:celebration: When do I get the trophy?!

Sure.

Also, obviously only articles which do have links in the article body (which aren't inside parentheses or in italics) are of interest here.



You don't, shut up, serious people talking over here.

Hey! I'm pretty serious if I ever decided to spend more than 5 minutes typing a response! It's just I have a short attention span, and the Bruins are on. This is an intense time for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Striated_muscle

Let the search begin for the self-linking article!!!!

Sweet cow of Moscow, you did it! xD How did you find it so quickly?



I doubt you'll ever find that.

Thought it isn't any more, that article was originally marked a stub. The first thing I did after this thread appeared was search my browsing history for stub wikipedia articles (Opera has a wicked browsing history search feature)


Oh, it's ON

That's smart thinking. Stubs, being stubby, are more likely not to transitively link to one of the articles in the "Philosophy-cycle".



Don't do it, man! It's like trying to prove that the fifth Euclidean axiom follows from the first four! You'll waste your life on it and end up completely demented!

I've seen them before. I'm sure he'll find one eventually.

So... what's the downside and how is that supposed to be different than my current situation? (read: do I really need to link to those anime songs again?)

Point acknowledged, proceed without molesting me.

Actually, the infobox is not in italics or parentheses. So assuming you're allowed to click on Wikipedia operating articles, this happens:

Wikipedia:Citing sources
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
Wikipedia:Verifiability
Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources (maybe this breaks another rule? This is what clicking on the first link did)
Blog
Website
Web page
Document
Non-fiction
Narrative
Latin
Italic languages
Indo-European languages
Language family
Language
Human
Extant taxon
Biology
Natural science
Science

and thus, as mentioned before, from science back to Philosophy. So in this case, if you can accept the section link, it still works. And IF you don't accept that, you've found your self-linking article.

Infoboxes are not in the articles, if you don't do the first link IN the article, you'll just end up on the main page every time (as that's the first link period)


Awww, are you certain? I can always try doing both

Attempted it, took awhile but it worked.

On a side, me and and my friends a long time ago in school would see if we could make it to a article in so many clicks after clicking random article.

That's arguable. They're below the article title. Since the article title marks the beginning of the article, they're pretty much in the article.

Another endless loop occurs between the articles "Recording" and "Data Storage Device".

Ok, not the a self-link, but this three-article loop is brilliant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Germany

East Germany -> West Germany -> German Reunification -> East Germany ....

Germany will forever be together ^_^

Kewl.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union <-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Soviet_Union

Welcome to the club, Bronzy (I'm Silvery, and Allstarn is Goldy)

Thanks. :hehe:

Anyway, I suggest that we take it as our personal mission to "fix" all of the Wikipedia articles which don't transitively end up on Philosophy in this way to make them end up on Philosophy, by reformulating their first sentences. Who's with me?

I dunno, it's kinda fun finding them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunication <-> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_(telecommunications)

For those curious: I've been using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Random to find my articles now

Exactly - you find one, you fix it so it ends up on Philosophy.

*clicks random article*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Edel

Godamnit...

ROFFLE

So, anyone played this game seeing what happens if you use the second link instead of the first?