Long version
How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
- One to notice it went out, and slap a {{Lightbulb is burned out}} tag on it.
- Two to research about how to replace a lightbulb.
- One to patrol Category:Lightbulbs that are burned out, and remove them all with an automated script.
- One to notice the removed lightbulb, and slap a {{Lightbulb is removed}} tag on it.
- One to patrol Category:Lightbulbs that have been removed, and re-install the burned out lightbulb with an automated script.
- One to notice that the previous editor used an automated script to install a burned out lightbulb, and report them to ANI.
- Fifteen to comment at ANI on whether this is a cause for blocking.
- One to close the ANI thread as "more heat than light".
- One to propose on the talk page that the lightbulb be replaced.
- One to place a notice with an arrow saying that "there's another light over there" and another to remove the redirect because it's too dark to read it.
- One to finally replace the lightbulb manually.
- One to revert the replacement, with the message "Please gain consensus before removing any lightbulbs".
- One to edit war the replacement lightbulb back in.
- One to edit war the original lightbulb back in (saying "please don't edit war").
- Six to continue the edit war, including one to remind them of the 3 revert rule and two others called in to avoid violating 3RR.
- One to request for protection.
- One administrator to protect the page (with the burnt out lightbulb in).
- One to alert the admin that the page was protected with the light bulb still burned out.
- One to claim "admin abuse" of lightbulb protection privileges.
- One to post the issue to Jimbo Wales' talk page.
- Two talk page stalkers to provide their opinions instead of Jimbo.
- One to demand an RFC on the subject.
- Twelve to participate in the 30-day RFC.
- Four to nominate and ponder the close of the RfC at Discussions for discussion.
- One to close the RFC as "no consensus".
- One to put in the replacement bulb anyway, with an edit summary "this is the stupidest thing I've ever seen".
- One to file another report at ANI for "Breach of WP:CIVILity and egregious Personal Attacks".
- Seven to comment at ANI whether this was uncivil or not.
- Seven more to debate whether one of the comments should be placed above or below a line.
- One to file a request for closure of the ANI thread at Administrators' noticeboard/Requests for closure.
- One to close the ANI thread with "user warned" several days after everyone else lost interest.
- One to mark the request for closure as done, because the actual closer forgot to do so.
- One to open a Sockpuppet Investigation on the user who changed the lightbulb.
- One CheckUser to block the user in question as a sock of a site banned user and revert all the user's contributions, including the lightbulb.
- One extended-confirmed user to request to be an admin so they can change the light bulb despite the full protection on it.
- 300 users to demand that the user be made an admin.
- One bureaucrat to make the hapless user an admin.
- One vandal to vandalize the lightbulb after the new admin accidentally un-protected the lightbulb.
- One vandalism-reverting bot to revert the vandalism.
- Ten sockpuppets belonging to the vandal to vandalize the lightbulb after the vandal got blocked by the new admin.
- One admin to block the sockpuppets and forget to restore the lightbulb.
- One admin to protect the light bulb.
- One person to comment that the light bulb still isn't fixed.
- One admin standing in good faith to change the light bulb.
- One person to notice that the lightbulb is a 75 Watt bulb rather than a 110 Watt bulb and request that it be moved to 110 Watts.
- Fifty-three users to support the move, another fifty-three to oppose, one to suggest a candle as an alternative, and one to suggest a LED light bulb.
- One to ask why it’s necessary to move when the lightbulb is fine.
- One to whack them with a wet trout, and another to sizzle the trout.
- One to delete this page, never to be seen again.
- The old EC user to hack up this page, tired of this mess.
- And a partridge in a pear tree.
- One to replace the partridge with a light bulb because it ain’t Christmas.
- One to notice the lack of a source inside it, and add one.
- Six, One to write the cover, one to write the story, and the other four to screw the bulb in.
So, by my count, 522.
Short version
See also
- Lightbulb joke
- List of jokes about Wikipedia
- Parkinson's law
- Underpants Gnome
- User:Eumat114/How many Wikipedians does it take to finally change a lightbulb?, stating that it's less than 515 users.