Medieval Wikigroaning

This post is part of my continuing commitment to stay a couple of months behind pop culture. A while ago, Something Awful proposed the new sport of Wikigroaning. As described in the original article:

The premise is quite simple. First, find a useful Wikipedia article that normal people might read. For example, the article called “Knight.” Then, find a somehow similar article that is longer, but at the same time, useless to a very large fraction of the population. In this case, we’ll go with “Jedi Knight.” Open both of the links and compare the lengths of the two articles. Compare not only that, but how well concepts are explored, and the greater professionalism with which the longer article was likely created. Are you looking yet? Get a good, long look. Yeah. Yeeaaah, we know, but that is just the tip of the iceberg. (We’re calling it Wikigroaning for a reason.)

Here is my late contribution to the sport (wordcounts approximate):

The Knight’s Tale (Chaucer’s): 440 words / A Knight’s Tale (2001 movie): 910 words
The 9th Crusade: 1,200 words / Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade: 2,400 words
The Canterbury Tales: 2,200 words / Duck Tales (cartoon): 3,500 words
Dark Ages (time period): 2,600 words / Perfect Dark (2000 Gamecube game): 5,400 words
Battle of Agincourt: 3,900 words / Medieval: Total War (video game): 5,400 words
Holy Roman Emperor: 1,200 words / Emperor Palpatine(Star Wars): 6,700 words
Dukes (nobility): 3,900 words / The Dukes of Hazzard (TV show): 10,100 words
Geoffrey Chaucer: 6,700 words / JRR Tolkien: 14,500 words

Granted, most medieval topics fail to meet the initial standard, “a useful article that normal people might read.” Full disclaimer: I use Wikipedia about 15 times a day to track down Pope Thisorthat or King Whatshisface, so who am I kidding with this show of elitism, really?

{ 2 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment

Bad Behavior has blocked 1418 access attempts in the last 7 days.