Forum:Unusual Pages

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Unusual Pages

Note: This topic has been unedited for 6382 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Wkipedia has a list of unusual pages that I think we should try to mimic in some way. It would be a good place to advertise pages that you wouldn't think to search for without hearing about it first. Much like the Do Not Click Any Links page, was featured, and in that way it was advertised. no one would have thought to look for such an unusual page by their own accord. I'm just saying, it could be useful. --Sir Tripod2282 cun vfp talk Active ~ 17:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Special:Randompage--Rataube 17:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Pwnt. And where is the WP list you mention? I'd like to see it. --User:Nintendorulez 20:40, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Unusual_articles --PseudoChron 03:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Why don't we just copy their page verbatim, but fix all the links to point back to the Wikipedia stuff, and then call it Unusually stupid articles? --Pseudouser 04:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

But (almost) every article on Uncyc is 'unusual'. We'd have to have a list of 'usual' articles instead. Not sure about Pseudo's idea: if it was done in a really 'unusual' way it might be good... --Hindleyite Talk 16:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

What I mean by "unusual" is articles like "Do Not Click Any Links". It has an unusual title. A person would search for something like "George W. Bush" or "Dog", but an unusual title like the one mentioned above isn't exactly obvious to search for. --Sir Tripod2282 cun vfp talk Active ~ 14:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, OK, then. Seems like a pretty good idea - I think you should go for it. It would certainly function better as a substantial list, though, not just eight or ten page links. --Hindleyite Talk 15:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I've always hated how we copy wikipedia every chance we get. A lot of those articles have extremely good humor value if they were rewritten to our standards, but why have a fricking page of them, that's just another way of saying we're Wikipedia's little brother. -- Kaizer the Bjorn takkun (nya nya) (1961 model!) Check out T61! 19:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Vote Here

Score: +5

• For --Sir Tripod2282 cun vfp talk Active ~ 15:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• For on the condition that it is well written with substantial content. This probably goes without saying. --Hindleyite Talk 15:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• Useless. But what's with the voting feeber? If you want to do it, do it and that's it. And if it's not funny, then is when the voting comes.--Rataube 16:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I think an admin should do it, because then it would have to have a link somewhere on the main page, and I don't exactly have the resources to find all of the unusual pages. I didn't say that I would do it, but that some one should. --Sir Tripod2282 cun vfp talk Active ~ 14:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
    • You don't have the resources couse there are sooooo many. But admins don't have any more resources than you for this, except for linking to it from the mainpage, which they won't do until it proves valuable (Rc is one of the senior adminis, see his comment). Admins can block users, delete or protect pages but they can not magically generate and order huge lists of articles (I know couse I'm an admin in a foreign uncy). If you really want this done you will have to do it youself, I seriously doubt anyone else would volunteer. I still think it's useless, but if you insist, take a look at the special pages, there you may find some links that might help.--Rataube 11:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• For. For the less obvious articles, I suppose this wouldn't hurt. --User:Nintendorulez 18:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• Yes, no need to vote for this. If it proves valuable maybe we could link it on the Community Portal or something...but I fear it's going to be quite a long list... —rc (t) 20:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• Baaaaah Do it; if no one likes it, kill it. Its quite simple really. --The Zombiebaron 23:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• For. Having read some of these articles, they're pretty darn funny. I say we take the best ones and lampoon it enough so that it has some extra content while still remaining to what the original page was about. (i.e. take a funny page and not make it entirely different.)--Witt E, 22:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
• Do it, then change your mind and delete it so that everyone whines and prattles on and on and on about how it was the "coolest idea ever" and why "the cabal had to ruin it for everyone," until there is finally a treaty that sets up something under the same namesake but so remote connected to the original concept everyone loses interest and everything connected to it goes up on VFD, whereup it is concluded that the idea is old and childish and the thing gets deleted, having successfully wasted much of our time that could be better spend on writing more ingenious stuff rather than warring over whether or not such simple connections between them should be drawn. !Cap'n SimzorzAr, Matey! 20:23, 4 May 2006 (UTC)!
• Against see above. -- Kaizer the Bjorn takkun (nya nya) (1961 model!) Check out T61! 19:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)