Talk:Lightbulb joke/Archive 1

Jokes Moved
I moved the bulk of the jokes. evrik 19:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of the Jokebook
Jimbo Wales has announced that he will be deleting the Jokebook from Wikibooks within 24 hours. See Wikibooks:Staff lounge. Uncle G 16:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Suggestions
Where should all those jokes go? evrik 21:04, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

content moved, then deleted
Given that most of the content here was moved to wikibooks and subsequently deleted from there, should it be added back here? -- Rick Block (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC) --evrik 15:44, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * sigh The information horder in me says yes, but does it really belong in the encyclopedia? If they're re-introduced, I'd suggest that we do like the fourth wall people and move everything but the most representative entries to a "list of lightbulb jokes." -Fuzzy 13:19, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I regret moving all the jokes to wikibooks, just to see them deleted and moved to lollerpedia. I liked the idea of having one place where they were all listed. I don't know if they belong in an encyclopedia. I was bothered by the deletion of the pages, so I moved copies of what the wikibooks pages were to my sandbox. User:Evrik/Sandbox/lightbulb

poor definition
The 'template' answer given in the introduction: Ten — one to hold the lightbulb and nine to turn the ladder around assumes the reader is familiar with screw-in light bulbs. It makes little sense to people used to a bayonet fitting. Markb 19:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Redundant
Wikibooks has a different set of lightbulb jokes. Either this one should be updated (in which case the Wikibooks link is redundant) or this list should be deleted. It's pointless having two.

A change in direction
I don't think our goal should be to list many jokes here for the following reasons:
 * googling for "lighbulb joke" gives plenty of sites that create huge lists and do it better than we can hope to
 * googling for ""how many " lightbulb finds all jokes involving if there are any (and there are for most words)
 * an encyclopedia article needs to be something different from a list

So I suggest we take out most jokes, basically rip every list section into a separate article (if they are needed at all) - lightbulb joke (Star Trek), lightbulb jokes (jobs), lightbulb jokes (nation) or just stuff them all into List of lightbulb jokes. This article should cover the joke in general, giving the history (the origins of the joke would be very interesting), reasons for its prevalence, similar jokes, overview of variations, how it is spread, what are the general characteristics, etc. Paranoid 20:32, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikibooks
There is now a Joke book on Wikibooks. Please consider whether parts of this article should moved and/or copied to that project. Rossami (talk) 05:28, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

An admin needs to transwiki most of this garbage
While I agree that the concept of lightbulb jokes is well-known enough to deserve an article, I believe that most of the jokes in this article are simply not good enough to remain on Wikipedia in compliance with the "no original research," notability, and neutrality policies. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that simply summarizes things made notable elsewhere, not a blog for amateur comedians to try out their nonexistent talent. I think most of the content on this page should be transwikied to WikiBooks Jokebook, as was done with most of You have two cows. Any admins feeling up to it? --Coolcaesar 02:51, 20 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I tend to agree. While I kind of liked them at first, it has gotten way out of hand. Many are not at all funny, and many one cannot get without some explanation, which isn't so bad when links help, but when there aren't any it's just crap. You have to be a goddamn astrologer to get the new zodiac ones. Wikipedia is not a joke book. This being said, I wouldn't mind keeping a few examples to illustrate the joke (beyond the original, which obviously needs to stay). This, however, might just the put snowball back to hand-size, but soon have it tumbling down the hill again. Anyway, not being an admin I can't help you out here. Sorry. -R. fiend 05:23, 20 August 2005 (UTC)


 * My only problem with the jokebook is that it lists the jokes alphabetically. Many of the jokes here are grouped by subject. What to do?
 * evrik 18:45, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

The lightbulb picture
Is there any point to the acctual picture of the lightbulb?

None that I can see, but it is quite fun. In keeping with the subject of the article, and all that. Kvetch 18:30, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

General Light Bulb Joke Formula
Many years ago, I came across a general purpose formula on Usenet that I can't quite reference. But essentially, it went like this:

to (behave in a manner sterotypical of the identifiable group).
 * Q: How many (members of an identifiable group) does it take to screw in a light bulb?
 * A: (A finite positive integer N greater than one). (Positive integer M <= N) to screw in the bulb, and (N-M)

Is there some place to fit this into the article? --Slffea


 * I just found the reference here It also contains a massive collection of 600 versions.


 * The formula is given as:


 * Q: How many (name of a class of people) does it take to change a light bulb ?
 * A: (A finite positive integer F.)  One to change the bulb, and the rest to (behave in a manner stereotypical of their group) or (say something stereotypical of their group in certain situations.)


 * Note: If F<2 then the joke can still be extremely funny, but you will probably need to choose a different generating formula. My personal favourites are the ones with F=0, as they require the most ingenuity to devise.
 * --Slffea

Hold the lightbulb? or just hold the bulb?
I'm not sure whether it's meaningful to debate the wording of the original urtext... but here goes. The article says:

The generally acknowledged "original" goes as follows:
 * Q: How many (insert chosen group here) does it take to change a lightbulb?
 * A: Ten - one to hold the lightbulb and nine to turn the ladder around.

But when I heard it (and early variants), the answer was phrased as
 * ''A: Ten: one to hold the bulb and nine to turn the ladder."

That is, bulb (rather than lightbulb) and turn the ladder (not turn the ladder around.).

Yes, that's right: to me the canonical form of the joke always uses the word "lightbulb" in the question, but just "bulb" in the answer.

These things have a sort of poetic cadence to them, and it stopped me and made me blink, so I thought I'd at least mention it. What do others thing?

(I would further speculate that there was also a canonical target group for the original joke, but I don't think I'll go there.) Dpbsmith 13:59, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

P.S. I live in the United States, I believe I heard the joke in the early sixties when I was going to college in the Boston area. Dpbsmith 14:00, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Repetition
There's a hell of alot of repetition in these jokes, I must have read the same one 3 times at one point. Furthermore a few are the original joke (or one of them) told with a specific nationality. Anyone object to some major housecleaning here? Plus there are a few that are pretty embarrassingly pathetic too. There should be some standards. -R. fiend 19:15, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Is this vandalism?
Chiropodists - Q: How many chiropodists does it take to change a lightbulb? A: The Holocaust didn't happen.

Is just a piece of subtle vandalism as it's (a) nonsensicla, (b) wouldn't be funny anyway?


 * Yeah, I'd call it vandalism. When I have enough time and energy, I'm going to sit down and overhaul this page, getting rid of crap like that, as well as all the redundant entries and the few that are just so lame they're unfunny by anyone's standards (very few, even most of the bad ones have a semblence of humor). The article nedds work. -R. fiend 30 June 2005 17:09 (UTC)

Huh?
I have to admit I don't get some of the jokes. Okay, I don't expect to get a bunch of the Trekkie ones and the like, but I'm talking about some of these musical instrument ones. Admittedly I don't play clarinet, trumpet, violin, etc., but am I missing something or are these jokes not funny? -R. fiend 06:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Error
My browser does it again. Due to size limits a good portion of the article was removed during my last reversion. Someone care to fix it? Thanks. -R. fiend 14:57, 24 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I did it before finding this note, actually. Should be all set now. LizardWizard 16:17, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Animated GIF
There is no reason to have an ani gif here. It adds nothing to the article and is therefore unnecessarily distracting. Ani gifs are useful when they actually show a process and they shouldn't be used if they don't convey any information. The eyes of the reader will be drawn to the image without any benefit or need. I vote for removal. --mav

Wikibooks Spar
Can anyone clean-up the links? The page now looks crowded!

Ugh! Many of these jokes are fake!
Doing Google searches for many of them turns up no non-Wikipedia hits. It seems as though well-intentioned individuals are attempting to fill out the joke collection with whatever jokes they can think of for an unrepresented group. While I understand that it is possible for jokes to exist in the wild without being detectable by Google, what are the chances? PaulStansifer 21:05, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

P.S. There are some difficulties with such searches -- be sure to leave out the "bulb"/"lightblub"/" light bulb" formulation, because that might be different from telling to telling.


 * Um, these are jokes; they aren't "real". If someone made up a joke and a punchline then it's by definition a joke. I fail to see how one can be fake. (now unfunny...well, that's a different story.) -R. fiend 19:17, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Canadians, British army
Montrealais, who is from Quebec I assume, put in a reference to the British allowing Canadians to be executed into the "armies" joke. While this may well be a true incident, it is certainly not a universal stereotype of the British army, and doesn't belong in the joke. --LDC


 * Well, in Canada it is. But be that as it may. user:Montrealais

Surrealists
Surrealists - Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a lightbulb? A: Fish.

How is it that this is the ONLY correct version of this joke? If you said:

Surrealists - Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a lightbulb? A: Aircraft carrier

you would be shouted down by earnest people telling you you'd got it wrong - which is a bit, ahem, surreal, really ...

Not that I am proposing any change. This is a random musing of a sort which is probably illegal and hotly to be discouraged. -- Nevilley


 * "Fish" is inherently funnier. Anyway, surrealists don't just choose images at random even if it sometimes looks like it, so you can't "improve" the joke by substituting a random word. - Ceci n'est pas Lee M 01:25, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Wikipedians
How about adding this one :-):


 * Q: How many Wikipedians does it take to change the lightbulb article?
 * A: 1, but about 15 edit conflicts.

-fonzy (It's terribly awful I know, but hey most of these jokes on the page are.)
 * Haha ! Jay 12:03, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Apple Newton users, Feet of Clay
Just saw this:
 * Q: How many Newton users does it take to change a lightbulb?
 * A. Foux! There to eat lemons, axe gravy soup.

To save people from having to follow the link, it's from a page about Feet of Clay, which has this exchange:


 * 'I think I'll write it in my notebook, if you don't mind,' said Vimes.
 * 'Oh, well, if you prefer, I can recognize handwriting,' said the imp proudly. ?I?m quite advanced.'
 * Vimes pulled out his notebook and held it up. 'Like this?' he said.
 * The imp squinted for a moment. 'Yep,' it said. That's handwriting, sure enough. Curly bits, spiky bits, all joined together. Yep. Handwriting. I'd recognize it anywhere.'
 * 'Aren't you supposed to tell me what it says?'
 * The imp looked wary. 'Says?' it said. 'It's supposed to make noises?'

Not a lightbulb joke, but funny. -- Jim Regan 20:52, 13 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Newton users
And what the original message entered by Newton users is supposed to be? Paranoid 14:34, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"vacuously true", mathematicians
From the article:
 * It is vacuously true that 0 mathematicians can change a lightbulb.

How so? It's vacuously true that all of them have the skills needed to change a lightbulb, but I don't think they can actually do it. And the k=1 case is false too, if it's interpreted as $$\forall x \in \mbox{Mathematicians}, \left\{x\right\} \mbox{can change a lightbulb}$$. As a counterexample consider wheelchair-bound mathematicians. -- BenRG 22:58, 23 Sep 2003 (UTC)

...gets invited to many parties
"The reader may legitimately wonder if the author of the above joke gets invited to many parties." How is the line relevant to the article ? Isn't it POV if you look at it one way. Jay 15:17, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * Above line has been removed. Jay 04:10, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Englishmen
How about this completely pointless lightbulb joke?: It may not be funny, but it is accurately observed...... Lee M 00:20, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Q: How many Englishmen does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
 * A: English lightbulbs don't screw in, they use bayonet fittings.

Indians and Pakistanis
"... and the Indians target the Pakistanis." -- can the contributor show me an example of such a lighbulb joke ? I haven't heard any, but if they exist I'd like to know how prevalent they are. Jay 12:03, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)

more versions

 * Q: How many guitarists does it take to change a light bulb?
 * A: Just one. He lies on the floor and the room spins around him.


 * Q: How many flies does it take to screw in a light bulb?
 * A: Two, naturally, but I'll be damned if I know how they got in there!

thefamouseccles
 * Q: How many Star Trek crew members does it take to change a light bulb?
 * A: None: Scotty doesn't have the power, Cap'n, Bones is a doctor, not an electrician, and Spock would be busy analysing the logically likely causes of the unexpected malfunction in the previous globular incandescent illuminatory device.

I heard:


 * Q: How many guitarists does it take to change a light bulb?
 * A: Six. One to change it and five to brag about how they could've done better.

Lduperval 20:04, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

_______________forum members

One to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed.

Fourteen to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently.

Seven to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs.

Seven more to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs.

Three to correct spelling/grammar errors.

Six to argue over whether it's "light bulb" or "lightbulb".

Another six to condemn those six as stupid.

Fifteen to claim experience in the lighting industry and give the correct spelling.

Nineteen to post that this group is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a light bulb (or lightbulb) forum.

Eleven to defend the posting to the group saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this group.

Thirty six to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty.

Seven to post URLs where one can see examples of different light bulbs.

Four to post that the URLs were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL.

Three to post about links they found from the URLs that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group.

Thirteen to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too".

Five to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy.

Four to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"

Thirteen to say "do a Dogpile.com search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs."

Three to tell a funny story about their students and a light bulb.

AND

One group lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now with something unrelated and start it all over again. ketseke

College versions
I've heard a number of college themed lightbulb jokes. For example:


 * Princeton--Two: one to mix the martinis, and one to call the electrician.
 * MIT--Two: One to get the lightbulb, and one to call a CMU student.
 * Yale--None: New Haven looks better in the dark.
 * Alfred University (my alma mater, in rural western NY)--One hundred and one: One to get the lighbulb, and one hundred to run an extension cord from Niagra Falls.

--zandperl 03:47, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Or this one, of UK universities:


 * How many students does it take to change a lightbulb at:
 * Aberystwyth: None - Most of them are still sleeping in the basketball court following housing shortages.
 * St. Andrews: Three - One to call the butler and two to arrange a tailor in Rome to design and make new suits for the special occasion. If a light bulb in a major building blows then increase to 27 to allow for a brass band playing the last post and five Sun reporters. In the following few days, The Sun will contain something along the lines of "Will's Pals in Blown Bulb Horror".
 * Aston : None - And stay down, they shoot at the lights, that's why the last one went.
 * Bath: Seven - Five to form a radical new initiative called 'TeamBulb Focus', one to make a public announcement stating "A successful environment is not about pushing yourself to the absolute limit" and one to change the light bulb before it's actually blown.
 * Birmingham: Nine - One to steal a new bulb from the back of a shop, two for the wheelmen and six to go shoot out all the light bulbs in some Aston student houses.
 * Cambridge: Three - one to mix the martinis, one to call the electrician and one to call daddy to pay for the bill.
 * Coventry: Two - One to take the bulb out and another to glass a random stranger's face with it.
 * De Montfort: Seven - Two to change the bulb and five to write an interpretive modern drama about the experience.
 * Glasgow: None of your f***ing business!
 * Imperial: Eight - It's not that one isn't smart enough to do it, it's just that they're all violently twitching from too much stress to achieve coordinated movement.
 * Leeds: Three - One to change it and two to find a way to get high off the old bulb.
 * Leicester: Four - One to change the bulb and three to complain bitterly that it wouldn't have been allowed to happen at Oxbridge, so please give us some funding. Please.
 * Liverpool: Only one, but he gets 10 course credits for doing it.
 * LSE: 84 - As follows:
 * 2 People - Preliminary discussion of concept change.
 * 1 Person - Devise and write formal bulb architecture.
 * 2 People - Feasibility study and timetable of events.
 * 2 People - Research existing business methods used throughout the illuminations industry.
 * 1 Person - Maintain ISO standards throughout the analysis.
 * 4 People - Commonality task force on bulb change.
 * 15 People - Change bulb.
 * 5 People - Perform bulb functional test.
 * 2 People - Perform bulb load test.
 * 3 People - Perform bulb financial value regression test.
 * 1 Person - Perform bulb performance analysis
 * 1 Person - Perform bulb bottleneck analysis.
 * 1 Person - Follow-up study (bulb merge feasibility).
 * 1 Person - Report to Utilities Commission
 * 1 Person - Research from accepted user database. (Did they want incandescent when we only supply non-tunable fluorescent point product?)
 * 5 People - Perform full compatibility/architecture study
 * 3 People - Ensure form (round/square, clear/frosted) follows function (wattage, 120/140 volts, visible/ultraviolet, flashing, flood/spot).
 * 3 People - Implement temporary alternative bulb socket for already (!?) existing, successful, and profitable socket (bulb-in-one)
 * 5 People - Determine how to market/package/distribute temporary alternative bulb socket.
 * 10 People - Determine how to perform bulb change product split
 * 1 Person - Interface with Utilities Commission quality assurance group
 * 1 Person - Interview local distribution centres to obtain statistics on light bulb usage around London.
 * 1 Person - Set up BPR (Bulb Problem Reports) system.
 * 1 Person - Review problems with BPR system.
 * 11 People - Write a full report justifying the expenses outlined above, and explaining how the six month lead time on research delivery was marginally less than expected.
 * 1 Person - Receive all credit for entire activity and also huge grant from local businesses. This person has to be a lecturer or post-grad.
 * Newcastle: Eight - One to find a red 'Fireglow' bulb, one to mount it near the window and the other six to wait inside.
 * Oxford: An entire college house, but only one of them is sober enough to figure out what to do with it, and he subsequently is cellophane-wrapped naked to a street lamp.
 * Oxford Brookes: Five - One to take the bulb out and four to stick their fingers in the socket.
 * Paisley: Between three and ten, depending on how far through the term it is, to club together their remaining funds to purchase a new light bulb.
 * Plymouth: Six - One to change it and five to campaign to make light bulb changing a new degree subject.
 * Pontypridd: Ten - One to buy the light bulb and nine to petition for the eventual electrification of Pontypridd.
 * Reading: Three - One to pull the bulb out and two to complain when the socket and ceiling come down with it through dry rot.
 * Salford: 16 - one to change the lightbulb and 15 others to keep scallies from beating the s**t out of the first one
 * UCL: Two - One to change the bulb and the other to say loudly how he did it as well as an Oxbridge student.
 * UMIST: Five - One to design a nuclear powered light bulb that never needs changing, one to figure out how to power the rest of Greater Manchester using said light bulb, two to install it, and one to write the computer program that controls the wall switch.
 * UNL: Nobody Knows - The light bulbs stay with North London U. longer than the students.
 * Warwick: Seventy Six - One to change the light bulb, fifty to protest the light bulb's right to not change, and twenty-five to hold a counter protest allowing for permissible change in light bulbs, as long as the light bulbs accept it.
 * York: Three - One to change the bulb and one to check his maths coursework.
 * James F. (talk) 05:52, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I forgot Columbia University: One hundred and eleven--One to change it, a hundred to form a protest that the lightbulb has a right not to change, and ten to form a counter-protest.

I've started a page for these, Lightbulb joke (university), feel free to add more or help clean it up. --zandperl 14:03, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC) No one seems to have noticed, but I moved the College & University Jokes to Wikibooks http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Jokebook:Lightbulb:University - evrik 07 October 2005 13:56 EDT

A.I. researchers
There's a lightbulb joke about A.I. researchers in the book on A.I. by Rich & Knight. Googling gave this: http://tecfa.unige.ch/pub/documentation/humour/AI.joke

which gave this:

Question: How many AI people does it take to change a lightbulb?

Answer: At least 67.

The Problem Space Group (5)

One to define the goal state One to define the operators One to describe the universal problem solver One to hack the production system One to indicate about how it is a model of human lightbulb-changing behavior

The Logical Formalism Group (12)

One to figure out how to describe lightbulb changing in predicate logic One to show the adequacy of predicate logic One to show the inadequacy of predicate logic One to show that lightbulb logic is nonmonotonic One to show that it isn't nonmonotonic One to incorporate nonmonotonicity into predicate logic One to determine the bindings for the variables One to show the completeness of the solution One to show the consistency of the solution One to hack a theorem prover for lightbulb resolution One to indicate how it is a description of human lightbulb-changing behavior One to call the electrician

The Statistical Group (1)

One to point out that, in the real world, a lightbulb is never "on" or "off", but usually somewhere in between

The Planning Group (4)

One to define STRIPS-style operators for lightbulb changing One to show that linear planning is not adequate One to show that nonlinear planning is adequate One to show that people don't plan; they simply react to lightbulbs

The Robotics Group (7)

One to build a vision system to recognise the dead bulb One to build a vision system to locate a new bulb One to figure out how to grasp the lightbulb without breaking it One to figure out the arm solutions that will get the arm to the socket One to organize the construction teams One to hack the planning system One to indicate how the robot mimics human motor behavior in lightbulb changing

The Knowledge Engeneering Group (6)

One to study electricians changing lightbulbs One to arrange for the purchase of the Lisp machines One to assure the customer that this is a hard problem and that great accomplishments in theory will come from support of this effort The same one can negotiate the project budget One to study related research One to indicate how it is a description of human lightbulb-changing behavior One to call the Lisp hackers

The Lisp Hackers (7)

One to bring up the network One to order the Chinese food Four to hack on the Lisp debugger, compiler, window system and microcode One to write the lightbulb changing program

The Connectionist Group (6)

One to claim that lightbulb changing can only be achieved through massive parallelism One to build a backpropagation network to direct the robot arm One to assign initial random weights to the connections in the network One to train the network by showing it how to change a lightbulb (training shall consist of 500,000 repeated epochs) One to tell the media that the network learns "just like a human does" One to compare the performance of the resulting system with that of traditional symbolyc approaches (optional)

The Natural Language Group (5)

One to collect sample utterances from the lightbulb domain One to build an English understanding program for the lightbulb-changing robot One to build a speech recognition system One to tell lightbulb jokes to the robot in between bulb-changing tasks One to build a language generation component so that the robot can make up its own lightbulb jokes

The Learning Group (4)

One to collect twenty lightbulbs One to collect twenty "near misses" One to write a concept learning program that learns to identify lightbulbs One to show that the program found a local maximum in the space of lightbulb descriptions

The Game-Playing Group (5)

One to design a two-player game tree with the robot as one player and the lightbulb as the other One to write a minimax search algorithm that assumes optimal play on the part of the lightbulb One to build special purpose hardware to enable 24-ply search One to enter the robot in a human lightbulb-changing tournament One to state categorically that lightbulb changing is "no longer considered AI"

The Psychological Group (5)

One to build an apparatus which will time lightbulb-changing performance One to gather and run subjects One to mathematically model the behavior One to call the expert systems group One to adjust the resulting system, so that it drops the right number of bulbs

[taken without permission from Artificial Intelligence from Rich & Knight]

geeks
Hey guys, it's not just computer geeks reading Wikipedia. Do we really need Trekkie, Debian, Usenet and Programming jokes on this page?


 * Not a simple question. Personally I think the first three groups have very limited interest to most, but I like the programming jokes (just as I like programming, though it's not my job now), so I am clearly biased. Objectively, may be it's better to move these subculture-specific jokes into a separate article - unless we aim provide a comprehensive collection, there is little reason to provide jokes other than the general ones. Paranoid 16:16, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

religious+philosophical
i don't think a sound engineer joke belongs in the philosophy joke section.

Lightbulb joke variants in literature
I don't have the details onhand, but in Mercedes Lackey's "Fortress of Frost and Fire" (part of the Bard's Tale series of books), there are two jokes made about lighting a candle IIRC. Q: How many druids does it take to light a candle? A: One to light and one not to light it. (Druids in fantasy being seen as creatures of balance)

Q: How many priests does it take to light a candle? A: Eight. One to light it and seven to chant the proper formulas.

Someone with a copy of the book onhand could add these, assuming they're not superfluous. (The second joke is essentially echoed over many professions, only being unique here due to the attempt to retrofit it to medieval times.) -Fuzzy 14:47, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Matlab

 * Matlab - How many Matlab programmers does it take to change a light bulb?
 * One - Matlab can do anything. Just specify the problem clearly in an Excel spreadsheet (Matlab can read and extract data from Excel). Next you have two basic choices: the inorganic solution, or the organic solution. If you choose the inorganic option Matlab has excellent programming toolboxes for the development of imaging and servo control software, and B-spine functions for design specification. If you choose the organic solution Matlab supports tools for Bioinformatics, functional magnetic resonance brain imaging and neural network modeling. Once you have completed the design and construction of your device / life form, simply instruct it to change the bulb. However, if you are presently unsure about which option to choose, Matlab has excellent tools for mathematical modeling, symbolic processing and stochastic simulation. If you need further help you may visit the Matlab website where you can browse software developed by users just like you. Moreover, if you experience technical difficulties do not hesitate to contact their helpful support personnel.

Hmmm... why is this funny? Yes, I know, most of the jokes on this article are awful, but this one is longer and more un-fun than the others. Plus, this stinks of advertising to me... --Fibonacci 07:37, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I've only had peripheral exposure to Matlab, but it's one of those pieces of software which is tremendously powerful, or so they'll keep telling you, but the official documentation is scant. Instead, you wind up learning how to do things on an apprenticing system of sorts, working with colleagues. -Fuzzy 12:41, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

P.S.: Do I get credit for inventing the word un-fun? --Fibonacci 07:37, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi everybody,

I wrote this joke, delete it if you want. However, is not meant to be advertising, instead it is meant to poke fun at that fact that Matlab endevours to provide so much that just considering what it can do seems to complicate simple problems. This being said, I still like Matlab.

Germany
Let's face it, this joke sucks. I'm deleting it.

The Germans - Q: How many Germans does it take to change a lightbulb? A: Vas?? Vat do you mean?!?!? Vun, nein?? Iss diss eine joke or somesink???!!!

Have a great day, God bless. -Jon2857092 23:03, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dog versions
More jokes, in dog versions, for the transwiki (which implies I like the idea of listing them on a transwiki, not here):

How many dogs does it take to change a light bulb?

Golden Retriever: The sun is shining, the day is young, we’ve got our whole lives ahead of us, and you’re inside worrying about a stupid burned out bulb?

Border Collie: Just one. And then I’ll replace any wiring that’s not up to code.

Dachshund: You know I can’t reach that stupid lamp!

Rottweiler: Make me.

Boxer: Who cares? I can still play with my squeaky toys in the dark.

Lab: Oh, me, me!!!!! Pleeeeeeeeeze let me change the light bulb! Can I? Can I? Huh? Huh? Huh? Can I? Pleeeeeeeeeze, please, please, please!

German Shepherd: I’ll change it as soon as I’ve led these people from the dark, check to make sure I haven’t missed any, and make just one more perimeter patrol to see that no one has tried to take advantage of the situation.

Jack Russell Terrier: I’ll just pop it in while I’m bouncing off the walls and furniture.

Old English Sheep Dog: Light bulb? I’m sorry, but I don’t see a light bulb!

Cocker Spaniel: Why change it? I can still pee on the carpet in the dark.

Chihuahua: Yo quiero Taco Bulb. Or “We don’t need no stinking light bulb.”

Greyhound: It isn’t moving. Who cares?

Australian Shepherd: First, I’ll put all the light bulbs in a little circle…

Poodle: I’ll just blow in the Border Collie’s ear and he’ll do it. By the time he finishes rewiring the house, my nails will be dry.

How many cats does it take to change a light bulb?

Cats do not change light bulbs. People change light bulbs. So, the real question is:

“How long will it be before I can expect some light, some dinner, and a massage?” ALL OF WHICH PROVES, ONCE AGAIN, THAT WHILE DOGS HAVE MASTERS, CATS HAVE STAFF!

Source: Dog Eat Doug

--zandperl 14:08, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Moved
Dog versions added in jokebookevrik 18:38, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Image Issues?
Can someone please verify that the picture of the lightbulb is free licensed? I'd hate to think that it was infringing on some undiscovered Mapplethorpe. (since we're on the topic of lightbulb "jokes" - this was only fitting. Sam Freedom 09:28, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

I have a great light bulb joke.
Q: How many Wikipedia users does it take to screw in a light bulb.

A: Thousands. One to create the light bulb and place it in the socket. Fifty to screw in the light bulb further. A hundred to argue about how much to screw in the light bulb on the light bulb's discussion page. Fifty or so to vandalize it by unscrewing it. A couple moderators to constantly revert the light bulb to screwed-in status and ban the vandalizers from going up the ladder at all. And hundreds more to look at the screwed in light bulb and learn about it without contributing. Earl Campbell (the user)

bah...
this is a very poor topic... bulb jokes... The next step is write about "how to watch the grass growing" or something like that. This kind of articles reduces the quality of the encyclopedia.

In China...
People say if you put a light bulb in your mouth, you cannot take it out anymore. Then they laugh so hard on Indians and English people, lol.

fundamental cause of joke missed
That changing a lightbulb is a very simple task that is relatively difficult to complicate ... and is therefore the fundamental cause of the humour ... is missed by the article.

dcult.com
After reading this article, I was curious about the Finn and their lightbulb jokes, so I googled for it, and I found this http://www.dcult.com/Jokes/Lightbulb_joke.php

I see that, see the article, and I think to myself.. WTF?! --Lacrymology 04:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks like an older version of thsi page.evrik 15:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Lightbulb image
How does it contribute to the article? -- (questioner who didn't sign)


 * It demonstrates that lightbulbs with a screw fitting exist to those who have only seen lightbulbs with a bayonet fitting. Such people might get the "change a light bulb" jokes but not understand the "screw in a light bulb" jokes. -- Derek Ross | Talk 15:50, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Q: How many undergraduate physics students does it take to change a lightbulb? A: None. They already measured optimal lighting.

Have a laugh
I can POV myself to death by saying that this is the one article that Wikipedia needs very much. Are jokes not allowed in Wiki? I sincerely hope they are, if only because they provide light relief, and are a much-needed element of daily life. Whoever started this article deserves a pat on the back. andreasegde 17:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The proverbial lightbulb
Should we mention that the joke it about an edison screw lightbulb, not a bayonet mount? All the fittings in my house are bayonets, so it took me years to get these kinds of jokes.

ah, here's one;

Q: How many thick people did it take to screw in a B22 lightbulb?

A: Over 1000 so far, they've still not succeeded yet!

I'm not a comic by trade... 82.13.83.244 01:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Even if you put in a B22 bulb, you still have to twist it/screw it. --212.241.67.98 11:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

A variation
This really happened:


 * How many idiots does it take to change a lightbulb?
 * How many?
 * Twelve. One to hold the lightbulb and ten to turn the ladder.
 * That makes eleven.
 * One, two... Shut up!

--Jnelson09 19:14, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Getting back to a useful article that isn't an endless list of jokes
I remember months ago this article was a compromise between an endless list of jokes and the barebones current version in response to the deletion nomination. It had a few (very few) examples of each of the general types of variations on the joke, and some limited but insightful analysis. It should get back to something like that.--ragesoss 05:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Maybe a revert back several months is in order. -R. fiend 22:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Seeing the current status of this page, it seems that it has again reverted back to an endless list of jokes that do not together comprise an encyclopedic article...what's the solution? Clarkefreak &#8734; 05:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Who-derises-whom text
I deleted the text about which groups of ethnicities are the unfortunate subjects of jokes by which other groups, because it's unsourced. Although the rest of the article also needs sourcing, the rest is not controversial; this paragraph is just a long list of racism allegations. See this diff for the removal:. —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-28 06:05Z 
 * Well done. Somebody seems to have put it in again without discussing here; I have re-removed it. –Henning Makholm 19:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Black joke
Why is there a Black joke at the end of the Nationality section??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.54.159.140 (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

world-wide?
This is one of the most standard, common jokes, in English, in the US (late 20th century). Is it as traditional/common in the rest of the world? In other languages?-69.87.193.116 13:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

screw in a light bulb
The article has been edited down to the point of not making sense. It mentions the word "screw", but leaves out the context: the phrase "screw in a light bulb" can replace "change a light bulb" in the US -- the "screw in" form would actually be more natural language here (despite the silly lurking sexual mis-understanding).-69.87.193.116 13:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"Various ethnic versions"
There is no uniformity as to the target of derision: in America it has been the Polish people (in Texas, Aggies – students of Texas A&M University – are often the target), while Poles poke fun at Russians and Americans. In Great Britain it is the Irish who are lampooned, which is reciprocated, (in Wales it is the "Cardis"). The Australians and New Zealanders make fun of each other. The Canadians target their own Newfoundlanders, or "newfies". The jokes are by no means limited to English-speaking countries. For example, the Russians tell the same joke about the Moldovans, Chukchi and Ukrainians. The Ukrainians, in turn, tell it about Russians; the Spanish make fun of the inhabitants of Lepe, while the Colombians make fun of the inhabitants of Nariño, and the rest of the Spanish-speaking population laugh at the Galicians; the Brazilians mock the Portuguese; the Portuguese mock the Brazilians; the Norwegians laugh at their Swedish neighbours, and conversely, the Swedes tell the same joke about Norwegians; the Germans target the East Frisians or the Austrians; The Dutch and French target their Belgian neighbours, the Costa Ricans joke about foreigners from Nicaragua, and the Indians target the Pakistanis. The Finns target everyone, including themselves.

Can we introduce any more generalizations and stereotypes? Seriously, this whole section ought to be removed. -- Mike 14:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * It has been removed several times, but resurfaced after an anonymous reversal to an old non-consensus version of the article. I have re-reverted to a version without this paragraph, and also without a long non-encyclopedic collection of individual lightbulb jokes. –Henning Makholm 16:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Older Discussions
You guys have managed to make a barely funny joke into a completely tedious article. Congratulations. 70.231.158.36 (talk) 02:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! 's what we're here for. :-) - ∅  ( ∅ ), 05:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow, you destroyed another page and you're even happy about it? 89.77.118.185 (talk) 15:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
-- 92.40.220.176 (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Any of them, but it will probably get reverted.
 * 2) Lightbulb is protected due to persistent vandalism.
 * 3) That's original research and hence not allowed.
 * 4) Light bulbs are not notable. This page has been marked for deletion.

What?--MCP9999 (talk) 00:44, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

you sausage 79.70.198.254 (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * 1) The whole concept of Wikipedia is that an Internetful of anonymous contributors can change a lightbulb as well as any electrician. - 69.107.143.94 (talk) 22:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

My version of the "How many Wikipeders joke" based on the Usenet original. I hope this is not off-topic for this talk page, but if so feel free to remove this comment. Enjoy. Shlomif (talk) 08:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb? One. MorkaisChosen (talk) 13:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality disputed
I sympathize with the statement about Internet joke lists that favor volume over humorous sensibility. But this article is not the place for such assertions of opinion. Is there another way to make the point (if it's worth making)? Citing an authority would work. — ℜob C. alias ᴀʟᴀʀoʙ 00:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Joke collection
Re: diff, of course this is not a joke collection. Of the countless lightbulb jokes out there, I found a select few to illustrate basic types. They're not just listed; each joke is accompanied with a reason. The current version of the article does not do this, and makes unsourced claims about how most lightbulb jokes tend to be. The article benefits by actually talking about different types of lightbulb jokes rather than merely speculating about its original structure. –Pomte 06:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Is it outside the scope of Wikipedia to facilitate collections of jokes, including lightbulb jokes?

For now, I am just putting the below jokes on the discussion page.

How many Atheists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A1: None. As they do not see the light, they are still waiting to see proof that the lightbulb exists.

How many Christians does it take to change a lightbulb?

A1: Maybe a congregation. I can let you know for sure, if and when their prayers for a lightbulb are answered.

A2: None. They believe that the Lord has worked in a mysterious way to help them get a little more rest (lightbulbs adversely affect our natural sleep patterns).

A3: They don't need to see, hence they don't need to change the lightbulb. The trinity will help show them the way.

How many XYZ (a small subset of humans) does it take to change a light bulb?

(Rational answer that is not typically funny, but could be fun for those who like to analyze a whole lot.) A1: The question is vague. In today's world most humans would be able to change most lightbulbs without help from any other humans. So, XYZ is not needed to change a lightbulb. But, if you are implying that only XYZs are allowed to change the lightbulb for the purposes of this question, then one could attempt to answer making a few standard presumptions about the XYZ category. Whether XYZ category is 'Christians' or 'Atheists', then making a few standard presumptions, just one would be required to change the lightbulb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aouie (talk • contribs) 22:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

"General structure"
A "general structure" of the joke is a generalization, i.,e., a conclusion. therefore it must be referenced. Otherwise it constitutes original research, inadmissible in wikipedia. Henning, judging from your other contributions/edit summaries, I see you know the rule. - Altenmann >t 20:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My revision avoids this issue. –Pomte 18:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Screw
How about the play on the word "screw": Q: How many flies does it to screw in a lightbulb? A: Two, but don't ask me how they got in there. Helluvamatt (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have restored mention of this type of wordplay. –Pomte 11:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Original research
This is clean-cut original research when you write some statement and then supply a joke. YOur reference is for the joke, but not for the statemnt it illustrates. For example, please provide a reference for the statement: The joke is often used to suggest that some groups follow processes that are Byzantine or unnecessarily elaborate. - Altenmann >t 16:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * At least some of those statements are supported by the sources, even if they don't have superscript numbers beside them. I restored and cited the ones that are immediately obvious, though I don't have access to JSTOR etc. anymore so maybe I'll be able to look into them later. –Pomte 06:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - Altenmann >t 21:53, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

General Outline
We should add the genertic outline of the joke perhaps?

"How many members of a certain demographic group does it take to perform a specified task?" "A finite number: one to perform the task and the remainder to act in a manner stereotypical of the group in question."

i belive this would greatly enhance the quality of the article? anyone? --Palijer (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Few punchlines involve "one to perform the task", they're usually more direct than that. The article already explains that "Generally, the punch line answer highlights a stereotype of the target group.", which seems more accurate. --McGeddon (talk) 16:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

About the picture...
Amusingly, the (current) picture is of a lightbulb that likely couldn't be screwed in with the 'spinning ladder' technique as it is hanging from a wire and not secured in a mount with an Edison screw. Any other pictures that could be used instead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.82.87 (talk) 19:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The temptation to change the caption to "A lightbulb, yesterday" is almost overwhelming...Mr Larrington (talk) 10:34, 3 June 2010 (UTC)