Jump to content

Talk:Russian jokes

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What this article is about


Gnomz007(?) 02:51, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I apopogize for trimming others contributions regularly. I follow the natural rules here.

  • This is not a joke repository. 2-3 example per topic is enough.
  • A joke must be of significantly Russian or Soviet relevance. Some jokes about wives, sex, stupid people, etc. may be told in any context. While they may be very funny, they do not contribute to understanding of Russian life, mentality, and history, which should be the primary purpose of the article.
  • The noted jokes must be of cultural significance or otherwise notable. According to wikipedia rules, they must be cited in reputable sources, which critically discuss the topic in question, namely, Russian humor, not just taken from joke colleciotns.

mikka (t) 18:26, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article was written long time ago when citation rules were not strictly observed. However addition of new material must follow the rules. `'Míkka>t 18:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What about adding those jokes to wikiquote or wikibook? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:15, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Themes in Russian Soviet Jokes


Analyzing comedy generally kills the humor. But wikipedia is not about delivering humor. I recommend that someone use the jokes as examples of specific themes in Russian or Soviet humor. The jokes themselves do not need to be encyclopedic. But it would be nice try to classify them. Of course, these classes will likely map on to those from other countries. Humor, I believe, like music is universal. Bon appetit. Codwiki (talk) 10:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rzhevsky and mat (mistake, maybe) + mistake in joke description


Article says that "Rzhevsky, with all his vulgarity, does not use heavy mat". In Moscow most versions of Rzhevsky jokes I've heard are involving heavy mat. Actually, some of jokes are based on mat used by Rzhevsky in inapproriate situations and girls from high society, who don't even know about such words exist.

Plus - in "the ultimate Hussar joke" the word, which should not be said by hussars is "pizda" (eng. "vagina"), not "arse". At least in most regions of Russia. "To vagina" ("в пизду") is most popular rude and pretending to be humorous answer to question "Where to", asked by women. Arse could do the trick too, but it's not rude enough for hussars. Maybe, in some small ethnical or social groups it's "arse" like in article - I don't know.

I think, it'll be good if somebody with better English than my corrects the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:27, 28 September 2012‎

It looks like modern generation lost feeling of mat (or its perception changed), as well as the "state of the mind" of poruchik Rzvevsky. There is a gradation in increasing of severity/rudeness of an expression of, e.g., the analogs of "go to hell": "go to devil" -> "go into arse" -> "go onto хуй" -> "go into pizda". (By the way only people with modern sick (I's day, Russophobic :-) mind interpret expressions "go into arse", "go onto хуй" as something belonging only to certain you known which ethnic or social groups. I strongly object this deprivation of Russian people of their true iskonny heritage ispokon vekov). One has to understand that the word "zhopa" is kind of "inherently funny word". (If one needs a rude equivalent, you use the word "sraka", which is even more ugly than 'pizda') You have to really understand the Hussar state of the mind in the discussed joke, at the moment when they were ordered to shut up. Think about it: the question about an extra candle was a perfect opportunity, but not for an insult (then "pizda" would do), but for a joke! <sigh> What had happened today with deep and exquisite Russian culture used to be? Now people don't even know the difference between 'pizda' and 'zhopa'. Tletvornoe vliyanie Zapada... - Altenmann >t 07:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian/black joke

A Ukrainian and a black person sit in a couchette car. Ukrainian takes out a piece of salo and starts eating it. The black person looks at him. Ukrainian asks: "What, do you want salo?". The black nods his head in agreement. "Ah, that's regular salo, write to your parents so they send you some too."

I strongly object inclusion of this "joke" in article. First, it is not funny at all. There's no pun and therefore it can't serve as an example of Russian humour. There's already a better example of a joke concerning salo; therefore, addition of this joke serves no reason. Second, Wikipedia is not a collection of anecdotes. The article already violates it too much, and now it even includes tasteless jokes about races. The very addition of this joke should have been reverted in first place, not the deletion of it. I am ready to appeal for a third opinion if needed. Garret Beaumain (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please show me where you see the jab at the black race. The joke pokes fun at the stereotype that "Ukrainians are stingy", and the black man is "the foreigner". Moreover, considering the harshness of the Soviet regime at the time, the only people who could be seen as "obviously foreigners" in the USSR were African exchange students at the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (then known as the Patrice Lumumba university).
As for the lack of pun, it's your personal view and as such, cannot be held as a measuring standard for Wikipedia, since one of its main principles is neutrality. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 20:23, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The first part of the joke is missing. A black person should give a Ukrainian a banana to start with. The pun is partly that a banana is exotic with salo being regular. -- (talk) 08:36, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And the punchline isn't right too. The joke should look like this (I still doubt how to translate the punchline idiom properly):
A Ukrainian and a black person sit in a couchette car. The black person takes out bananas and starts eating them. Ukrainian asks the black person to give him a banana for tasting. The black person kindly does so. Shortly after Ukrainian takes out a piece of salo and starts eating it. The black person in turn asks a bit of it for tasting. Ukrainian answers: "Why on Earth one needs to taste salo? Salo is always the same salo, even in Africa".
notion of black man eating bananas is racist, unnecessary inclusion of race. as this is for examples of ukranian/russian humor, change to something generic/ a man sharing an apple, ex?Therealjendavis (talk) 19:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"notion of black man eating bananas is racist" -- oh, another snowflake imposing their standards onto other cultures. "unnecessary inclusion" -- this joke is told in exactly that way, and actually makes fun of perceived attachment of Ukranians to salo and also their perceived greediness, not of the black (who is of course called "negro" by Russian natives, the horror!). Will you also censor articles about Third Reich? Or, even better, about some 18-century American who held views deemed racist *now*, but that were considered completely normal back then? Also, a good third of such jokes is *supposed* to be somewhat offensive, and normally they are littered with words such as "khokly", "pendosy" and what not. If you say such things must be omitted, it oddly reminds of that "the arse exists, but the word doesn't!", which you can look up in the article. -- (talk) 23:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

you are not a camel


I work with a 50ish guy who grew up in the sov union he says proove you are not a camel comes from a skit, where a man needs a piece of paper signed, and the official keeps asking for mroe and more documents, which the man has, finally the official asks for the document prooving the man is not a camel,which the man doesn't ahve — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Smth is the same smth, even in Africa" ([Сало] - оно и в Африке [сало]) is popular russian idiom for something regular, ordinary or standard. Rachelier (talk) 16:10, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I failed to find any reliable reference about Сало - оно и в Африке сало , which is clearly a well-known expression. At the moment I am removing this joke, since there is another one about salo. - Altenmann >t 06:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"a seven-foot-note"


Someone, I haven't bothered to dig up who, left the following in a source comment following the "lean, ringing, and transparent" joke. It rather belongs here:

this joke deserves a footnote; actually, a seven-foot-note: each tiny piece from the joke is a holographic reflection of the morose reality of the Soviet era. Unfortunately deciphering it here would be original research. However I cannot help comment on being "lazy, gluttony, and deceiving". It reflects two very different pieces of reality. From one hand, the negative depiction of gulag inmates was typical of leftist Western authors who insisted that Soviet political prisoners deserved their fate. On the opposite hand, what looks like a negative depiction from a "normal" point of view, in fact is the basics from the gulag survival guide ("Gulag Survival 101"): work less, eat what you manage to, and "anything you say may be used against you"

copied over by 4pq1injbok (talk) 22:29, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand this joke at all. What have "lean, ringing, and transparent" got to do with anything? Equinox 10:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a good one


Two old ladies meet and have a conversation. - You know, I stopped using foul language. - And I became an atheist. - Are you fucking me?! - I swear to god!

Why these jokes?


Why some jokes are quoted here and the other ones aren't? I would expect some logical basis. Maybe the jokes shoud be moved to Wikisources?Xx236 (talk) 07:19, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "quoted"? -M.Altenmann >t 04:12, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wikisource is for documents. -M.Altenmann >t
Why some jokes are published in the article? It's non-neutral, biased.
Wikisource is for fiction, too.Xx236 (talk) 05:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
biased, how is that? -M.Altenmann >t 06:34, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Published fiction. a book is a document. If you find published free joke collections, go ahead. -M.Altenmann >t 06:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Editors who choose the jokes create the image of the historical period and of the jokes as the subject. It'a a bias, even if the editors aren't aware of their policy. They select more abstract or more disgusting jokes, radical anti-Communist or satyric. It's OR. A Wikipecia editor should be aware the difference between neutral presentation of existing knowledge vs. OR.
Are all the jokes Russian? The same jokes were frequently told in all Warsaw pact countries. Xx236 (talk) 06:59, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Constantinehuk (talk) 13:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

seemed to consist of khuyevina, pizd'ulina, and a poyeben' connecting them together, with all three parts being completely interchangeable


This joke is not about rockets, but about Russian language and especially Russian mat. As Russian mother-language speaker I know that every single Russian word has heavy load of variations, most of which carrys a little or none meaning but are required in ANY word conjunction. Here is some examples: a word Keyboard (клавиатура) belongs to "female-gender" branch of rules and together with "male gender" plurals in these to branches are encoded by letter -Ы аt the very end (after suffixes); but Programming word (программирование) has "middle gender" branch of rules, therefore plural form is transmitted with -Я ending which more often is using with "female" words. That "middle gender" is not agender because using some usual words about somebody "incorrectly" in middle gender is a common way for hate speech on that special somebody. But mat words unleash a world of simpler ways for calling any things and movements and feelings and, of cource, name-callings, with respect to gender (male or female) or not (middle). Words khuyevina, pizd'ulina, and a poyeben' are all female (like most of the technical stuff), that's why these three are common in technical stuff (only when women are out of hearing). A khuievina, like any instance of Hui, must be something bulb, like rocket or anything else. A pizdulina must be something you can grab, maybe something costy or just with hole, as instance of Pizda. Poyeben is something you do not understand, since middle gender means disrespect, any well-known thing or good learned stuff can not continue being poeben any more. So, khuievina and pizdulina, are not interchangable but compatible, and both of them may or may not be a part of poeben which is singular. Any rocket and any its part may be a khuievina and/or a pizdulina as well as being poeben. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Russian jokes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:37, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sholem Aleichem, a famous Rabinovich


I sugges to remove this phrase because it is offensive to the writer.--Reciprocist (talk) 20:06, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube video


@Saizai: about this edit ― diff.
1) I think it is necessary to start with the fact that all Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable sources - WP:RS
2) Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information - WP:INDISCRIMINATE
3) YouTube generally is not a reliable source. See WP:RSPYT.
4) In your edit summary you say: "I've added a transcript as well. You could also just Google it." But the problem is not that I am questioning video-text integrity, I am questioning the reliability of this YouTube video and the justification for including text from this video in this encyclopedic article.
Based on the information above, I would like to ask you a couple of questions:
1) Do you think that this particular YouTube video is a reliable source? Why?
2) The video lasts 2 hours. Of all the 2 hours, why did you choose this particular speech part to add to the article?
3) Is there any secondary reliable source that discuss the same part of the text you added?--Renat 15:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Renat: "Generally" is a key word. YouTube isn't magically tainted somehow. A CNN clip on YouTube is just as reliable as one on cnn.com. So I think that the question is fundamentally flawed; the real question is about the source, not the platform.

Also, there's no such thing as a "source" without a fact that you are trying to prove using that source. Talk about sources must always include an explicit statement of what facts need to be proven.

0. So, first off:

A. The "source" in this case is the comedian who's performing. YouTube the corporation has absolutely nothing to do with it, and it wouldn't be any more or less reliable if it were published somewhere else.
B. The article claims that the text cited is
  1. a joke
  2. funny
  3. comprehensible to a native Russian speaker
  4. consisting entirely of хуй derived terms.

Do you agree?

1. Part d is self-evident from the transcription.

The video is

  1. a Russian comedian
  2. performing, more or less verbatim, the text cited in the article
  3. to a lot of laughter
  4. with commentary from other comedians about the cultural context of the joke.

This proves the rest of it.

2. I specifically linked to, and cited in text, the timestamp where the content in this paragraph is used. I make no claims about the rest of the show. You can't expect any reference to be exclusively about one thing, let alone a reference for a joke.

3. … it's a joke. Be realistic.

Do you seriously need more than a Russian comic using it on broadcast TV to prove the facts I enumerated at #0.B above?

Are there some other facts you think need to be proven, other than the ones I listed in #0.B?

FWIW, the version he uses is even more elaborated than the one quoted in the article — and the one quoted has lots of variants easily Googled.

I'm not aware of any secondary sources abstractly analyzing the linguistics of Russian jokes, any more than I know ones for the linguistics of English jokes. They might exist, but it's pretty esoteric, and won't be comprehensive.

Language Hat *might* have something — I know they've had articles on Russian mat before — but that's only a guess. — Sai ¿? 15:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Saizai:""Generally" is a key word. YouTube isn't magically tainted somehow. A CNN clip on YouTube is just as reliable as one on cnn.com. So I think that the question is fundamentally flawed; the real question is about the source, not the platform."
This video is not from CNN. So could you please tell me why is this video a reliable source?
"Also, there's no such thing as a "source" without a fact that you are trying to prove using that source. Talk about sources must always include an explicit statement of what facts need to be proven."
Please, read my first sentence in this thread. I specifically wrote at the beginning: "about this edit" and gave you the diff link. I am discussing the text in that particular edit I gave here.
"The "source" in this case is the comedian who's performing."
Comedian who? Nikita Dzhigurda? It doesn't look like he is a subject matter expert. Why do you think he is a reliable source?
"The article claims that the text cited is a. a joke b. funny c. comprehensible to a native Russian speaker d. consisting entirely of хуй derived terms."
When you say "the article" you mean this Wikipedia article? The article can not claim anything. The source can. It returns us back to the question of reliablity of the source.
"Part d is self-evident from the transcription."
Please, read 4th point of my starting comment here. I am not questioning integrity.
"The video is 1. a Russian comedian 2. performing, more or less verbatim, the text cited in the article 3. to a lot of laughter 4. with commentary from other comedians about the cultural context of the joke."
I am not sure if you understand what I asked you. You need to explain why is this comedian a reliable source. There are many Russian comedians. It is technically impossible to list all jokes from all comedians.
"This proves the rest of it."
I am sorry, but at this point it proves nothing. P.S. Please, read this Wikipedia:Indentation.-Renat 16:31, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Renat: Please first respond to my part 0.B. What fact, exactly, are you trying to source? A comedian is an expert on comedy, and that paragraph is about humor. Do you question the existence of the anecdote? Dzhigurda proved it by example. Do you question that it's composed of хуй-compounds? Any Russian speaker can confirm that. (I am one, and do.) So… what fact needs better sourcing? — Sai ¿? 18:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Saizai:"What fact, exactly, are you trying to source?"
The text that you added in this edit.
First of all, I don't see why Nikita Dzhigurda is a comedian. Just because someone is joking doesn't make him a comedian. You need RS to call someone a comedian. Second, being a comedian doesn't mean being a RS. According to Cambridge dictionary, "Comedian - a person whose job is to make people laugh by telling jokes and funny stories or by copying the behaviour or speech of famous people". So I don't see why comedians are RS for this encyclopedic article. Linguists and historians are RS (generally). Comedians - no.--Renat 02:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This article purports to show a few (two or three) examples of each of the various varieties of Russian jokes, not to be a dissertation about specifically Russian humor (which, like Bergson's Laughter, would be boring, and possibly even pompous). IMHO this article reaches its goal if each joke (a) makes us laugh or at least smile, and (b) is recognized by Russians as being of a kind which is frequently told in Russia. Sources are welcome, but I would expect them to come from collections of jokes originally published in Russian or from Russian-language jokester performances, not from academic essays or doctoral dissertations. — Tonymec (talk) 12:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tonymec: Please, read WP:SOURCETYPES. "Many Wikipedia articles rely on scholarly material. When available, academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks are usually the most reliable sources." And I see no reason why this article needs to be different. And anyway, this is not what we are discussing here. We are discussing the reliability of a particular YouTube video.--Renat 16:11, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've watched the video, and (being native Russian) I seriously question that what Dzhigurda has performed there is a joke. It's not that I'm offended or anything, in fact I find the original joke funny. but Dzhigurda's performance is just a continuous flow of obscenities. Some people *might* find it funny, but that's not a joke. I would also question authenticity of the audience's laughter. And I agree that this source is not reliable. Shcha (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Work robes"?


The "work robes" mentioned here, as part of a joke, sounds very awkward and strange in English. I think it should be "coveralls" or "overalls" instead of "work robes". However, I don't know Russian humour, so I'm leaving it alone in case the awkwardness is part of the joke. TooManyFingers (talk) 23:52, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed as unreferenced. I did hear it in several variants but didnt read. - Altenmann >talk 02:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A few examples for the article


I would like to offer a few examples for the article at the authors' discretion. They are quite famous in Russia, this is easy to verify with the help of Google.

Rabinovich sells watermelons at the market place, in front of him is a price tag: "One watermelon — three rubles. Three watermelons — ten rubles." A man comes up, buys one watermelon and leaves. A couple of minutes later he returns, buys the watermelon again and leaves. In a couple more minutes later he buys a watermelon again and tells Rabinovich:

— Look, I bought three watermelons from you, but only paid nine rubles. You don't know how to trade! — and leaves.

Rabinovich looks after him and says:

— It’s always like this — they buy three watermelons each, and then teach me commerce.

The last phrase became a meme/saying in Russia.

A few examples about Stierlitz.

Stierlitz crossed the border without being noticed. He learned about this from the morning newspapers.

Müller was driving at a speed of 80 km/h. Stierlitz ran alongside, pretending to be taking a walk.

Stierlitz gave the dog gasoline to drink. The dog walked a few meters and fell. “Gasoline is out,” thought Stierlitz.

An attempt to translate a joke about Stierlitz with a play on words.

Müller stood on the roof. When Stierlitz passed below, Müller threw a brick at him.

— These are the time! — Stierlitz thought.

— These are the second time! — Müller thought, and threw another brick.

But most of the plays on words can only be translated with explanations. The surname of the actor who played Müller — “Bronevoy” — literally translates as “armored”.

Stierlitz shot Müller in the head. The bullet bounced off. “Bronevoy,” thought Stierlitz. (talk) 01:15, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, there are tens of thousands of RUssain jokes. In encyclopedia only notable jokes (i.e., discussed, not just published) are added. - Altenmann >talk 01:22, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understood the criteria you explained. It seemed to me that I gave notable examples - they are notable for their long-standing popularity. They are not “just published”. (talk) 01:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was in a hurry and not clear: they must be discussed in porlised reliable sources (see WP:RS) which explain the merits of the discussed jokes. I am sure your jokes are published in many jokebooks, but for Wikipedia purposes, a joke must be discussed, e.g., in an article about folklore or singled out in some other way. - Altenmann >talk 05:44, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]