Uncyclopedia talk:About: Difference between revisions

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Tompkins
m (revert.)
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 88: Line 88:
 
Testing 1 2 3. Seems to work (using: <code><nowiki><div style="text-align:right"></div></nowiki></code>) --{{User:Splaka/sig}} 05:04, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 
Testing 1 2 3. Seems to work (using: <code><nowiki><div style="text-align:right"></div></nowiki></code>) --{{User:Splaka/sig}} 05:04, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 
</div>
 
</div>
  +
  +
== This website sucks ==
  +
  +
Uncyclopedia is a fucking website full of corrupt people and racists.
  +
  +
Someone should shut this fucking website down because of fucking racists.

Revision as of 21:14, 19 March 2006

Protection, v 2.0

Lately, we've been averaging about a revert a day on this page. While we've picked up a bit of good content in the last few months, I'm starting to wonder if it's a battle worth fighting. We could probably save a bit of admin time by protecting this page, and actually following the "standing on one knee position" policy upon the top of the page. Any objections to protetion? Bone F clear.png Sir Famine, Gun Petition » 21:02, 30 Oct 2005 (UTC)

With no complaints, and with me reverting again today, I'm cleaning it up and protecting. Yell if bad. Also, propose changes here if you think this page needs them. Bone F clear.png Sir Famine, Gun Petition » 02:55, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)
How about moving the table of contents to be under the "About" section so that there's actually something to read at the top of the page besides quotes? Or just removing the "About" heading in the first place because it's redundant. --Nerd42 22:44, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Kamelopedia

Did you guys launch this inspired by Kamelopedia, or is it a translingual coincidence?

I'm recommending Uncyclopedia to every Wikipedia burnout I can think of. It's just what one needs after a hard day's nerdery - David Gerard 17:20, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Oh - there's an English edition, but it ain't done much - David Gerard 17:23, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

It's not related to Kamelopedia at all, and I wasn't aware of it's existence when we launched. --Sophia

I just read every entry on the English Kamelopedia. I fear I don't find camels that interesting. The German version looks better, now I need to improve my German - David Gerard 20:10, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)

SA

SA guys, if you don't think it's funny... make it funny. That's why it's open and editable. I see alot of whining and not much writing. From my impressions on SA, it's rather not that funny, but very egocentric.--Chronarion 23:40, 23 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Are you suggesting that the SA goons are in fact NOT the pinnacle of earthly evolution? Heresy. Or not. They might not be too amusing, but I'll be darned if they ain't fun to block. (For valid reasons, of course.) --Rcmurphy 03:16, 24 Apr 2005 (EDT)
YAMS YAMS YAMS YAMS YAMS YAMS YAMS Avertist 13:06, 24 Apr 2005 (EDT)
HAMS HAMS HAMS HAMS HAMS HAMS HAMS --Chronarion 03:03, 25 Apr 2005 (EDT)
CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ CQ DE KG4WIJ 24:40, 14 Sep 2005 (CDT)

Starting new pages

How do I start a new page?

Take a look here: Uncyclopedia_talk:Community_Portal#noob_question. --Famine 17:32, 9 May 2005 (EDT)

Why did uncyclopedia change its logo.

The New logo is much better (Which Is Not Really A Good Thing For An Encyclopedia Of Junk) but why did they change it? it's supposed to look stoopid!!!


Actually, it's because when I updated mediawiki, I accidentally overwote the old logo and don't know where I put the original. Now there's a logo contest ongoing. --Chronarion 22:16, 21 May 2005 (EDT)

Uncyclopedia redirects here

I think Uncyclopedia:About should be a serious page covering the true porpoise of Uncyclopedia, while Uncyclopedia should be a humorous page claiming Uncyclopedia to be the world's most reliable source, Wikipedia a misguiding rip-off etc.

In no uncertain terms, I agree. I agree with a level of agreement seldom seen before -Norph "Helv0r" Helvig

I agree: The main page should be dressed in a nice little outfit fringed with green and he/she/it should carry a matching handbag full of Important Things to read out loudly in public libraries . . . otherwise they should shut up and stop moaning about The Inviolable page . . . . hahahahaha! And I do not know anyone called Sieffe . . .why do you ask?

How about a bit of text near the top that says something like, "This is a serious article about the Uncyclopedia. If that's not what you were looking for, try The Uncyclopedia."? 24.7.130.199 19:25, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I think that Gerald, The True Porpoise of Uncyclopedia, does not get enough attention. EamonnPKeane 20:36, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia Foundation

Should the Uncyclopedia Foundation article be mentioned here ? Presently it has no links anywhere on Uncyclopedia. 152.163.100.74 05:40, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Or Recyclopedia for that matter. Might be an intersting addition to a history of Uncyclopedia article. 152.163.100.74 17:29, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC)
I think it's Wikimedia Foundation, not Wikipedia Foundation. - 84.237.120.114 06:58, 24 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Unprotecting

Has anyone got any problems with unprotecting this page?--Elvis 08:46, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Unicyclopedia

right now, this bit (originally thought of by me and then revised by somebody else) is under the About section of this page:

About

"Unicyclopedia is the official encyclopedia of Unicycles. It has all the information on unicycles that you will ever need. (But if you ever need any more, you can just add it because it's a wiki.) Unicyclopedia is a place for unicycle enthusiasts to share all their greatest unicycle secrets! Go 1 Wheelers!!!

Um, actually...

Uncyclopedia is an encyclopedia full of misinformation and utter lies." and so on...

I think it's funny but it's not my site, I hope my adding that wasn't rude and I hope this bit stays in because IT'S FUNNY! But anyway if you get rid of it please leave it here in the Talk Page at least so the idea doesn't die. Nerd42 01:51, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

It will always remain in the history of the page, regardless of whether it stays in the current edit. I moved it to the About section because while I like the idea, the goal of this page is to be informative, and having it as its own section broke the flow of useful(ish) information. If you feel like doing it up right, you could start a new Uncyclopedia called Unicyclopedia, and fill it with Uni articles. Also check the Multilingual coordination page if you're interested.
As this is supposed to be a somewhat useful page on the site, I can't guarentee that your idea will stay on it. However, I liked it enough that I didn't revert it, so here's to hoping that other admins feel likewise. --Bone F clear.png Sir Famine, Gun Petition » 23:05, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Hebrew Uncyclopedia

What do I do in order to open a Hebrew Uncyclopedia? Kakun 20:53, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

You can get things started in the He: page (we have fake namespaces for languages, see Uncyclopedia:List_of_Uncyclopedias). Just prefix every Hebrew language article with He: and link them from He: (and to each other). At some point you might have enough to start an offsite mirror (we have 4, Italian, German, French, Polish). --Splaka 04:28, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Thank you man. I want to type from right to left, do you have any idea of how? Kakun 04:59, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)


I don't think you can get too stylistic here like they do on he.wikipedia.org. However, you can try something like this.

Testing 1 2 3. Seems to work (using: <div style="text-align:right"></div>) --Splaka 05:04, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

This website sucks

Uncyclopedia is a fucking website full of corrupt people and racists.

Someone should shut this fucking website down because of fucking racists.