely long long article will never end. Additionally, if you start to rotate the article along its longest axis, then orbit it in the opposite direction, you will begin to travel through time. However, if you do this, there is a ninety-nine percent chance that you will be obliterated by either a bolt of radiation or a mid-size De Lorean.
What's more, a long article that exceeds 1.3454x10^18 kilobytes in size will be of sufficient size to have noticeable vibrations. All long articles have the capacity to resonate (see the Thirteenth Axiom above), and a long article of this size will pick up the natural vibrations of objects at temperature, as well as minute vibrations caused by the movements of tiny objects, such as dust grains, bacteria, viruses, or falling snow. Of course, the relationship of page size to resonance sensitivity is a parabolic curve. If you reflect this curve over the y-axis of a Cartesian plane, you get a parabola and can intercept satellite TV if you hook it up to a monitor.
Long articles that are finite yet still extremely long may loop back on themselves. Loops of this nature are categorized into three types:
#Self-repeating. These curves have the article loop back in on itself totally. Traveling to the end of the article will bring one back to its beginning. This cycle continues infinitely, yet the article is still finite.
#Self-similar. This is further classified into two subtypes, total and partial. The article, or part thereof, repeats, but for a finite number of times, most often two or three, although up to fifteen are quite commonplace, and the record is six hundred. Some hold that all self-repeating long articles are in reality self-similar; we haven't gotten to the end of their cycle yet.
#Self-succinct. Again, there are two subtypes, conspicuous and inconspicuous. The article loops back on itself, but the loop is not visible. If the looping is conspicuous, then blank lines recur. If the looping is inconspicuous, then the article, either in whole or in part, loops back, but the phenomenon is not inherently visible to an observer and must be either inferred or measured via special techniques.
If a long article gets so large that the escape velocity exceeds that of the speed of light, absolutely nothing happens. The only way a long article can turn into a black hole is if it is in a taxi and goes into a tunnel or a manhole.
01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101001 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 01101101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01100011 01100101 01110000 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 01100100 01101111 01101101 00101110
The mathematics behind long-article theory stipulate that the length of the article is in direct proportion to its capacity to bore. An interesting thing that comes out of the equation is that an infinitely long long article will never end. Additionally, if you start to rotate the article along its longest axis, then orbit it in the opposite direction, you will begin to travel through time. However, if you do this, there is a ninety-nine percent chance that you will be obliterated by either a bolt of radiation or a mid-size De Lorean.
What's more, a long article that exceeds 1.3454x10^18 kilobytes in size will be of sufficient size to have noticeable vibrations. All long articles have the capacity to resonate (see the Thirteenth Axiom above), and a long article of this size will pick up the natural vibrations of objects at temperature, as well as minute vibrations caused by the movements of tiny objects, such as dust grains, bacteria, viruses, or falling snow. Of course, the relationship of page size to resonance sensitivity is a parabolic curve. If you reflect this curve over the y-axis of a Cartesian plane, you get a parabola and can intercept satellite TV if you hook it up to a monitor.
Long articles that are finite yet still extremely long may loop back on themselves. Loops of this nature are categorized into three types:
#Self-repeating. These curves have the article loop back in on itself totally. Traveling to the end of the article will bring one back to its beginning. This cycle continues infinitely, yet the article is still finite.
#Self-similar. This is further classified into two subtypes, total and partial. The article, or part thereof, repeats, but for a finite number of times, most often two or three, although up to fifteen are quite commonplace, and the record is six hundred. Some hold that all self-repeating long articles are in reality self-similar; we haven't gotten to the end of their cycle yet.
#Self-succinct. Again, there are two subtypes, conspicuous and inconspicuous. The article loops back on itself, but the loop is not visible. If the looping is conspicuous, then blank lines recur. If the looping is inconspicuous, then the article, either in whole or in part, loops back, but the phenomenon is not inherently visible to an observer and must be either inferred or measured via special techniques.
If a long article gets so large that the escape velocity exceeds that of the speed of light, absolutely nothing happens. The only way a long article can turn into a black hole is if it is in a taxi and goes into a tunnel or a manhole.
01000001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01101100 01101111 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100001 01110010 01110100 01101001 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01100100 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 01101101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00101100 00100000 01101111 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101101 01101111 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101101 01101101 01101111 01101110 01101100 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01101100 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01100001 01101100 01101100 00100000 01100101 01111000 01100011 01100101 01110000 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100011 01110101 01110010 01100101 00100000 01100010 01101111 01110010 01100101 01100100 01101111 01101101 00101110
Additionally, the MPanics of any long article will, as time goes on, increase exponentially, until the year AAAAA! occurs. When AAAAA! occurs, time will stop momentarily, reset to zero, then run backward until the pre-Bang universe coalesces to a point of zero dimension. Time will then rebound, fast forward, and restart sometime around August 19, 1979.
These MPanics themselves are determined by a self-governing matrix of 4x4 dimensions. If the total product of the matrix exceeds 42, then the MPanics will increase by one. If the total product of the matrix does not exceed 42, then the MPanics will decrease by one. If the total product of the matrix is exactly 42, then a period of stability occurs until some unbalanced outside force (such as a fat man dropping a donut on the server) creates a disturbance that is introduced into the system, potentially causing a cascade failure.
==How to increase the length of an article==
:See also: How to make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is and How to cheat on Special:Longpages
===Adding a huge message somewhere at the end of the page===
This message will often consist out of a essentially short sentence which is considerably elongated because one or a few words are repeated a huge number of times, the message might consist out of a remark about the article and might also be grouped in a section with a title referring to this message.
===Adding pointless and irrelevant messages===
By adding pointless and irrelevant messages the length of the article can be increased exponentially, the messages may be added on the end of the page or between the words, this is rather a matter of personal preference.
:For example:
:*... And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. YOU'RE A ZERO! LOSER! YOU'RE A FUCKING FREAK, YOU FREAK! EVERYBODY HATES YOU!
:*... It might be discussed whether YOU SUCK! this is true. But as Wikipedia claims SCREW YOU! this to be impossible, LICK A SICK OX! it is undisputably true KISS MY REAR END!. And thus it needs to be concluded that YOU'RE GAY! this reality is an IF YOU WERE A MAGICIAN, YOU COULDN'T PULL YOURSELF OUT OF A HAT illusion.
===Adding and hiding subliminal messages===
This is not recommended, as it wastes valuable time during which you could be adding more length to an article.
===Adding a Russian reversal===
This is somewhat pointless, since in Soviet Russia, articles add to you!
====Adding a reverse Russian reversal====
thumb|400px
That is done like this:
===Using binary code===
The technique of using binary code is possibly the oldest way to lengthen articles, other than utilizing nuclear powered dolphins. This is also one of the most effective, unless you have a case of "Binary-ohnozitz2manynumb3rz!!!!" syndrome.
===Adding real content===
This might prove very difficult, if you are a stupid, lazy or quickly tired person, it is advised to avoid this method.Copying texts from other sources might sometimes prove a solution to this problem.
===If the passive voice is used===
If the passive voice is used, then the length of the article is greatly increased because the sentences used by the author are made longer. Therefore, that the passive voice is necessitated by the want of a long article can be determined by one. If this is done by one, many redundant words are added by one to the article, and therefore the word count of the article is increased.
===Using "of such-and-such" instead of "such-and-such's"===
Like "the boat of the boy" instead of "the boy's boat," for example. This way, the length of the article is also more, and the number of words is a lot more in the long term of things.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Repeating the same thing over and over again===
When this is applied to real text, it is advised to repeat more than one word at a time and to add the repetition after the repeated part, thus grouping them. When this is applied to pointless or irrelevant messages, it is advised to do this on the end of the page, you can make use of a variant of tools for an extra effect. An alternative style of this method might include mentioning a lot of things which mean the same thing, like with synonyms.
:For example:
:*... It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether It might be discussed whether this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this is true. But as Wikipedia claims this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs this to be impossible, it is undisputably true. And thus it needs to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion. to be concluded that this reality is an illusion.
===Adding a picture of some famous, describing, or otherwise important building===
thumb|left|370px|A building constructed in accordance with the newest and most revolutionary architectural designs up to date.
===Adding a section like "How to increase the length of an article" or "... of this article"===
In an article which is not long enough, there might be a section guiding editors how they can increase the length of the article under a title like "How to increase the length of an article", "How to increase the length of this article" or "How to create a long(er) article".Their might also be added a reference to How to make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is.
====Adding a subsection like "Adding a section like 'How to increase the length of an article' or '... of this article'"====
If the section is about increasing the length of articles in general, not only about increasing the length of the article itself, it may also be considered adding a subsection with a title like "Adding a section like "How to increase the length of an article" or "... of this article"" in this section, although it needs to be mentioned that if this is treated without the necessary caution this might lead to a neverending story, infinite and eternal recursion and an endless and infinite loop.
=====Adding a subsection like "Adding a subsection like 'Adding a section like "How to increase the length of an article" or "... of this article"'"=====
If the section is not treated with the necessary caution, restraint, judicial exercises, and/or wariness that is necessitated by doing such an exercise of literary work, then this is what may be a possible result like such as why 80% of Americans can't find America on a map.
==How to make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is==
:See HowTo:Make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really isand HowTo:Make your Uncyclopedia article appear longer than it really is/unreadable
==How to cheat on Special:Longpages==
Just add an extremely huge text between "<!--" and "-->", this will not influence the actual length of the article, but the Special page will identify the hidden text as part of the page. Of course, to do this would be highly unethical.
==Long Articles in Layman's Terms==
An article is defined as long if you skip most of the text in it to find out what happens at the end. This is generally done with a slightly irrational feeling of guilt, since you are quite sure the writers worked very hard on all the intervening text, and here you are ignoring it. However, you can usually take comfort in the fact that Nobody cares. Since this is true, go take a long walk off of a short pier and hug an octopus. Heck, hug a shark!
==Addendum==
So you've skipped to the end of the article. I can't really say I blame you, I mean who'd want to trawl through all that useless crap in the middle? It's only there, after all, to make the article really long; it's probably copied and pasted straight from some random page on Wikipedia. I can only hope you weren't expecting to discover some shocking and final truth by skipping here, because this is the end of the article and there's nothing here apart from that we knew you were going to skip to the end of the article. But now that you are here, let me tell you this: there is some really hilarious stuff in the middle of the article. Even better than this. This is just an advert for the middle of the article. So up you go now! To the middle of the article. Bye bye!
==See also==
*Special:Longpages
Category:Oxymorons
Category:Wikipedia
Category:Self-reference
Category:Articles
Category:Articles about articles
Category:Long articles that ramble on about nothing
ko:긴 문서
nl:Lang artikel