Forum:Why is uncyclopedia so damn special?: Mandantory skin does not effect this site

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Why is uncyclopedia so damn special?: Mandantory skin does not effect this site

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4962 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

1. Why is uncyclopedia exempt from the new mandatory skin which is being rolled out in the fall?
2. Was there any online public discussions about this exception which I can read?
3. Are any projects other than uncyclopedia and its sister projects exempt?

Thank you so much in advance. Ernieandburt 14:59, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

We are? Cool beans. --EMC ^[TALK] 15:03 Sep 15 2010

First, the reason we're exempt is because we have a certain style we are meant to parody (Wikipedia's style). Secondly, I'm assuming the discussions of our exemption would carry over from the talks of when Wikia first rolled out Monaco (What happened then was we all said "Fuck Monaco" and Wikia got scared of us), so Wikia didn't even try to get us to go along with this skin. Thirdly, it doesn't look like anyone else is getting exempted from this horrid skin. Sorry. Wikia is trying too desperately to be a social networking site. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 15:16, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Also, we're the money. --EMC ^[TALK] 15:20 Sep 15 2010

Yeah dude. We're so cash. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 15:21, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Dexter, can you direct me to the "fuck monaco" discussion of the past? Thank you so much for your detailed and exhaustive response. Ernieandburt 15:31, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

This is all I could find. --EMC ^[TALK] 15:52 Sep 15 2010

Thank you EMC, I searched and found that too. It doesn't seem to really answer how uncyclopedia avoid this though huh? But thank you for searching! Ernieandburt 16:34, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Stern measures would have to be taken if ever any attempt was made by our host to attack this aspect of our projects identity.--Sycamore (Talk) 16:38, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

Basically, the bottom line is, if we looked like Lostpedia, we wouldn't function as a parody of Wikipedia, and then we'd be even more pointless than we already are and no one would come here. Wikia probably wants to avoid that situation, since from there perspective the whole point of the site is to generate traffic. pillow talk 19:24, September 15, 2010 (UTC)

The "mandatory" reskin does not apply to us because as Wikia are acutely aware, any reskin of the site would fuck up our shit so catastrophically the site would be practically unusable. -- Prof. Olipro KUN (W)Anchor Op Bur. (Harass) 01:21, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

So...how would we tell? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 09:15, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Those horseheads that RAHB left in the Wiki corporate offices might have had something to do with our exemption. --—John Lydon 16:43, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

He gave them horseshoe crabs. He forgot the horseshoes. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:48, September 16, 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the skin of Uncyclopedia, are we going to change the skin to match the new Wikipedia skin at some point, or going back to what Olipro said, would that fuck Uncyc up beyond repair? I ask this because the site using the older Wiki skin makes it seem more dated than it already is. And we're not old, right? I mean come on, we're hip! We're cool! ...right? Leutnant Herr Thatdamnedfollowspot 00:34 Friday, September 17, 2010

Inciclopedia (the Spanish Uncyc) uses it and they are hosted by Wikia. It's just added to their monobook.css, though (90% sure of that). Certain pages here, such as Red link, would definitely be fucked. Plus, we could never be sure what user javascript would be fucked if we made the change. Also, the Vector skin is less functional than our skin. Trust me. I'm a Wikipedian. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 02:17, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the comments and insight! I understand the why clearly. I am just interested in the how...seems like no one is sure. Does anyone know how uncyclopedia kept its skin? It is absurd to think wikia just let uncyclopedia keep its skin, whereas the other thousands of wikias were all forced to change. Ernieandburt 01:13, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

You could try moving to a different hosting site or something.--Mn-z 02:02, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

You can find the how here if you don't want to check out the link in EMC's link. Leutnant Herr Thatdamnedfollowspot 02:12 Friday, September 17, 2010

And in regards to the "fuck Monaco" discussions, most of that was over IRC long ago, and I don't know where it is any more. Plus, it wouldn't really provide much help for other wikis that are trying to keep their current skins. Basically though, we convinced Wikia that our purpose was to look like Wikipedia and that Monaco would ruin that. To be completely honest, the only reason Wikia continues hosting us is because we provide an incredibly large page visit count that they show off to advertisers and investors (Deceitful business practices over at Wikia, but it's fine legally).

However, I've got a couple of things you guys could do. First, if enough of the larger wikis threatened to leave Wikia and be hosted elsewhere if they aren't allowed the continued use of other skins, then you guys could stage a coo of sorts. However, Wikia can see through idle threats. The second possible thing you all could do is tell Wikia every single functionality problem with their newest skin, regardless of how small it is. If the beta testers report enough problems, then they may potentially drop the new skin. Sadly, that doesn't seem like it will happen since the beta testers were handpicked by Wikia. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 02:17, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Dexter, thanks for your comments, very helpful. Thatdamnedfollowspot I read over both pages, they didn't seem like there was much information, I will read it over again though. Ernieandburt 03:25, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

Image of the new skin versus Monaco

[this image was deleted by wikia staff, lets not piss them off please -- Ernieandburt 20:57, September 17, 2010 (UTC) ]

--Mn-z 02:02, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

I think Wikia is a pretty cool guy. Eh tries to look like Facebook and doesn't afraid of anything (most notably the users). Honestly, if Monaco is consider shit, this new skin should be considered Jenkem. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 03:00, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

So... which one's which, then? *emits aura of cluelessness* ~ *shifty eyes* (talk) (stalk) -- 20100917 - 03:20 (UTC)

Well, here's an example of the beta and here's a random page in Monaco. I like that somebody at Wikia thought anyone would ever want to just be able to randomly browse every picture on a wiki on whatever page they are on. I'm sure that is really useful and doesn't at all increase loading times or use up a ton of memory. Regardless, Wikia intends to remove Monobook from most of the other wikis (except us, of course) shortly after they implement their Jenkem skin. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 03:31, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

From the "unfunny site":

Jenkem is an alleged hallucinogenic recreational drug composed of noxious gas formed from fermented sewage.

LOL. This is a great site! Ernieandburt