Talk:Flying Spaghetti Monster

Good articleFlying Spaghetti Monster has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 23, 2005Articles for deletionKept
October 26, 2006Good article nomineeListed
February 9, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
September 20, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
January 6, 2010Good article nomineeListed
December 10, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
May 24, 2013Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article

Flying spaghetti monster has been a phrase since the 1970's

The history of the flying spaghetti monster, or the church thereof, is grotesquely incomplete. I have heard the phrase "the church of the flying spaghetti monster," or at least of the "flying spaghetti monster" since the early 70's. So, please do a better job with your research! 2601:8C0:280:8C0:125:E8DC:DB9B:33DE (talk) 16:54, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is based on reliable sources and nothing else. Do you have a source stating that the sentence was already used in the 70s? Please also see WP:BURDEN. --McSly (talk) 17:30, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I concur that attribution to "first" in 2005 is grossly wrong. When I came across this assertion (AI quoting Wikipedia) I was somewhat stunned. The FSM and "Pastafarianism" was brought to my attention by someone I haven't seen since the '90s so absolutely must predate 2005. I checked with people I still know from that old social circle and asked when it was a popular topic of amusement for our social group and they said it was the 1990s also. This in Melbourne (Australia), which I moved out of in the late '90s.
It might be hard to find attestable articles so early / pre internet but it was certainly a topic of amused and admired conversation waaaaaaaay before 2005 and this Wikipedia article should reflect that. ~2026-28179-84 (talk) 07:40, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is WP, you, or, if you're lucky, someone else at some point, need to bring WP:RS we can use. No RS, no reflection. You can try digging at [2], it says it has hits older than 2005. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:44, 10 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind the factual presentation of M. Henderson in Kansas on 2005, I wouldn't even mind if this was described as the earliest recorded notable public use or some such, not sure exactly best description. But this article goes beyond evidence that this guy used fsm in this context and repeatedly mis-attributes invention to this guy, eg "The Flying Spaghetti Monster was first described..."
That assertion of being "first" requires evidence, and there can't be evidence because he wasn't first.
The article requires substantial adjustment beyond my skills. ~2026-29613-54 (talk) 09:54, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I made this [3] edit, we'll see what happens. You can start getting skills at WP:TUTORIAL. And I recommend WP:REGISTER. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:15, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What happened next was me making this edit: [4]. The cited source clearly implies that Henderson thought of the idea, even though it doesn't explicitly use the description "first", but that does not imply that he wasn't the first, because we don't know whether or not the source regarded saying that as unnecessary. If there were previous instances of the term, I would expect that there would be sources recording that, and I'm not aware of any, nor am I seeing anyone cite one here. A couple of unregistered contributors saying that they have personal memories of earlier use fails WP:NOR. I'm inclined to simply revert back to the previous language, pending someone providing a reliable source, but I decided to err on the side of being careful, and I framed it as the "first documented description". --Tryptofish (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have you note this [5] which clearly says publication date: 1957.[FBDB] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if taking the piss. That appears to be a hoax video. Yes, the original video is likely from 1957, but the FSM superimposed upon it appears to originate from 2007. Note the funny caption: "Proof that both evolution and creationism are wrong." Viriditas (talk) 22:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Viriditas The [FBDB] was meant to indicate I'm not serious, perhaps I should have used[Joke] instead. I deliberately didn't say "published in 1957." As has been noted, text-only humor is easy to misunderstand. Note also that FSM is commenting in the Reviews section. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:20, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have heard "the church of the flying spaghetti monster," or at least of the "flying spaghetti monster" since the early 70's. Big doubt! But please, continue to have fun. I think you are confusing Pastafarianism with the Church of the SubGenius, which indeed arose in the 1970s. In the 1990s, the Invisible Pink Unicorn gained traction. To date, there is zero evidence that the FSM arose before 2005. Part of the joke is that many people are creating hoaxes to make it appear that it did. Viriditas (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I can imagine people using "flying spaghetti monster" to describe something lovecraftian. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:25, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For the interested, Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Flying_Spaghetti_Monster. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:29, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think this discussion has gone past its expiration date, and I'm just going to say for the record that I doubt that anyone is going to come up with a reliable sauce. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:43, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Still funny. DolyaIskrina (talk) 20:08, 18 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

The phrase, "...that promotes a light-hearted view of religion" has a source of one article, from USA Today, written by one person. As this is a central claim to this entry, it would seem that there should be greater evidence than just the opinion of one person. I recommend removal of the phrase, particularly as other sources within this wiki entry cite that the view of FSM is anything but light-hearted. 75.249.104.48 (talk) 15:13, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. If there are reliable sources saying that it is not light-hearted, we could revisit this. But this is really a WP:BLUESKY thing: it's obviously light-hearted, even if it addresses serious underlying issues. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is not obviously light-hearted. Many believers from citations on this very wikipage are evidence otherwise. The phrase needs to be removed even if it were so, based on the link you provide. If it is so very obvious, there's no need to state it, as there is no need to state the sky is blue.
To keep that phrase in would be offensive to this religion. Wikipedia is not, as I understand it, in the business to offend religious believers. Also, the requirement to find sources saying an item is not something else seems...ridiculous. That's not a thing, otherwise every article on Wikipedia would mention near infinite sources of what the thing is not. 2600:1008:A031:73E0:F9BB:DE9F:C458:2F0E (talk) 20:44, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the thing about this is, both can be true. a movement can discuss issues regarding religion and encourage people to be lighthearted about it. and in general, the ability to not take the concept of religion seriously is a handy thing to have, because i wouldn't want to be forbidden from eating something because a tree is old enough to go to preschool consarn (grave) (obituary) 21:48, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
True, but by leaving out the lighthearted phrase, folks are not persuaded that opinion is fact. By keeping it in, the entry is making an unsupported claim. In other words, if someone were to believe it to be lighthearted, so be it. But telling everyone as such and implying it is fact is another issue. An example, I can believe that Christianity is a satirical religion based upon zombie worship. That would be highly offensive and a wiki entry making that claim would be erroneous because it is based on opinion. 2600:1008:A031:73E0:9B2:8CAA:EDC0:A3EE (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
this is what i like to call the "pokémon limbo". something gets so widespread that it becomes obvious to anyone looking at it, to the extent that it gets little to no coverage because it "goes without saying". in this case, saying that a parody of the concept of religion that says that hell has a stale beer volcano is lighthearted is obvious, so saying that would feel redundant, because everyone already knows it
(note: i'm not stating as fact that everyone knows it, but as an example of why someone would feel that saying something would be unnecessary) consarn (grave) (obituary) 00:56, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...though this is all implying i don't think one guy actually saying it is enough, which i actually do. it's not like anyone looking at any other form of coverage about it would walk away thinking it's the "goddamn batman" of religion, so i would say you can treat it as being cited by pretty much everything consarn (grave) (obituary) 01:02, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of like how america was created as a democracy in opposition to monarchy and thus there are no kings here. Obvious. ProofCreature (talk) 12:28, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
what consarn (talck) (contirbuton s) 12:29, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lack of qualified evidence and/or news reports provided to WP necessitates the removal of the "light-hearted" portion of the sentence. 97.223.125.207 (talk) 16:02, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
yup, so to do that, you should attempt to argue that that lack exists consarn (grave) (obituary) 16:04, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's worth seeing the FAQs (especially Q2) at the top of this talk page. Ramen. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:49, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First Pastafarian Wedding

Steven A. Miller, Ph.D., was ordained a Pastafarian Minister (Registry 209-012) on February 20, 2014. On May 17, 2014, he officiated the wedding of Daniel J. Kruger and Jessica Sloan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Dan and Jessica asked Steve to "Marry them in statistical matrimony." Steve asked Jessica her favorite statistical technique, to which she replied "ANOVA." He asked Dan what his favorite statistical technique was, and he said "regression." Steve decided that he would read from Jacob Cohen's 1968 paper on how regression and ANOVA were part of the same statistical technique, the general linear model, and this was the reading at the first known Pastafarian wedding. 2600:1700:C9D0:2DDF:7124:DCA2:97BD:3D3F (talk) 03:51, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To include this, we need to be able to cite a reliable sauce, I mean, source. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:13, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
😀 Laurier (xe or they) (talk) 13:38, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.