Talk:List of Google Easter eggs

Deletion Nomination

The above nomination was done when this article was named Google Gulp – see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Google Gulp

It might be wise to add a little bit about the Google Text Based Web Browser... Damien

At least this version introduces it as a prank. What should be done with this? Deletion? Merge/redirect? I'd go for the latter (with some trimming, certainly drop the graphics), but to where? April Fools Day? Google? Some other place? -R. fiend 02:00, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No, please don't delete it. We have plenty of articles about fictional subjects. They're an actual part of culture. I'll flesh it out as detailed as possible. Superm401 03:57, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

I dunno, a whole article dedicated to Google Gulp? Sounds like it should be part of Google... I mean, it's a smallish joke, brought up once, no one really talks about it, but whatever.

This is dumb. Is Wikipedia going to start summarizing articles in the The Onion? Please delete it!!!

This needs to stay, in the future "GoogleGulp" may enter our slang vocabulary. Plus its an excellent joke and can be linked to numerous places. Cokehabit 21:49, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'd go with merge and redirect. Uttaddmb 22:06, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't think it should be deleted. Many people like the Aprils fool jokes of google, and this provides a single source of all their jokes. Perhaps merged (although it should probably be a stud of google).

Do NOT Delete. As a page entitled "Google Hoaxes" I feel this is appropriate and well developped. Dachande 02:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, this page was once up for deletion!? Google and its eggs have come a long way.Mr. Guye (talk) 01:35, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Ascii

I think Google got rid of the ascii one, doesn't appear for me on Chrome. --James Freeman 19:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't work for me on Safari. --roger6106 (talk) 00:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Hoaxes?

Why is this page called "hoaxes"? It conveys the wrong idea. In the minds of most people a "hoax" is a negative thing. These are just "quirks" or otherwise cute stuff that Google tends to do. Why don't we move it to something that better reflects the topic? Unfortunately I can't think of a good name just now. "Google culture"? "Google quirks"? "Google humour"? -- klaus

Maybe you could call it "Google's Pranks" or "Google April Fools" ? --Jake (talk) 22:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I believe it used to be called April Fools, but they changed it because they weren't all April Fools jokes. --Dlevenstein 15:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Images

Surely these images are copyvios? violet/riga (t) 18:39, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well since google host some servers for wikipedia can't someone ask them if they ming us having the images there? Cokehabit 21:49, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the logo and made the other pictures smaller. As it was, there was practically more picture than article. --User:Jenmoa 01:05, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

no delete

how can wikipedia have all of humanity's knowledge if you are always deleting articles for stupid reasons. every little piece of text, despite it's ridiculity shouldn't be deleted Cosme Fulanito 22:25, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I totally agree with that. --Stebbiv 23:25, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I also agree with that, I found this article very interesting. --Newuser12345215

Blog Links

I reverted the blog links I put in back. They are necessary because they provide basic analysis of the joke. This article should have that, and I can't make it up from scratch because of the No original research doctrine (which I agree with) Superm401 23:28, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

Image Permission

Violetriga, you are correct that the images could be an issue. If I have time, I will seek permission from Google. Until then, keep them small. Superm401 23:38, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

• 1) If the images are untagged, shouldn't they be removed altogether from the article until they are tagged?

• 2) I don't think we accept "used by permission" images, do we? Google would have to license them under GFDL or some other license that Wikimedia Commons considers "free."

I think the burden is on the uploader of the images to give a convincing explanation of why they are fair use. I think that's probably true of the main Google logo, but I am much less sure about things like their hoax images and celebratory main-page images... Dpbsmith (talk) 12:32, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Non-hoaxes

Is this subsection really required? It seems to me that the only "non-hoax" in support of this section is the one involving the introduction of GMail. The timing for the increased capacity had more to do with GMail's anniversary than it had with it being April Fool's Day. Shankar 19:48 7 April, 2005 UTC

Indeed, I'd like to see evidence that the 2005 space increase was widely thought to be a hoax. I mean, once you have 1 GB Gmail, what's so unlikely about 2 GB a year later? It's the kind of story you'd expect to see on That's Credible!. -- Coneslayer 16:10, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)

The section, being about the initial announcement of gmail, is certainly relevant. The anniversary increase was also met with a little skepticism because of the way it was done. I've reinstated the section and added two supporting external links. violet/riga (t) 08:49, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd still like to see support for the claim "in 2005 the increase of storage space was also thought to be false," -- Coneslayer 23:23, 2005 May 12 (UTC)

VFD

On 2 April 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep after move. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Google Gulp for a record of the discussion. – ABCD 22:12, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Gulp!

A real drink known as Gulp! exists. It is a brand of milkshake and is very popular in the United Kingdom. NSR 00:17, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why I removed the "miserable failure" reference

On the opening paragraph, there was a line referring to the "miserable failure" Google Bomb.

This has been removed (and I am naturally willing to hear a second opinion why it should have stayed). This article deals with "hoaxes" and "Easter Cookies" initiated by Google itself. Google Bombs are not a Google iniative - au contraire, as the French say - it is an attempt to manipulate Google's results.

By the way, "miserable failure" is not the only politically/socially motivated "Google Bomb" (as the article reveals) and IINM not even the first one.

Karpada 11:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Opening section or article title needs revising

The article's opening discusses things that are not hoaxes and don't even resemble hoaxes. What are they doing on a page called "Google's hoaxes" at all, let alone starting off the article? If they are to stay, the article needs to be renamed to clarify that this is about Google's sense of humor, not just Google's hoaxes. - furrykef (Talk at me) 21:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Should Google Moon (2005) be considered a hoax?

I don't see how Google Moon (2005) is a hoax. Please note that I'm not talking about Google Lunar (2004). Google Moon is simply a limit ed extension of Google Maps. A similar thing was done during the Katrina Hurricane. Please explain why Google Moon should be considered an hoax.--Alf 17:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Doue to lack of objections I'm now going ahead and editing. --Alf 14:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe because of the image of the cheese of the faq style is a bit inconherence Google moon faq 219.78.165.185 07:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

This section needs to be edited because google moon no longer shows swiss cheese when one zooms all the way in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.152.243 (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Google TV Beta

I am horrible at writing articles but I think some one needs to add that Google TV beta trick that went around on Youtube.

Prepare for 2007's prank...

In three/four days (depending where on the globe you are) there's going to be April Fools Days 2007. Everyone hold onto your butts, this one should be big - they acquired YouTube since the last one, and GMail came out of beta. Look very carefully, and lets keep this article as up-to-date as possible. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 11:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Could this be it? Note item number 23... - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 21:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we need to quickly and reflexivly remove ANY reference to 2007's prank until there is a reliable source published about it, preferably the day after. We don't want to mistakenly lable something like GMail as a hoax. --Ybbor^TSurvey! 00:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I think that they made this year's prank pretty clear.Ezratrumpet 04:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

google tisp

This article would benefit by the inclusion of the year this prank was played. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.4.228.239 (talk) 08:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

oh god i feel really stupid coz i fell for the google tisp prank. i actually believed that they were gonna introduce a wireless broadband that connected through the toilet —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dark Devil (talk • contribs) 07:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

So did I. But really we need broadband through our toilet's.Dspradau 13:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

GooDay removed

I'm not sure why it was put there, but it was the only hoax without references, and I don't see it on my calendar, so I removed it. --Dlevenstein 17:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Missing one

If you go onto Google Maps today and ask it to route you from North America to Europe, it'll explicitly tell you to "swim across the Atlantic Ocean". I've done it myself and, lo, it actually says just that. I've been told it only started doing this today...? --Shadow Hog 01:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

If you'll notice my comment earlier on this talk page, It's been doing that since at least March 31. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 16:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Googlegulp logo.gif

Image:Googlegulp logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Googlegulp logo.gif

Image:Googlegulp logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

No more "swim across the Atlantic Ocean"

Google Maps no longer tells you to swim across the ocean. i dunno why.24.165.106.246 03:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Where is this written in here? About the swimming across Atlantic Ocean? --Complex-Algorithm-Interval 02:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Google lake of Blood in Iraq

View it here. I can see the google copyright in the water, should we mention this as an Easter Egg? OBEY STARMAN 00:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Google copyrights show up all over the map; it's not just here. And apparently the red is from salt production. --Ybbor^Talk 01:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Infinite monkey theorem

I'm not sure if this is an easter egg, but while searching on YouTube, I accidentally pressed a random key and got this:

500 Internal Server Error

Sorry, something went wrong.

A team of highly trained monkeys has been dispatched to deal with this situation. Please report this incident to customer service. Also, please include the following information in your error report:

[followed by string of random characters]

Is this considered an easter egg? If so, should it be put on this page?

Sincerely, GlobeGores 04:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Also, when I clicked on the "report this incident" link, I got Google normal customer support. GlobeGores 08:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

The idea behind TISP in the news?

Long story short, was TISP based on a rollout of cable through sewerage systems such as what is described in this article? (Note from the article that this rollout started in 2003 in the UK, possibly before that in Japan) [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.44.183 (talk) 13:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

French military victories

I removed this:

• Typing "french military victories" and choosing the I'm Feeling Lucky search option will yield no results, with a redirect "french military defeats" leading to a recent "history" of French warfare.

This is just the first hit as determined by PageRank. From the page:

"This Parody is not sponsored or endorsed by Google"

Perhaps it is manually kept at the top of the page because Google likes the parody, but it doesn't fit in an existing area of the article. Mark Hurd (talk) 02:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it doesn't belong here. It's mentioned in Google bomb, where it belongs. -- Coneslayer (talk) 02:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

WMDs

Try typing in "Weapons of Mass Destruction" in google and hit Im Feeling Lucky. a great message is found that is the exact same layout as the "web page cannot be found" page except with a twist. i cant quote exactly as i dont have access where i am now, but its worth a look. Dark_Wounds —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.108.73.47 (talk) 14:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

All that is is somebody using google bombs to get they're site to the top of the page. If you look at the URL it is albinoblacksheep. I think it was already discussed somewhere but feel free to look. 69.24.5.21 (talk) 12:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Google Docs Offline

Why is Google Docs Offline considered a hoax when it clearly isn't. This is an enormously requested feature which is easily possible using Google Gears and something which has been confirmed to exist in user accounts by many. Bjtitus (talk) 02:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've removed it, there's no evidence it is a hoax. It fits the standard way google release new features - wacky video, gradual roll out. It isn't funny either. EAi (talk) 03:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a function of google gears, google it! Jmhunter (talk) 10:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

However they added an easteregg to docs... 'new airplane' smiles Jmhunter (talk) 10:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Google April Fools joke 2008

if you go to youtube and try to watch any featured video you see the rickroll video --201.143.35.141 (talk) 06:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Today GMAIL offers a chance to choose the DATE of when your e-mail was sent according to the 'beta' testers. OF course that option is unavailable. Check your GMAIL account via web interface. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.157.167 (talk) 07:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

_{Hey guys, please do not remove the link i placed to http://imageupload.com/~imageupl/show.php/94201_gmailcustomtime.PNG.html ^^ it's an april fools joke too}

VIRGLE IS NOT A HOAX!

I DO NOT KNOW WHERE PEOPLE GOT VIRGLE HAS A HOAX IS FROM. THIS IS NOT TRUE! IT IS LIKE GMAIL! IT IS NOT A HOAX! 203.122.240.136 (talk) 07:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

righhhhhhttt Jmhunter (talk) 10:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow... Dude do you realize how stupid that makes you look? Just gotta love thos school IP's. Like mine Lulz..... 69.24.5.21 (talk) 12:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Erm, it really is. Did you take the questionnaire? "You are distressingly normal". Like they'd say that about a future astronaut. nedragehtnistercesruodeirubew 18:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, you do know it's April Fools' Day, don't you? (I'm on GMT-3, so it still is) - Adler (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.76.130.89 (talk)

Ok. Go to the Virgle page, and click on "FAQ". At the very bottom, click on "Virgle is Real". Read the Page Error. :-) It's ok, because all of my friends believed it (i didn't).And, didn't you see Sergey and Larry (Google founders) trying to keep a straight face on the YouTube video? So, to make it short: Virgle (sadly) IS a cleverly constructed April Fools Day Joke. --Listen to your Princess, dear Wikipedians. (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

YouTube Rickroll

What to others think about keeping or removing the YouTube hoax. Should this article include only hoaxes on sites that are fully Google-branded, or include a subsidiary such as YouTube? --Rich Janis (talk) 13:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Google owns a lot of entities. Though Youtube is owned by Google, Youtube's front-end has changed very little (other than having an "add to iGoogle" link near the bottom), and as such has retained it's own identity. It is not Google-branded, as Gmail and other Google spinoffs are. This article is about Google hoaxes, not about Youtube hoaxes. The Youtube prank is already mentioned on Youtube's page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, this is a Google entity and should be included.Tbooz 16:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tbooz (talk • contribs)

I also disagree. YouTube is not a "subsidiary" of Google but is fully owned and incorporated into the company itself. Although it isn't "Google Branded", anyone who is at all interested in YouTube will clearly understand the relationship between the two companies. Bjtitus (talk) 17:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I third that, it is notable enough and nowhere near long enough for another article. nedragehtnistercesruodeirubew 18:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No one is saying that it needs it's own article; it's already included in the YouTube article. Furthermore, it's not even a hoax; it's a prank redirect. (All of the other items mentioned on the page fit the definition of a hoax). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe this section is worth including, since it is a hoax which was perpetrated by Google's employees. YouTube, as a fully owned subsidary, has Google employees. Whether the site has Google branding is irrelevant. Also, the Orkut section is included as well, despite orkut not being fully Google-branded. 65.19.75.233 (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree to disagree. It does belong to the under google hoax. Since by that time, Google owned youtube, and the site participated google’s traditional April Fools prank with this prank redirect. --DavidD4scnrt (talk) 06:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

infinity + 1

I don't remember what year it was, but, one of the gmail pranks has been offering infinity plus 1 amount of storage. Does anyone else remember this? 70.232.94.60 (talk) 19:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I think that was a deliberate exaggeration to promote the service, rather than a hoax. nedragehtnistercesruodeirubew 20:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright then. Was forever ago so wasn't quite sure. Thanks. 70.232.94.60 (talk) 04:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. =P weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 10:59, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup

I added {{prose}} because it reads like a list more than an article. The links also need some attention and cleanup. I like the information but want to see it presented better. Too bad I'm to lazy to do it myself. --B Fizz (talk) 21:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't this be fixed by moving the page to "List of Google's hoaxes"? --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

2001-search's error page easter egg?

Google put their index of 2001 back for their birthday celebration, searching for for example "cache:google.com" brings you to this error page: http://www.google.com/search2001toobusy.html not sure if can call this an easter egg, if so, someone could put it at the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.212.16.222 (talk) 22:13, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Advertising

This is a prank war, google sponsored. Wikipedia is used for advertising, as there is no science here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.226.97 (talk) 06:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

WTF? Never mind that. But anyway, WHAT THE HECK DO YOUR MEAN? Pisharov (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Worst band in the world

Is it sure that this is an easter egg and not a google bomb? 87.212.16.222 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC).

Nope, (almost) definitely an easter egg. I did some WP:OR and found that:

1)"(Best|Worst) x in the world" didn't produce a similar result for many x,

2)Other permutaions of the words "band in the world worst" produced the same basic results without the "creed" results, and

3)When searching "Worst band in the world" but limiting results to Australia only, it still produced the "creed" results, but limited to Australia, which doesn't match any results for the band in the three results it shows.

The results look similar to the results for some of the suggested misspelling results sets where it shows a handfull of results for what Google thinks you meant to search for but then also shows the results of what you actually searched for.

Mark Hurd (talk) 14:11, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Further to this, this article suggests it was an early bomb, but my point above about it working for the Australian only query suggests it is something more. Similary the fact that it doesn't work on google.co.uk queries at all (at least for me from Australia) suggests it is an easter egg and not a google bomb. Mark Hurd (talk) 05:29, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I've reverted the entry again. First of all, your explanation is entirely OR, as you say, so it couldn't be used to justify the inclusion even if it were right. But I don't even see that. Most of your points indicate that this is a google bomb to me, actually. Anyhow, one of the first results of the search leads this: "No Google employee planted this Creed quip, a Google spokesperson said in an e-mail." --Conti|✉ 10:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

2009 hoaxes?

I added the gBall prank as I had a source for it - but there is the YouTube 'upside down' prank and the 'panda' Street View prank. I've tried both of them to no avail and they aren't sourced.

Could it be that there are pranksters here on Wiki?

Scott Lyon (talk) 21:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I can confirm both of the other two.

May be it depends upon where you view them from but here are my links:

Panda in lower right-hand corner: http://maps.google.com/maps <search for a location and zoom in enough to enable street view. For me the panda does appear.> Can't give an exact URL as it is interactive.

Upside-down YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5erqEbn4uw&feature=featured&flip=1

Note the &flip=1 in the latter URL. I got that from clicking on the "Spotlight Video" Meet the YouTube Symphony Orchestra. Mark Hurd (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

And in the source can find a link to http://s.ytimg.com/yt/js/april_fools-vfl84826.js, which makes everything upside-down87.212.16.222 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC).

My Immortal easter egg

Should it be added that searching for "Worst Fanfic Ever" brings up a now-defunct Fanfiction.net page for My Immortal? I think I'll add it; remove it if you see the need to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.86.77 (talk) 22:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I get normal search results, including an out of date link internal to fanfiction.net, but also includes a sub-result with the URL of www.fanfiction.net/s/4243272/1/The_Worst_Fanfic_Ever, which still exists. So this is a GoogleBomb, or just a normal result. Mark Hurd (talk) 00:13, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

if you type "why is it when" into the search box, you get the rather large suggestion of:

"why is it when your looking for that someone you find no one but once you find it a lot more choices start showing up but if you leave that first love then they all start drifting away is that love's way of testing your true feelings or to"

this is surely an easter egg? i added it but it was removed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irlargy (talk • contribs) 23:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Non-Hoaxes 2009

They released a new version of Google Earth, Google Maps is fully updated, New version of Picasa, etc. all happened today, 04-01-2009, in addition to the silly CADIE stuff. Zanotam - Google me (talk)

Google is working on AI. It was reported 2 years ago[2]. Obviously I'm not saying that all of the CADIE stuff is real, but there might just be a grain of truth lurking somewhere within it. - X201 (talk) 08:11, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

2010 YouTube new design

The video page on YouTube has a new design. Any confirmation on whether this is here to stay? (it looks to too good to be for April Fool's). 79.117.186.157 (talk) 22:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

The new design has been in place for a couple of weeks, so I don't think it's a Google hoax. Google Translate for Animals on the other hand looks like a hoax but I don't have an android phone to test it out. —TheJC (Talk • Contribs • Count) 00:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

It is not a hoax. The new YouTube video page was rolled out to all users on March 31, 2010 - not April 1st. Also, the fact it is a serious change and the fact the video page has been in beta for months supports that it is not a hoax. There's even a blog post on the official YouTube blog. --Jesant13 (talk) 16:58, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

So was the YouTube text/ascii thing Google's only hoax this year? (other than naming themselves Topeka?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.187.124 (talk) 04:21, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Non-Hoaxes 2010

I just thought I should suggest we semi-protect this page for this April fool's day, as 3 of the 5 new hoaxes do not exist, and are spam.-Heighliner10191 (talk) 00:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, and I suggest the number of units that aren't for direct references be taken out, as those are loading times. Example, the number for jiffies is 72.10, whereas I got something like 32.47. Clearly, the numbers aren't related to the jokes themselves, and are simply actual loading times under those units.--Gregoriev (talk) 19:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I put the units to give some context. Maybe we can just put some text to indicate that. The list looks weird without the numbers.

Yakatz (talk) 22:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I would remove the last one (about the chrome extension IDs) since I am not sure what that has to do with April 1st, as it has been around since the very first version that supported extensions. Yakatz (talk) 22:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

It looks like an IP has done the deed. Yakatz (talk) 00:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The "Find Chuck Norris" isn't really an easter egg from Google, it is a third party prank. Also, it was not for April's Fool in 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.100.232.99 (talk) 16:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 April Fool Section PLEASE READ

I have been on the April Fools 2010 Blog Page, and there was something on "Snail Mail" stickers. I have nothing to prove it but I am honest and it was like: As we all know, snail mail has been used before in Gmail. (...)Although some of you may trade, as the Unicorn Sticker isn't for everyone.

And then, there is a picture of the stickers. I don't know if this was a joke, eihter. But can somebody please verify? Thanks.Natalie978 (talk) 23:27, 3 April 2010 (UTC)GIRL IN BRAIDS

2010 iGoogle

Didn't google introduce iGoogle on its homepage on April 1, 2010? Shouldn't that be under "Non-Hoaxes"?Elium2 (talk) 13:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Two Reader Advantage Sections

How could that be? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.199.139.63 (talk) 03:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Google Translate

Does anyone else have any thoughts on including typing "alienworld" in to google translate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.60.114 (talk) 23:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Translate Easter Egg

Is the Translate Easter Egg really an egg? I thought that if enough people submitted their own suggestions for a translation, it would eventually get used as the "accepted" translation. I.e. if I got a few thousand people to suggest that "fork" in Italian is actually "pasta", then it would end up as the official translation? (zzyss (talk) 03:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC))

• You can't believe that translating "Íslenska" from Indonesian to Icelandic and getting "English" is a result of that.

216.195.175.63 (talk) 07:40, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

google test 1

This was added to the Calculator Easter Egg:

• Once in a while when you type in google test 1 an ad will show up with the title "ag" and the text "ewr sgs" This is a link -> http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=google+test+1

If anyone can explain it as meaning something other than just a test ad, it might be worth adding back, but probably not at Calculator Easter Egg.

Mark Hurd (talk) 01:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Added easter egg to Google Translate section

"* Translating "DSi" from Turkish to Japanese gives the result "ニンテンドー", which means Nintendo." I wasn't sure if it belonged in the User Suggested portion, and if it does belong there, please move it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.94.216.158 (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

"Hidden" flight simulator in Google Earth

How can a feature be "hidden" if it can be reached from the menu bar? Poor choice of words, just like the word "hoax" word in the article title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.253.87.43 (talk) 10:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

If I remeber correctly it used to be hidden and only available through ctrl+alt+A. Then after some time Google decided to also make it available through the menu bar. --Christoffre (talk) 17:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

New google maps hoax

There is a new internet meme going around regarding an "apparition" on google maps - street view at 47.110579,9.227568 . I wonder whether this should be included here. It does have 2008 or 2009 google written on bottom right corner of it making it pretty clear its a hoax — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.78.88.206 (talk) 19:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Just searched for these coords (Google Maps: [3]) and it appears to be something on the lens of the camera photographing that particular zone (similar to the West Brom "UFO Pliers" incident of 2011). Haven't seen the 'hoax' image circulating but suspect it is actually just what you can see for yourself on Street View with the link above. West Brom flying pliers link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/7473754/Google-Street-View-Giant-floating-pliers-above-the-sky-of-West-Bromwich.html Chris W. (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

moved here

I removed this as it's an incomplete sentence and means nothing without the original editor completing it: (*On a Webkit based browser (such as Google Chrome, or Safari, searching "[ ) Peterpanpirate (talk) 18:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool, good catch.MilkStraw532 (talk) 18:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Yt1911.PNG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Yt1911.PNG, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Youtube: robots.txt Easter Egg

There's a little Easter Egg found in YouTube's robots.txt file, which mentions it was "Created in the distant future (the year 2000) after the robotic uprising of the mid 90's wiped out all humans."

Should this be included the article?

-173.70.32.52 (talk) 19:01, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Chuck Norris Easter Egg?

This page does not mention the Easter egg where searching for "Chuck Norris" showed up as "No results found. Google could not search for Chuck Norris, because you don't find Chuck Norris, Chuck finds YOU." (not sure if it still works, but it should at least be mentioned.) 92.96.30.121 (talk) 15:53, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

That seems to be one of the first hits for "Chuck Norris", but nothing to do with Google? Destynova (talk) 01:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Google Docs "cheat code"

On google docs,in a text document, if one enters the up-up-down-down-left-right-left-right-B-A code, and then presses enter, the page will flip around and will only unflip if you refresh the page or re-enter the code. Does this count? AJO191 (talk) 02:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)12 June 2012 (UTC)

Google Reader - Konami code

Supposedly, the now-obsolete Google Reader also supported a Konami code Easter egg, which is not listed on this page; see [4]. 86.164.201.234 (talk) 16:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Google Maps sail across the Pacific Ocean

In Google Maps, when you type in walking directions involving crossing the Pacific Ocean, it says 'sail across the Pacific Ocean' and not 'kayak across the Pacific Ocean'. Would that information need to be sourced?90.197.190.243 (talk) 09:40, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

BTW: In Australia, it would suggest a row boat. Likely it was random or continent specific? 203.123.90.144 (talk) 02:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

yes yes

I added this bit in which I recently discovered

• + yes Searching for "yes yes" plays the clip from the popular meme.

Someone might want to tidy up the description though. Maybe with a link to the know your meme article http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/yes-yes — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimMitchell (talk • contribs) 12:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

23 mind-blowing Google easter eggs

I believe that the link to the blog mentioned above should be kept on the page. I say this because it is a good blog that gives some detail about a few of Google's easter eggs. Some of said easter eggs are found on Google maps, but most are found on the main search.--Dinner101 (talk) 02:11, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Issues?

Just curious, but the page says it has issues. Of what kind? Mr. Guye (talk) 01:33, 25 October 2013 (UTC)