Talk:Fool's errand
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Snipe hunt was copied or moved into Fool's errand with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
reference updates edit
The domain in reference #13 is up for sale. and needs changing, I'm not sure how to change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.216.85 (talk) 01:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
March 28 revert edit
I added a first sentence to the lead that, I thought, stood alone and was clear, to wit: "A fool's errand is a task almost certain to fail." It was reverted with the comment "Article should have a clear standalone WP:FIRSTSENTENCE." Now I'm wondering about my grasp of reality. How was my sentence not standalone and clear? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 16:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- The subject of the article as written is the pranks which are played on novice members of a professional group. That should be summarised clearly in the first sentence, and "a task almost certain to fail" does not do that. --Lord Belbury (talk) 17:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. I had trouble divining that from the edit summary text. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 17:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Carl Bernstein edit
Does anyone have a copy of All the President's Men handy? I don't, so I can't properly cite it, but I recall the story of young Carl Bernstein on his first day at the newspaper being told to "wash the carbon copy paper" in the lavatory. He got the ink all over his new suit. Tfdavisatsnetnet (talk) 02:04, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
An article which explains the success and cultural transmission of fool's errand pranks edit
A recent article proposes an explanatory model for fool's errands based on evolved psychology for communication and coalitional management. https://brill.com/view/journals/jocc/22/1-2/article-p1_1.xml full text here https://psyarxiv.com/vkc42/download?format=pdf
Basically, the prank speculates our epistemic vigilance and is a tool for social dominance in professional context with asymmetry of knowledge and apprenticeship-like inclusion of new members.
Does anyone consider it relevant for inclusion here? I do not feel I should do it since I am the author of the article, hence I am biased :)) Radugabrielradu (talk) 13:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)