Forum:Maybe why we don't have lots and lots of new writers

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Maybe why we don't have lots and lots of new writers

Note: This topic has been unedited for 4325 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I thought this maybe was just happening to me, but a friend had the same experience when he was going to look at a page here while we were on the phone. I use Internet Explorer, maybe the most common browser, and it often takes me several times to get to Uncy because it says it "has to close" and won't take me here. Then if I look around without logging in I can't even skip between pages for long before it will close and put a "Can't return to Wikia" sign up. Then when cute Qwertozercom or whatever he's named put up a great forum topic at Wikipedia and linked uncy, that link wouldn't allow a connection to our site. So unless I'm persistent on trying the connection here one or three times before I am allowed to log in, I'd forget the site and move on. Is anyone else besides my friend and I having this happen, and if so, it likely means we are losing lots and lots of viewers and readers, what is there to do about it? Aleister 1:34 19-4-'12

Does your friend use Firefox as an alternative? I sometimes juggle between Firefox, Safari and Opera - all on a mac - and don't see that message. Perhaps he needs to check the preferences on Internet Explorer and whether he is trying to log in from home, work or school and see if the same error message comes up. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 06:15, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Really, if you think about it, it's for the best. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:22, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

No such problems with Google Chrome, ever. But when I had IE, sometimes that would happen and the site was unstable. But my PC was a virus hive back then, so I can't be certain of the cause. Mattsnow 18:04, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Talkin' 'bout me? Yeah, Chrome's the best. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 20:33, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

That might explain some of it. Another reason we might not have tons of users, is the way some people constructively apply tags or give comments, but do so in an agressive way without realising it. As for the browser, we would always create the unbrowser that will be set up to work specifically with uncyclopedia, so that it only loaded uncyclopedia pages no matter what site you tried to access! --ShabiDOO 18:18, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Man, those were the days. I almost quit my job here over an ICU tag. Now I can't even believe I'm doing this stuff and I actually empathize with users who get their pages tagged. See User:Qzekrom#Stuff I do on Uncyclopedia. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 19:36, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Those ICU tags are important, because it tells a user right from the beginning that crappy kindergarten articles wont last and dont belong here. Its just the summary text often says "dont write crap or Ill ban you". Glad you are still working here. How much do they pay you? --ShabiDOO 19:38, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

I volunteer here. I'm kinda like a bot, you know. And yeah, I'm glad I'm still here because it's a chance to help n00bs out. Should we have a requirement for adding a fix parameter to ICU tags? -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 19:43, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

çWeve had that discussion recently and there was a consensus that we shouldnt "bite noobs". I considered starting up a project to work on it...to find examples of noob biting and to encourage new noobs, but, Im just one person, a particularly powerful and invincible person, but even gods have limitations. Even semi gods. Even puny humans like you. You know what i mean? --ShabiDOO 19:56, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

Remember, I'm a Pokemon...! Anyway, I agree that we shouldn't bite n00bs. A "fix" parameter would usually contain advice and actually when I add a fix param I sign it with a link to my talk page that says "Talk to me if you have questions." -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 20:04, April 20, 2012 (UTC)

The problem mentioned above has happened to me too. I had a hard time doing anything here for several days. Not that I'm here enough for anyone to notice anyway. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  02:38, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Okay... I'm trying not to spend too much time here. It's the epitome of unproductivity! -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 02:42, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

I think I know why

It's because BGBU is too condescending. You read that, you start feeling scared about joining like right away. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 23:33, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

EMC is working on it. I've added a thing or two. Im sure when its done it will be glorious! --ShabiDOO 23:39, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

So what's the latest news from that corner of the Oscar J. Wilde National Radiation Facility? -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 23:44, April 25, 2012 (UTC)

Beginner's Guide Rewrite

As I just said above, the beginners guide is being rewritten. --ShabiDOO 22:35, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

I know, I'me just reiterating it as a sort of announcement-type message. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 22:41, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

I have read through BGBU several times in the past with a view to removing what some people have labelled condescending or harsh. I have to say that I profoundly disagree with that. BGBU is not intended to be a document that says "Hey we're all friends here, let's go for Margaritas" (though we could add a page saying that) but to educate people who have recently arrived as to what we're all about. Having read it myself as a new user I found the beginner's guide to be entirely acceptable and it certainly didn't "drive" me away from the sign-up page, and that was when it contained the "No-Lip to the admins" chapter which has since vanished. My point in a nutshell is that I don't think the beginner's guide is deserving of being called harsh or condescending. Is it perfect? No, but it certainly doesn't require a rewrite in my opinion. If Qzekrom thinks it is harsh and unfunny, which the above would seem to suggest, I'd urge him to include some examples of the same here in order that we could make up our own minds and, if necessary, make some changes. --ChiefjusticeGameCube 12:51, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Chiefjustice has nothing but good points here. The rewrite is mostly aesthetic, a trimming of the introduction and the rewording of a few points while maintaining the overall message (dont write shitty crud). It will most likely be ready in Spring 2016, just intime for the Summer Olympics in Sochi, Russia. A great deadline if you ask me! --ShabiDOO 19:03, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

My 2 cents

Writing is BORING. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 06:46, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I say we take this motherfucking site DOWN, bitches. I, for one, am going to start the destruction by inserting long-winded attempts at humor into pages that otherwise consist of lists, doing half-assed rewrites of pages on VFD, and I am also going to upload pictures of F16s carrying dildos instead of bombs.

...wait... ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Sun, Apr 29 '12 7:12 (UTC)

Instead of taking this place down with pathetic military night, I say that we use an alpha-paticle-chain-reation-process on this wiki. Not only will it dissapear, but also, any trace of it, any memory of it, will also dissapear, and then, uncyclopedia, will never have existed. Huh? --ShabiDOO 12:30, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

 I'm FIRMLY AGAINST taking down Uncyclopedia. Even if we're guilty of blatant copyright infringement, we have a chance to redeem ourselves. Wikipedia needs us to parody them, that people will have fun reading that site and then seeing what the experts at Uncyclopedia have to say about it. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 19:12, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

You, sir, don't understand what a few strategically-placed pictures of a dude's private parts in mid-sex-change-operation can do for a site. Less git CRUNKED up in hea! ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Mon, Apr 30 '12 6:52 (UTC)

I thought I had a mid-sex-operation. It turned out to just be my belly button. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 14:08, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Instead of taking the site down, let's wait for CISPA to do that (if it gets passed). If it doesn't, well, we'll make it better. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 19:39, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

My 2.01 cents

Exchange rate and all. Maybe we could try and keep the writers we have. And as for BGBU - I have never read all of it. It's boring, and way too long. If you go through the tedious process of filling in the sign in form, arguing with the verification thing, waiting for the email, responding to the email, and then trying to find your way back to where you started and wanted to write a "Pikachu likes butthurt" joke, and then this orange thing comes up on your screen, you follow the link and see a pre-formatted welcome that looks like the emails you get when you're opening a new email account, and then you happen to click on the BGBU one while looking for the "delete this email" link, you realise you're looking at a set of rules. So you ignore it and go elsewhere to explain why Chuck Norris can kill a grue. BannedPuppy (talk)

Why would we want to keep the writers we already have? They made this site what it is in the first place! Yeah. I bet you feel pretty foolish now. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:52, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

BannedPuppy makes good points. People should be able to sign up easier and with more fun. Modus makes good points. We try our best to banish those who do the things to again made it what it was in first place. BannedPuppy bad, bad. Penquin-Fucker 23:58 29-4-'12

Hey, we should give BannedPuppy another chance. Maybe he'll promise not to vandalize if we unban him/her. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 00:04, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Nah - this makes more sense. Ban users before they start to vandalise, as that'll encourage them to come back with only feelings of joy and goodwill in their hearts. (Where is DG Neree when you need him?) BannedPuppy (talk)

If you really want to get banned, then become an admin and ban yourself. Duh. Just wait 6 months and come back if you promise not to vandalize. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 00:47, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

Qzekrom, I hate to point out, well, no, I don't hate it, it's kind of blah though, that neither PuppyOnTopOfTheRadio nor BannedPuppy vandalized anything as far as I could tell (maybe I missed something). Vandals is as vandals does. So vandalism is likely the wrong word here. Word. Aleister 18:24 30-4-'12

Yeah, I didn't like what ZB did, either. Six months is too much for ANYONE, even the Buddha! -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 19:37, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

To be fair, the Buddha's vandalism was particularly vile and time consuming to undo. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:20, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

What Buddha? I didn't know the Buddha worked here. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 22:05, April 30, 2012 (UTC)

I got an idea!

You know how all the other websites on Wikia use some sort of automatic reward system? So like, MediaWiki gives you some freaky award for editing 14 consecutive days or something? Well, we should ask Wikia to get us something like that, just suited to our needs. Like writing your first UnNews article, then 5 of 'em, 10, 25, and so on. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 23:17, May 6, 2012 (UTC)

Unless it involves Nicole Scherzinger, I will decline the offers. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 23:08, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Gesundheit. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:12, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

We could ask Wikia staff to get us a customized implementation of the reward system based on per-namespace contributions. I say "Muckraker" for one of the UnNews titles and "Dedicated Poopsmith" for ICUing a certain number of articles! -- Sir CuteArceusOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0) • Stuy'16] 00:03, May 26, 2012 (UTC)