HowTo:Negotiate the wording of your application for creating a new article on Uncyclopedia

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
"I would like to create an article based on this."
"I really think we should vote on this!"
"You spoiled my alignment, dude!"
This user came prepared.

This article will give you perfect advice on negotiating the wording of your Application for Permission to create a New Article on Uncyclopedia. Accept no forgeries! This is the real thing! For the purpose, we have dramatized an imaginary negotiation between editors. We have given the editors totally random names. Nothing to do with their personalities.

Phase I: suggestion[edit]

Yo, all. I thought I would sort of like to write an article around here one of these days. What should I do? ---Dawrk

Who is this person? Why is he approaching us with this weird request for comment? Hasn't he been reading our Style Guides on asking questions? Tell him, someone. I'm far too busy trying to find faults in other people's articles, myself. ---Lord
Shouldn't we vote on this? I mean, we should probably already have appointed someone to deal with the separation of our different functions around here. Any ideas, anyone? ---InSec
What do you mean, "separation"? Shouldn't we all be dealing with situations as they occur? Are you being serious? There is no call to start separating our functions. You know where that will lead! ---Nitpicky
Yeah, total demise of Democracy. You give an opening to subversion and we will soon lose the right to vote on which articles to delete. The next thing we know is we only have those with no quality in them at all! Then the readers - on whom our thought must hang through the duration of our writing process - will have no determining factors to point out the things we wish to ridicule. What are you, InSec? A propagator of mental anarchy --- on a comedy site? I'm frankly shocked! ---Foamster
Take it easy, Foamster - and you too, Nitpicky. I just proposed we vote on this issue, so I'm not altogether certain how I could pose a threat to democracy just yet. How do you want it, then? I mean, if we wish this newcomer to contribute, we will obviously need to give him some guidelines on how to pose his questions to the panel. ---InSec
You are out of line there, InSec. I would really hate to pick on your formatting but you have your comment on the same alignment with Lord. ---Nitpicky
Are you certain you want to change the subject that way, Nitpicky? I'm not saying you are giving our fresh editor grounds for suspecting our competence in keeping to the business at hand, but... ---Lord
I know you like to call yourself Lord. This is just a self-appointed position, though. Your comments are also out of alignment now. I suppose we will have to vote on this need of keeping the alignment totally clear all the time. After all, we still do retain a certain freedom of action, don't we? ---Nitpicky
I should never have thought you had the gall to take that stance, Nitpicky! Your comments are out of line despite being on alignment - and the latter is only true for this instance, as well! I remember you spamming your comments - which were good and regular for content, granted - all over my talk page with no regard to my carefully kept alignment! I am only telling you this to remind you that you were the one who first brought up this alignment business back in 2006! ---Foamster
All right, Foamster - stay clear of my alignment from now on unless you want to deal with my bitter sarcasm. ---Nitpicky
I'm afraid this has gone too far already. Nitpicky, hold your sarcasm for the nonce. I know from previous experience that the dollop would be too hard not to stick in our throats yet too soft to be left unswallowed. Someone please devise a way out of this conundrum! ---Lord
No, you devise it. You are lord of your own talkpage. Elsewhere you are just one of us. ---Foamster
Seconded. ---Nitpicky
PLEASE! I'm not quick to lose my temper but don't you see there's a fresh contributor out there waiting for our answer? ---InSec

Phase II: demand[edit]

Yo dudes. Can't you just tell me what to do, OK? ---Dawrk

Someone deal with this. ---Lord
I still think we should vote on it, all right? I'll be out of line if I take the matter in my own hands just like that. ---InSec

Really - I just want to know how to go about writing that fucking article! ---Dawrk

I really think it's time we blocked this person. Look at the language he is ready to use at the slightest exasperation. Don't you agree? He seems to be one of the unwashed masses. ---Nitpicky
I do agree. I am fairly secure in my supposition he has breached some other rules already as well. He clearly is not an asset to us the way he is going. All he does is draw attention to himself with no regard to the reader. I say dump him at the next offense. ---Foamster
Are you certain? Shouldn't we be voting? I mean - while it is not without precedent that we block users for using those unmentionable expressions, I am fairly certain this one is acting out of the purest of motives. He has come to us pleading for attention before he has attempted to break any of the rules we have set into our several Style Guides. Am I not right? ---InSec
You most certainly are not. Your alignment is wrong again. ---Nitpicky

Phase III: there will be no phase III[edit]