We need to have a load of people on RC Patrol that day. Especially admins, so they can easily revert.

Yes, having a ton of RC Patrollers is good. But the thing is that, without a formal agreement that tolerance for breaking the rules on April 1 is no different than it is on April 2, many admins simply support and help the cause by reverting revertions. It's happened on WP.

From: "Oldak Quill" oldakquill@gmail.com Which logos are you talking about? The project logos are copyrighted by the WMF.

Agreed. While changing logos can be interesting and humourous (I'm a big fan of the "Google Doodle"), WMF's content is fully protected by law.

From: "Robin Shannon" robin@shannon.id.au But they do help to form a sense of wikimedian community which is good for the wikimedia projects and helps further its goals.

Some fun is good, but too much fun leads to distraction, like in Esperanza.

From: "David Speakman" david@speakman.com I honestly cannot imagine the depth of the flame wars when someone attempts to spoof such news stories as Iraq, Bush, same-sex marriage, Christianity, Islam, the execution of Saddam Hussein, sex crimes, tsunamis, 9/11, fake obituaries, illegal immigration, female circumcision...

On Meta, there's an article called "How to deal with Poles".

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_deal_with_Poles

While it supposedly is an article written be Polish contributors to represent the attitudes expressed towards them by non-Polish contributors, it just reads as racist to me. I've never seen any examples of editors dealing in such manners, so I personally have never seen the humor in it.

It's recently been compared to the style of humor used in "Borat", but it's just stupid. Until recently, it even read "Note: this is intended to be [[w:satire|satirical]]. If you do not recognize it as such, consult a doctor or professional comedian."

I think we need to remind ourselves that as Wikinewsies and Wikipedians we are making something to be used by other people more so than by ourselves.

Are people really coming to Wiki* to read original fiction by amateur humorists? I wouldn't bet money on it.

Great point.

Nick