Forum:Open invitation to join group for the purpose of working together on improving articles with promise that have been tagged 'NRV'
I'm a fairly new member, and I think a lot of funny material is getting deleted because it's not being developed, not because the ideas are bad. I'd like to do something about this, but I think it would work better if other people who believe in what I do were to join me in an organized group for this purpose. We could together decide what articles to work on, share writing/humor techniques, and essentially collaborate to add a lot of great content to uncyclopedia. Any takers?
--RudolfRadna 16:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
- Heh... We used to have something that did exactly that: Colonizations. But after a while it fell flat on its arse... So, despite your very good intentions, I'm afraid we won't be making that mistake again... Perhaps you can try contacting Dawg though... He tried reviving it not too long ago, and of course failed miserable... :D
- Oops, and just noticed that there was only recently another forum post about this here--Sir Mon€¥$ignSTFU F@H|PLS|VFP 21:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I just didn't want people to think I was hypocritical to be saying we should be trying to save stuff and not try to do something about it. If it hasn't worked then it doesn't sound worth trying again.
--RudolfRadna 22:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Here's an idea: I'm going to put any ideas that have been NRV marked that I like onto my user page. Anyone who wants to mess around with them can edit my user page and write whatever they want. If the article gets good enough, and the original gets killed, I'll try re-establishing it.
--RudolfRadna 00:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Because it's obviously impossible for us to look through the list of NRVs ourselves, decide which ones we like and rewrite those. Absolutely impossible. We need your guidance, or we'll be lost!
Oh, and could you...maybe...login?
Cheers, Dzugavili 00:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I created the Colonizations originally for this purpose. Each week an article would be selected in various categories, such as history, geography, science, in the intentions of many people working on it to make it funny. It was highly successful at first, with about 4 main writers working on most of them along with an array of minor editors. Afghanistan is a prime example and was soon featured after the Colonization. But as the weeks went on, fewer and fewer people seemed to care, eventually a week would pass and only one or two people would have even edited it once. Then, disheartened, I went on a few months worth semi-break and just gave up on updating the colonizations at all (I officially returned in February for those concerned). I still go through NRV's and fix them up on my own time though, its more efficient then working through a bureacracy and hoping others assist. I also work with friends on articles, either in a group effort or just by getting ideas from them and implementing them. This is probably the best way of going about a group effort rather then starting up an official program like Colonizations. ~Sir Rangeley 
GUN WotM UotM +S (talk) 01:46, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Even if there's no "official" colonization-style project going on, it's hardly a reason reason stop people from taking wiki-beautification matters into their own hands. I would hate for any sort of bureaucracy to prevent good intentions, and commend your enthusiasm, RudolfRadna. If you want to try to better organize and establish your project, I suggest you create one or several pages in your user-space dedicated to it (i.e., a page titled User:RudolfRadna/NRVRescue) to which you can refer those interested in working along the same lines as you. --Spin 03:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I'll try that. Thanks for the advice. As for the logging in thing, sometimes I just forget to do it, other times I log in and notice after I've gone to another page that I ended up logged out somehow. Maybe something to do with my cookies settings, I don't know. I'm just a n00b, and if you've looked at my user page, you're aware that I'm also a self proclaimed "moron."
This may seem a surprising thing to admit, but given that I honestly think that "Oh noes" thing and that "giant manatee" thing are funny, whereas everyone else seems to think they're moronic, I see it more as truth in advertising than anything else.
Plus, once you get that issue out of the way right up front, it makes arguments a lot easier. 'You're a moron!' "Yes, I went over that already on my user page, remember?"
--RudolfRadna 12:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
About that logging in thing, it just did it again. I was logged in when I created the above edit, then when I clicked save, I was logged out. Weird. I won't date/time stamp this entry because it would just lead to an infinite regression loop, no doubt.
--RudolfRadna (a bit after the above entry), 11 April 2006 (Sorta Kinda Accurate Time)
Just to clarify, it's User:RudolfRadna/NRVRescue. Again, thanks for the great idea.
--RudolfRadna 13:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I'd love to help, meanwhile, does anyone want to help start the "making up rene descartes quotes" page? Katvanzongorista 00:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- Be careful with quotes. It's tempting to spam them where they don't belong and aren't funny. If you can think of a few good and appropriate quotes, feel free, but make sure that they fit the context of any article you put them on and have at least some resemblance to something Descartes might say. Adding a famous name to a stupid joke generally does very little to improve it. --Spin 03:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't know enough about Descartes to do anything with that one. Maybe some variant of "I think therefore I am." How about Popeye Descartes - "I thinsk thereforesk I y'am whast I y'am . . . (popeye laugh)" sorry, best I could do off the top of my head.
There's an idea, same quote but said by a different 'character' every time for comedic purpose.
(steve jobs) I think different, therefore I am
etc
--RudolfRadna 17:35, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I also think that "a lot of funny material is getting deleted because it's not being developed, not because the ideas are bad" and have said so repeatedly. --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 17:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I think I've come up with a good solution. If you have a funny idea, instead of creating a new page, just add it to an existing one! For some reason, if it goes onto a page that's already established, the NRV monster doesn't seem to care. For instance, I just put an "evolution mountion" section into the "brokeback mountain" article. It's probably going to be allowed to stay. Now, if I'd made a seperate "evolution mountain" page, it'd probably have been wiped out by now.
Just trying to find a workable solution . . .
--RudolfRadna 00:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I could use some help improving human nature. It's a funny little idea I started but couldn't think of a nice ending to. --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 14:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I'll see if I can think of something good.
--RudolfRadna 15:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I added some stuff. What do you think?
--RudolfRadna 16:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Your contribution is funnier than mine --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 16:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Like I said, it was a fruitful topic for satire. I'll try to come up with more. Thanks for the invitation to help, and if there's anything people around you do that drives you nuts, make fun of it! --RudolfRadna 16:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)