Just from memory...

Rape article...some controversy about male rape
Lucille Ball...not really dead
South Park...Craig Nomel's name and no trivia section

We need some more!

On semi-serious issues,

Battle of Jenin
Dutch Empire....keep adding map that Red4Tribe keeps trying to add (hey, it's not that bad!)
Rochdale...keep adding a media section (see the article's talk page) or inclusion of Pickup Street which prostitution is common

Feel free to list more!
Let's wait until May 15th to begin editing!
Think of a productive edits now! Funny but productive is even better!

I don't think this will be very successful but a wave of humour would be nice! Don't get mad at Wikipedia for any previous edit wars. Start getting light hearted and have fun with Wikipedia!

Pardon me for asking, and I hope you don't think me overly rude, but... you're drunk, right?

Is the Battle of Jenin edit war still going on? Damn.

I've heard that the WWII article edit war has been going on for years now.

Have they figured out who won yet? From a NPOV position, of course....

Oh come on. That article is near perfection! Take this piece of fine writing:

I could say no one wins wars. Now that would really make things interesting on Wikipedia! Battle of Stalingrad - Result: Nobody won, because nobody wins in wars. Oh, that would be an interesting talk page to view.

I've noticed that with these war articles, individual battles and biographies of military people tend to be the best and the darlings. The articles on World War I, II, and others tend to have problems with being convoluted or having size problems. There's just so much that could go in there, but too large an article can scare off readers or crash browsers. Nationalist groups like the Russians, Latvians, Estonians, etc. think their contributions have been marginalized and want to add their side to the article much to the chagrin of everyone else trying to create a small, concise, and balance article.

Then you have different views by historians and what right do Wikipedians have to determine who's a "mainstream" or "fringe" historian? I've heard it argued that there was no World War II, only one World War from 1914 to 1945. WWII technically hasn't ended because Japan and Russia have yet to sign a peace treaty due to Russia's continued occupation/claim of the Kuril Islands. Since the formal occupation of Germany did not end until 1990, you may argue the war went right to 1994 (a stretch maybe). Who needs Harry Turtledove when you have professional historians arguing these things?

And to get back on the topic, that is why you have the lame edit wars.