Forum:Here, there and everywhere

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Here, there and everywhere
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2137 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Hello! Maybe you haven't heard about me yet, as I have created an account here only yesterday, so I will introduce myself. I am Anton (my username is Anton199) and I have been editing for uncyclopedia.com for about two months. After visiting VFH on this site yesterday, I was surprised by the fact that there were not many entries there and a lot of them were not very good.


Numbers:

  • There were 10 entries on the 4th of July.
  • 2 of the nominations were jokes. However, they got votes for and if the articles would be featured, this might have chased several readers away (for example, VFD: how would you react to the person who welcomes you to his house with a trash can). (See VFH for more details)
  • 2 articles got 5 and 2 other articles 6 votes against.
  • This leaves us 4 possible features. One of these got two votes aganist and another one was featured on the 5th of July (The Picture of Dorian Gray).

These were the numbers. As you can see the situation is not very good. We need more good quality articles for feature. And that's why I came up with a project idea, which is called "Here, there and everywhere" (a Beatles song; the Beatles is my favorite band).

The project concerns in taking the best featured articles from uncyclopedia.wikia.com, transporting them and nominating them on VFH here. This technique has been applied to one article already (Probability theory). The same thing can be done backwards.


Possible articles: You can look up any articles on the page "Recently featured" (go to the other site and type "Uncyclopedia:VFH/Featured"). Possible ideas are:

  1. Berlin Wall ([uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Berlin_Wall])
  2. Libertarian party ([uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Libertarian_Party])
  3. American Football ([uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/American_Football])
  4. Emu War ([uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Emu_War])
  5. Cotswold Olympic Games ([uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Cotswold_Olympic_Games])
  6. Vendredism ([uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Vendredism])

(All of them got more than 9 votes for)


Of course, there are many more good articles. And that's why I need help. If if you like the project and if you are interested in contributing, please, do it. All the comments and the results so far can be posted below.

Thank you!

Anton (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

"2 of the nominations were jokes. However, they got votes for and if the articles would be featured, this might have chased several readers away" - that wouldn't be the first time that sort of things happen. And never ever that has chased any readers away. Why would it? I honestly don't believe that nobody really gets upset of joke-features. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Zzz...morning? 12:59, 5 July, 2013 (UTC)
And most of the users have stopped caring about VFH a long, long time ago, just because it's useless. Take a look at Multiliteralist, for example. We have to always remind him to stay the fuck out of VFH becaues that always ends up in broken noses and sad faces. And just creates more drama, which nobody wants. And that is because sometimes, some jerk VFH's his articles and then other jerks come vote against which will eventually lead up on sad and violent Mulkkuliteralist. (don't even try to understand the joke of that one, it's finnish lol) My opinion is that VFH gets VFD'd. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Zzz...morning? 13:03, 5 July, 2013 (UTC)
When I said "would chase readers away", I meant non-users who would come and look at your main page. They would expect a nice funny article but not your VFD. And you cannot say that it has never happened, as you don't have any information about someone who is not a user.
Concerning your second comment, this is exactly why Spike talks about your site in such a way. What he said, is that you create stuff that is funny only for yourselves (members of the site) and not for the readers. You just said exactly the same thing but with different words. Anton (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
...So what? I have to admit that SPIKE is, in fact, right. Why the fuck anyone should care about what someone else thinks about the article? Of course it's nice if some stranger comes and says, "hey, that article was quite funny", but I personally think we do it just for ourselves, and to amuse other users etc. I cannot see anything bad about that, or why to even complain about it. Yes, I may be the only thinking this way but I originally joined Uncyclopedia in 2010 just to emprove my writing and english-skills. Back in the day my english was crap. It was terrible. Everytime I see one of my older edits I want to puke. I puke everytime I make a new edit too because I am honest to myself and know that I'm not perfect, but still I'm better than I used to be. So basically, Uncycloepdia has been a school for me, and yes, I'm trying to create articles that amuse others but to also amuse myself. Writing articles should be fun. It's absurd to think that everybody else likes what you do. So I don't give a flying fuck what some outsider says about my edits. I only care if it is a friend or such, or another user of this site, like SPIKE said. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Zzz...morning? 13:20, 5 July, 2013 (UTC)

My opinion

Nobody cares. i assume uncyclowikia's articles have some sense of humor skill but they're not paticularily entertaining, nor i will laugh like the joker. How people actually gets entertained by their articles are beyond my words, and if i have sysops i will block him. (and yes, i read uncyclowikia's articles before)--WELCOME TO UNCYCLOPEDIA HELL!!!! Offensive flag.png 13:51, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

If you look at the list of possible articles for transportation, there is not a single article that belongs to me. I will be glad, if you post a comment concerning the project and not concerning my articles. Thank you!
The only valid argument against that I received is that "Here, there and everywhere" will make VFH less funnier for internal users. Anton (talk) 14:03, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Ok, you rephrased your comment and it concerns the project more now but logic has disappeared. If you do not talk about my articles anymore, why do you want to block me? Anton (talk) 14:12, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
for manipulating the site.--WELCOME TO UNCYCLOPEDIA HELL!!!! Offensive flag.png 14:16, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
also, no matter how good the humor is, if the internet (the majority of people/hipsters who use the internet at least 2 times a day) does not find it entertaining, the site will never revive regardless of how sharp or how good the humor is. The best bet is to assume that non-normal people would want to watch your articles than mature, normal people because that's the majority of the internet.--WELCOME TO UNCYCLOPEDIA HELL!!!! Offensive flag.png 14:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I strongly disagree. We should aim for good and sharp humor over cheap popularity points. Otherwise, we're no better than Chuck Lorre. – Kip > Talk Works Sophia It's Peanut Better Jelly Time!!! Carlton2.gif Rotating Rick Astley.gif derp Sexy Snoo.png Knight of the Order USA! 14:29, Jul. 5, 2013
(i.e. what we are doing is exactly right. not only me, the entire site's regulars.)--WELCOME TO UNCYCLOPEDIA HELL!!!! Offensive flag.png 14:31, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
To Mr-ex, or whatever he calls himself: that's a valid argument for creating crap. However, I very much doubt that your site will gain popularity after the feature of your spambox. Finally, what I wanted to say, if you don't care about good humor, please, do not threaten to ban me on the only account that I do. Anton (talk) 14:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
And I am afraid we cannot reach any kind of agreement, so let's just behave in the way we want. Me personally, I just wanted to encourage others to help this site and gave them instructions. As the site members don't want any help, then you can forget about my project and I don't care about it so much in order to work on it alone. Anton (talk) 14:34, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
disregard, i cannot. (as of now, and if i can someday that's at least 3 years later, or never.) and as for the spambox feature, i don't care. --WELCOME TO UNCYCLOPEDIA HELL!!!! Offensive flag.png 14:36, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
No no no, Anton we just don't want forked articles thankyouverymuch. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Zzz...morning? 14:50, 5 July, 2013 (UTC)

Another opinion nobody cares about

I've been a regular at Uncyclopedia for about six years now, though I joined as a registered user this year in January. I can actually claim to have read at least 75% of all the articles on Uncyclowikia without being ostentatiously incorrect. I understand that you have found several good articles there, ones most users are already aware of.

Thing is, if your baby is ugly, you don't adopt a new one. You give your baby pretty clothes, or worst case, tell her she's beautiful in her own way. Get my drift?

Create good articles, nom good articles. Make average articles better so they can be VFH. Do it all here. HERE. No sporking from Uncyclowikia. Make this site better, rather than importing stuff. We've all got the ability to be funny. Well, not IFYMB!, but that's okay. The rest of us can work at making this site funnier.  Tumb13weed Tumbleweed01.gif 21:55, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

That is a very good analogy Tumbleweed but... wait, hey man, that's just not cool. IFYMB! Talk to me baby! 05:03 6 July 2013
Well, nobody seems to do that. Anton (talk) 05:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for finishing of my sentance Anton. IFYMB! Talk to me baby! 06:00 6 July 2013
You are welcome, although that was my opinion and I didn't know you wanted to say that... Anton (talk) 06:58, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
You both can. IFYMB! is a poopsmith anyway, he knows the difference between an article that can be helped, and one with no hope. And, well, I've done more reviews and proofreads than I have written articles. Anton199, you can help us pinpoint bad articles by adding the {{fix}} template. That's how most of us know what needs help. Maybe I'll try my hand at expanding. Can't be too bad. :D  Tumb13weed

Tumbleweed01.gif 10:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, really?! If I begin doing this, you won't be able to fix everything in one year. Anton (talk) 10:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Not alone, granted. That's my primary point.  Tumb13weed Tumbleweed01.gif 10:36, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
The whole community won't be able to fix everything if I begin putting the fix tags. Anton (talk) 11:15, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
I think his point is that we might not get rid of all the crap, but it's better then doing nothing. IFYMB! Talk to me baby! 11:42 6 July 2013
Ok. I think the discussion is basically finished. If the thing with the VFH will be really bad, I will organize a vote about the article transportation. Anton (talk) 11:53, 6 July 2013 (UTC)