Talk:Wit

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wit article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Start a new topic Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Comedy This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This is still quite a boring page. I wish you guys hadn't removed my picture. Ah well. I don't want to be seen as a spamming recidivist, but this page needs a bit extra. Not just my pic (LOL) but a bit more juicy text as well. I'll try to come up with something, but if any one native speaker can come up with something in proper English, I'd be thrilled.

Cheers Wit 12:30, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

It seems to me that a definition of 'wit' as "slang" for 'with' is highly out of place.

Fudge

Agreed, this slang must be attached with the with definition not with Wit. --Magallanes 02:17, 6 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

---

Oscar Wilde - witty but not twentieth century. Charles Matthews 22:21, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. I fixed that a bit. Jonathunder 00:47, 2005 Apr 12 (UTC)

---

The Dimwit Flathead link is funny, but not very relevant, I'd say, having played the game myself. Perhaps a link to the word "dimwit" would be better? Sir Ophiuchus 04:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

---

What about this:

Wit is regarded the highest form of sarcasm. Whereas, sarcasm is considered the lowest form of wit – hereby intrinsically giving the wittiest example of wit.

Useful?--Lord Snoeckx 21:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

I find that definition of sarcasm most often used by those who do not understand it. Perhaps they are not quick-witted enough. Call that the sar-chasm.

On a content note, what does 'To Wit' mean, as in addressing a declaratory statement?208.114.132.151 06:35, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Same as "witness", and probably etymologically related. What about those wits we are suppose to keep about us, or at the end of which we might be? [these are mentioned...] But true, whilst a wit, being a person, could be encylopedic (e.g. Mark Twain, Will Rogers, Oscar Wilde, etc), all these other three uses mentioned here are really wiktionary, not wikipedia material, except as they form background for a discussion of historical persons.--SportWagon 18:03, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Given the root meaning of "wit", as, roughly, "mental faculties", all of "to wit", "witness", "wits about you", and "wits' end" would seem to follow, although without historical research, some etymology might be historically false.--SportWagon 18:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

What about this: Why are the writers and editors of this article asking each other what should or should not be included within it? Anyone who knows a subject well enough will be able to simply include the relevant and exclude the irrelevant. Anyone who doesn’t have a command of the topic should refrain from contributing to an article about it. It’s not a complicated matter.

With that said, this article is meandering, occasionally confusing, and has no voice of command. It seems it would be of very little use to a reader unfamiliar with the concept. Its nadir is its reference to an episode of the Simpsons, which falls within in its list-like section before a quotation from Shakespeare.

So for writers and editors unfamiliar with the concept, here is an example of (admittedly acerbic) wit: Seizing every opportunity to cite an animated television comedy as a reference - in an encyclopedia that expects to be taken seriously by intelligent readers - is a nearly-nauseating habit of many of Wikipedia's contributors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.239.133.107 (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

---

Does anyone know what "FFers"" refers to? The link goes to a disambig page. JoeKearney 22:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I've removed this line as it doesn't make sense:

 In Dan Bron's humor, Wit is usually attributed to FFers or 'the ween'.

Perhaps someone could give a better explanation? -- JDX 05:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

---

Added link to Oscar Wilde

-theredfandango —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theredfandango (talk • contribs) 17:13, 31 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate the brevity of this page. Its brevity is its soul. Panzer V Panther 09:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Not a good page. It is completely disorganized; 50 people adding snippets with no editor. It should begin with a history of the word "wit", various words or categories of "wit". Then it should have a short list of people (historical and fictional) known for their wit and a sample of their wit. Perhaps it should have a list of well-known literary works that are considered full of wit. Some people say musical works can be witty like PDQ Bach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angry bee (talk • contribs) 01:14, 6 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well said Angry bee. "second that" all in favor......? Cibwin2885 (talk) 03:43, 28 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

I've deleted a section because it was an unorganized list of unrelated sentences about archaic definitions of this word. Very misleading. 74.183.191.55 (talk) 02:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

FYI,Under Sophism people might find some concepts worth reading about. e.g. where it talks about two types of people,

  *One who does wisdom
  *One who makes a business out of wisdom

Usually I'd enter these things under "See also" straight away, but I'm not so certain. See Also- Spin (a number of topics of interest under the See Also list there) Arete One-liner Is there a specific word for business quips/euphemism/allegory/mission-statementesque? (I'm thinking "that which is expressed in a certain way to bamboozle/confuse eavesdroppers or such")

 This, I've just discovered, seems to be covered in List of buzzwords(phrases}.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.66.30 (talk) 11:46, 6 November 2010 (UTC)Reply 

See various witty quips/quotes at www.nrgordon.com/quips.htm (n.b. some trademarked ), with purpose to improve/add to this subject. Fineness is one thing, then there's finesse. Can people say "that's a sarcastic quip" or "that's a witty quip" but not, "a hackneyed/cliched quip"or "a ubiquitous/passe quip". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.101.66.30 (talk) 10:47, 6 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Wisdoms'ethics Cibwin2885 (talk) 03:45, 28 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

“It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.” ― Carl Sagan - This is an example of witty remark from Carl Sagan. 78.3.89.241 (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply