Uncyclopedia:Village Dump/archive4

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Banning Arbitrarily

Are we allowed to ban users "for the hell of it" or "because we don't like them" or "their attitude sucks"? I can see how this could get out of hand, so how about limiting it to just one arbitrary ban per day? --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 23:57, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I use the 3 point system of bannination
Point 1:
User creates an array of shitty 1 liners.
Point 2:
User recreates deleted shitty articles.
Point 3:
User insists on recreating Vandanitous cruft
--Nytrospawn 00:05, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Banning this kind of user is not effective. It makes their actions more difficult to track. I say discouraging a registered user by monitoring and reverting his edits is more efficient than having yet another random IP doing mischief. A "You suck and it makes Uncyclopedia sad. Admins are looking in your direction, rolling their eyes. You can help this situation by reading featured articles and learn how not to suck." template could be added to their pages. --Sir Sunsneezer CUN

I don't think I'm being understood. Arbitrarily, i.e., without just or sufficient cause. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 02:43, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Don't do that, Please. Only ban for just cause, like blanking or spamming. Or for an extremely short time in joke circumstances, i.e. the admin bannings earlier. Someone was banned for 10 seconds. it was Funny(tm). Otherwise, the admins will be viewed as tyrannical overlords. That's not to say we aren't... We just don't want that to get around. Hope that helps. --PantsMacKenzie 04:11, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)
OK, got it, Pants. Thank you for explaining it fully. It's a no-no, not a perk. Damn. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 08:16, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Bans are ONLY for: 1. Spam, 2. Vandalism / Blanking 3. Intentionally being malicious


How about for typing in all caps? Can I ban someone for that? I really do like the concept of someone being unfunny to the point that they're seen as malicious. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 08:16, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Overkill. We already have VFD and the like to deal with plain 'ol unfunny text. --Carlb 19:30, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)


I'm getting slightly worried that we are putting off the newbies if we instantly huff their new creations, whilst I don't have a problem placeing a lot of them on the QVFD page quickly (stalking new pages is always a good way of spotting them) should we admins leave them for at least 24 hours to allow for a governors reprieve (i.e. give them a chance to expand a little).? Ideas, comments? BTW I'd welcome the views of admins and non-admins. --Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 23:17, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

also whilst it's not a requirement to place a tag on them, should it be strongly encouraged template:qvfd may need to be rewrittn to be less jocky and more, "Might be worth reading this", etc. etc.--Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 23:19, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, speaking as a rabid QVFD'er, I have to say there are clearly two categories of QVFD pages. Things that must be deleted instantly like spam links to business sites, or slandanity of unfamous people... And crap-ish paragraph articles started to blue a red link (or similar reasons). Perhaps if the former were only put on Ban Patrol (or the IP rather, their efforts easily listed in contribs). And for the latter: give QVFD pages a grace period that can be decided on arbitrarily (12-24 hrs? or maybe up to the QVFDer) Just a thought. --Splaka Bur. SG CM © 23:29, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)
What ^he^ said. I tend to kill the "my mate john smith is a big gay faggot" stuff instantly, since it clearly isn't going anywhere. However, as an example of the latter, there's the stuff related to Welsh wildlife and Dutch cities that has popped up over the past couple of days; at first it looked like a lame local joke, but there's some coherent work starting to come out of it. Some people take longer to develop their ideas than others, and why shouldn't they be able to leave their work on the wiki "in-progress"? Others might even jump on board in the meanwhile. -- Codeine OUN Bur. 00:36, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I believe those pages should be on regular vfd. --Sophia 03:54, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

The one-liners and the two sentences of vulgarity? Not worth debating or sweating over. I think a more direct how to guide for newbies may be needed. It actually takes a lot of knowledge, a lot of work (and sometimes a lot of research) to write a good Uncyclopedia article. (The really good articles pull this off in such a way that it looks effortless.) A very specific how-to guide detailing what types of topics make good articles, how to do the research, and how to find pictures may be helpful. --KP CUN 23:54, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps some sort of "Under Construction: Postpone Baleetion" tag would be useful, as the stub one generally seems to indicate that somebody else should finish it because the author won't. This might help differentiate between the homesteaders and bums. It would have to be well advertised somehow though, so new folks and one time posters would use it. --Spintherism 01:06, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'm a slow writer myself; that's why I usually write my longer articles in MS Word or on my talk page before posting them in their final version. I'm always afraid that they'll be deleted or mutilated before I've had a chance to improve them. Poor defenseless little stubs... *sniff* --Jordanus 02:04, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Personally I think that we are being a little too fast with our deletions. We should give the slightly coherent stuff a longer chance. Really. --Sophia 03:53, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps we need a QVFD where pages get say 24 hours (or whatevr we decide upon, I sugggest that QVFD submissions are signed, for the datestamp, although we won't have to be too arsey about this as long as they are in order) and the addition of a newb friednly QVFD tag to the article is "encouraged" and a ImmediateVFD for the spam, "YOUR GHEY" stuff that gets no mercy (although at this rate we turn into WP)--Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 08:43, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Great potato! Can you tell us what you would do on non-spam things (then we can follow your example in general) like:
MTU, but instead of redirecting the page, put a disambiguation so people can actually write an article AS WELL as read the definition.. --Sophia 13:37, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • Candy_corn (one line not counting templates with no pages linked to it)
Rewrite request and stub. --Sophia 13:37, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • Makkara (test page maybe, second appearance)
vfd the first page, I actually liked the meat product thing about finns --Sophia 13:37, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
qvfd, it doesn't have copyright status--Sophia 13:37, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • John 'Boner' Bonham (content: Drinking drinking drinking drinking drinking drinking drinking dead)
vfd, but I actually liked it. --Sophia 13:37, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Which would you suggest for VFD, QVFD, Stub, MTU, etc? --Splaka Bur. SG CM © 04:06, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I thought some of those had potential. But what do I know? I'm an anonymous IP. But I suppose we all need to justify our Burninator templates.
Apart from a narrowing range of appreciation for what's funny, one thing I haven't been crazy enough is the about is the bannings. If you don't think a line is funny, fine. But banning a user for days for a handful of what you find to be unfunny one-liners seems a bit much.-- 10:03, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
After having a quick shufty at the block log I have to agree with our anno friend whilst some are reasonably open and shut (spambots, spamming about an external wicca site!) some users are being banned for recreating pages (which is not a probalem but they should be at least warned after they recreate it once not to do it again) and for things that could be considered construcitve flamewaring (if reverted and they re-insert it, they should be warned before being banned), perhaps if the rate of instant deletions is slowed slightly thus will be less of a problem as the users in question will have a chance to get a better understanding of ::Uncyclopedia otherwise it seems the current process at times:
  1. User finds Uncyc, thinks cool
  2. User creates his first little article
  3. article gets instantly deleted
  4. User thinks WTF, recreates it (possibly not even realising that it was deleted or why)
  5. User gets Banned.
  6. User thinks fuck this I'm off.
Again this is just my impression. in the current climate I would probably have been banned when I first started --Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 10:51, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC) --Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 10:51, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I tend to only delete the following: stuff on QVFD, stuff that's been sat in VFD for long enough and no one likes it, images that have been sat in the Pictures VFD for long enough. I do also tend to go for what I think are lame short articles - perhaps I need to adjust that line and mark the page/user/user-talk in some way to be helpful to the author, though a lot of time the short articles do appear to reek of graphiti. As for banning, I only ban the following: ppl on the ban patrol page (after I've independantly checked the reason for the ban) and people caught in the act of vandalism/spamming/distruptive editting of important pages - though I've also banned for recreation of crap pages I've previously deleted. Again, maybe the tone of that last criterium needs to be toned down. --Gay2.gifIMBJRGay2.gif 11:34, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I've created Template:MTUsign which does add a timestamp, when used {{MTUsign|~~~~~}} (5 tildes), I still havn't worked out how to automagically timestamp doing just {{MTUsign}} and using {{MTUsign|--~~~~}} i.e. a normal signature dosn't work (for me anyway, probably blame the silly signature), if any MediaWiki gurus can work out a better way please do so!, Anyway enough of my rambling, it would probably be worth adapting the {{QVFD}} to do this with an appropriate warning that it has 24 hours to shape up, good idea / bad idea? (I've just created Template:WIP for works in progress again same used )--Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 11:59, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

{{subst:MTUsign|~~~~~}} gives

This page is a candidate to be moved to Undictionary.
This article appears to be an Undictionary entry, not an Uncyclopedia article. Uncyclopedia is not your friend, but Undictionary is. Either:

  1. If this article can be expanded to be more than a dictionary entry, please do so and remove this message.
  2. Convert it to an Undictionary Entry

If this article is not moved or expanded within 7 days it may be huffed without mercy.
This Template placed on 17:10, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC) (Admins Check time stamp)

</nowiki>Category:Move to Undictionary|{{PAGENAME}}

Effectively, subst: causes the template text to be expanded and used as soon as the original edit is made, instead of being done when the page is displayed. The person using the template would, however, need to be the one to use {{subst:template}} instead of just {{template}}. --Carlb 17:16, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

It's pretty clear that we're using a little too much bannination. The other thing is that I find there's way too many things in QVFD that should really not be there. QVFD should only be for things like spam, or hate speech. It's OK to qvfd a one line that's called 'fo shizzle lol haxed', but I don't think it's OK to QVFD a small entry that could go in undictionary. I also think that we should talk to users before applying the banhammer, even if they are creating articles left and right. The exception is obvious vandals and spammers. --Sophia 13:32, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

If QVFD is for undisputed rubbish, then perhaps the unfunny one-line substub that gets recreated should get the {{vfd}} template and a swift kick into regular VFD instead of reaching for the ban hammer? (with the usual exceptions for plagarism, spam links, bomb threats and the like). A template like wikipedia:test (ok, your test post worked, next time try the sandbox...) may be of use too? --Carlb 17:16, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
How about test pages? Pages self-blanked by users (that don't know how to move or request QVFD themselves)? Wieringen ? I like the idea of the new MTUsign tag being a general conglomeration of "rewrite, move to undictionary, fix, improve, or something, or it will be deleted!" for anything that is slightly coherent. The problem is there are so many tags even now, and so many pages to report/nominate for deletion, that the average new user, and many old ones, won't know what to do. --Splaka Bur. SG CM © 20:58, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I certainly think we need to avoid a plethora of tags and that they should be easy to use (hence bening annoyed about needing to use the 5 tildes). I humberly suggest the following:
  1. Immediate Delete - No need for tag
  2. Move to Undictonary {{MTU|~~~~}} and dont' worry if they just use {{MTU}}, it'll look a bit rubbishy but that's not a major problem.
  3. VFD {{VFD}}
  4. QVFD {{QVFD|~~~~~}} agains don't sweat about missing tildes (although encouraged) and rewritten to be less jokey.
  5. {{welcome}} for new users.
  6. {{test}} for new users in danger of the ban stick.
The above five should be the only ones needed, of course people are free to invent wild and waky alternatives (possibly with indepth explainaitions) but those should be the "default" minimum, fianlly each should add into a category.--Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 00:54, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

What qualifies for QVFD?

As it stands, quick-deletion criteria is "pages that are so blatantly crappy that they don't need to go through a long voting process to be deleted." Too ambiguous, no? I believe that specific criteria for being quick-deleted would be a lot more helpful to both users and admins who use QVFD than "blatantly crappy", while also reducing deletions of stub/merge/dictionary candidates. --EvilZak 17:40, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Should the following be kept, deleted, or moved to Undictionary?

Would any of these actually make good Undictionary entries, or is Undictionary going to be the new place we shove stuff we don't have the will to delete? If items put into QVFD are to be kept there for a week, why not just put them into VFD? What is the point of a QVFD that isn't Q? --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 20:34, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Oops, I edited over some of those. Here is what I did this morning:
When I say "MTU" I just mean adding the MTU tag. Instruct me my masters! --Splaka Bur. SG CM © 20:52, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Personally i'd move them all. My criteria for QVFD is spam/vandalism only, or pages of cussing and no content. Slight crap can stay on vfd. --Chronarion 01:23, 12 Sep 2005 (UTC)

2 Centage

I've been part of online communities before (chat rooms, message boards, etc) where the old style of doing things conflicts with the new. The less active ones who created the guidelines will eventually clash with the newer ones who question or modify them. The older users want things to stay the same as they were in the originating days of the community, and the newer ones think the old methods are oudated with all the new technology and influx of users (and may feel impaired by them). It is tough to compromise.

For example (and nothing against any of the admin mind you, I probably would have deleted them too after months of wikipedia-orientation): Almost all the examples I gave Sophia have since been Quick-deleted, even though very few on that list met her criteria for such. Almost all of the pages I added to QVFD in my first week here were deleted, and many I angsted over whether to nominate for QVFD or even VFD too. My view was somewhat conservative, nowhere near as conservative as Sophia's, and much more than (for example, my hero) Flammable's. It appears to me there is a huge gap in personal deletion critera here. Better definition of "crappy" might not be enough.

If possible, IMHO all the active admin should have a real time discussion about this, with examples. And if possible upon consensus: create a "Dummies guide to qvfd/vfd/mtu/stub/rewrite/wip" page with actual past examples of posts and the accepted tag (kept to a minimum, there are quite a few here) to add to each. Then each new user and admin can orient themselves on what to do in a crisis situation, as well as refer to it in the future. Less technical than the VFD/QVFD guidelines, and more technical than "crappy".

Delenda est Carthago.

My 2 centage, cheers. --Splaka Bur. SG CM © 21:30, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)


So as I see it the "consensus" so far on the timing of deletions is as follows"

  1. On Sight/IVFD (No need to redirect if admin)
    1. Slander/vanity
    2. Vandalism
    3. Formatting nonsense
    4. Non-witty gibberish
    5. Adverts
  2. QVFD
    1. Short articles that could be expanded
    2. Quality Single digit-liners that could go to the uncyc.
  3. VFD
    1. Questionable(i.e. maybe-humorous) material
    2. Factual material (verification)
    3. Grammatical mishaps and spelling disasters

with Immediate removal for On Sight/IVFD, 24 hours for QVFD, and a few days/one week for VFD?

I think that if we split QVFD into tow categories, we can do this better. However, I also think that 24 hours is much for a untagged short crap article. 16-18ish is good. If they work, they should be home in time to fix it, and I should be back in time to see if it either blooms or withers and dies. I also don't want to reach a point where we become backlogged. While categorization is nice, I don't wnat to have to come to a consensus on which articles are undict/non-undict worthy. This is how admin conflicts start. I say it's crap, you don't, we toss ideas back and forth and get frustated that an article goes nowhere, but sits in the main "volume." instead of being huffed, {{rewrite}} or sent to its doom. Maybe we could make "Limbo:" but then that just adds another level of categorization and more to deal with.

When I delete, I try to think if the article (by its title/contents) has potential (i.e. Pirates vs. ninjas). if it does, I give the user until the evening/afternoon to do his thing. If it's still not keep-worthy I off it. Unfunny short articles and pure crap (Gibberish, slander/vanity, etc.), I just nuke on sight, deferring to other users when i don't know, or leaving it as is when I'm not sure. I add comments and sometimes poke visitors IP talks about HTBFANJS and the Beginner's Guide (I should probably lay off comments like "Crap, crap crap..etc.", though). I figure if they don't take the time to understand how this place works, they really shouldn't be here. Posting is something you do properly, and as long as you add some wit, some insight, or some humor, in a light, right grammar sauce, you're good.--Flammable CUN 22:32, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

The problem with 16-18 hours is that the user may not be in the same time zone as you, with 24 at least it's certain that they have a chance during their prime editing time. Finally backlog shouldn't be a problrm, even if we get the same volume as we are now it just means you've got to wait a day (i.e. you don't have to worry about the 29th's till the 30th. --Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 00:45, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I can't wait a day for instant gratification! This is America! I don't care if there are other countries on Earth! I don't recognize other countries's sovereignty, in fact, I don't even thinkt hey exist! I'm a Loudmouthed American Asshole and I demand it be done MY way. USA ALL THE WAY. *Barf*--Flammable CUN 02:39, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Did I note, I'm an AmerI-CAN! Oh yeah! *Vomit*--Flammable CUN 02:53, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

More than timing, I often look at "What links here". If an author made 2-3 shitty articles which are interlinking, but link to nothing else on Uncylopedia, I whack them. If there's a shitty article which has links from 2+ "solid" pages, I whack without pause, because I figure that there's a good chance that it will get re-written via the red-linkage. The iffy part is a mediocre page with one link from a minor page elsewhere. Both pages are improved by the interlinkage, but the chance of the article improving, even if stubbed, is low. In that case, I put on my Santeria hat, grab a chicken, and go to town.

But really, I don't worry about whacking stuff with a vengence. When I first started writing anon here, several years ago, I lost a fair amount of stuff. Lots of it was crappy one-liners, or stupid-ass adds to pages. I learned quite a bit, as I watched my half-assed creations go down the drain. As I read some of the huge, well-written articles here, I started learning what I needed to do for my stuff to stay around. Now, only like 20-25% of the crap I write gets deleted. If someone writes a bunch of crappy one-liners, and goes off in a huff after they get deleted, good. They probably don't have the patience and clear-headedness needed to add a lot to this site. If they, like me, go "wow, they really don't put up with shitty articles here", and start rapidly improving their writing, great! That's the sort of person we want around here.

Part of the reason I write so little now is that I don't often have the muse to produce an article of the quality that I think this site requires. When I do take the time to write something, it's usually at least passible, if not moderately good. If all our anon-users did the same, while our volume would be lower, our "legitimate content page" count might actually increase faster. --Famine 12:54, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Hear hear! --Spintherism 02:12, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Follow Up?

So, if we're just going to tag articles with MTU or whatever template, what is the mechanism for following up? It doesn't look like the majority of tagged articles are showing up in either VFD or QVFD. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 06:05, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Same issue with {{rewrite}} stuff - much of it just sits there untouched, neither replaced with something better nor deleted. Perhaps there is a need to decide how long to let something languish on {{rewrite}} status before giving up on it??? --Carlb 06:25, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)
But is there a way of keeping track of any of it, is what I'd like to know. I'm new to this wiki thing, so maybe there is a way to find all the articles with a particular tag. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 00:00, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)
You can go to Template:rewrite and select "What links here" from the toolbox on the left to find all the articles that it's on, alternatively if the template is in a category all the pages that the template is placed on gets inlcuded in the category.--Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 01:56, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. There's crap there months old. I had a funny idea about making someone's talk page an undictionary page, since they have the MTU template on that page. How hard would that be to undo? --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 02:41, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite, Stub, no category...

Looks like we have nearly 1600 stubs (most of which could be kept or merged somewhere, but some of which were stubbed specifically because they are marginal but not quite VFD-worthy), about a hundred articles tagged for rewrite, more than 1100 with common mispellings and more than 1600 with no category tags at all. A simply misspelled or unwikified entry is fixable, but many of the uncategorised articles are marginal - could easily be a thousand there which, while not short enough to be QVFD-grade fragments, also are not very funny and could well belong on {{rewrite}} or on regular VFD.

QVFD, MTU and deletion-on-sight are only getting rid of one-liners and short school bus material. Almost none of the abandoned {{rewrite}}-grade dreck reaches VFD; most remains uncategorised or gets flagged for rewrite and then is just as promptly forgotten.

It's tempting to take everything still languishing on {{rewrite}} or {{boring}} status and VFD the lot of it, but would anyone object to having an extra hundred items show up on VFD in a short time frame? What about {{rewrite}} as just the tip of a larger iceberg, not just a hundred abandoned {{rewrite}} articles; we could easily have a thousand deserving pieces of rubbish to take their place?

Should I just start nominating these for VFD and let the (buffalo) chips fall where they may? --Carlb 20:38, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Might be worth trickeling them on, say 5 at a time. Start with rewrite and broing, then stubs then un-cat'd ones.--Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 23:56, 29 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Admins, please do not redirect talk pages to "no advert", and do not lock them. --Chronarion 15:04, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, that was me on Talk:Clinjas. But I only did it because it was getting auto-spammed by the Wickes furniture advert guy repeatedly, and I planned to unlock it after he'd run himself dry. -- Codeine 15:32, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Oh okay that's fine. Try not to redirect talk pages though, in general. Thanks though. --Chronarion 15:49, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)


There's been a minor flood of spam attacks this morning for 'Wickes Furniture' (see:Special:Log/delete). The attacks seem to be coming from a wide variation of IP addresses, which presumably means it's some sort of auto relay thing? Is there any way to stop this kind of thing without just waiting for an attack and then blocking the new IP address? -- Codeine 12:29, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I think I gotta talk to Wikia about that. We need an antispam extension installed. They have one at Central Wikicity, but we might need a custom edit one. --chron

Hidden Categories

Is it possible to add an article to a category in such a manner that the article will appear in the category index without the category being listed within the article itself? -- 19:59, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Auto-delete , or something

Is it possible to force minimum number of words in an article? Theres a whole slew of 2 sentence articles that just went up, all of which are not funny --Nytrospawn 17:58, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Denied. See Absolute power. --chron
If that was created today, it'd have been moved straight to undictionary. Assuming the right admin recognised it. Ah, the days without undictionary...
No no, thats one of our first articles --Nytrospawn 15:18, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)
That's the point. I agree. There's alot of stuff that should stay as is. We might be moving stuff too excessively sometimes. --Chronarion 15:19, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Blocking an IP range

How do I go about blocking an IP range? --Nytrospawn 15:02, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

There's some stuff about it here [1], but it looks a bit scary to me -- Codeine OUN Burninator 15:11, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
What the Zeus ?!?--Nytrospawn 17:54, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Which ips need blocking? I dunno if this extension is enabled, but I know how to do a subnet block.--chron
Eh, forget it, looks like I banned all the guys IP's. Shows what he knows, damn DSL/Cable users --Nytrospawn 15:06, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Patrolled Edits

I don't know if this is the place to mention this, but it appears that I can mark my own edits as being patrolled? What sense does patrolling make when this is possible? ComaVN 13:45, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Well, maybe its a show of how much you're confident that your "shit dont stink" ? so to speak.--Nytrospawn 14:30, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

To be frank, I'm not sure if anyone here knows what a patroled edit is. I, at least, pay no attention to whether or not an article is patrolled, and I never click the link to mark one as such. We have a fair number of active admins and admin-lakeys that put eyes on a large number of our articles, old or new. --Famine 20:50, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Ditto. To me the only function of patrolling is to get rid of the annoying red exclamation marks on the recent changes page. --Rcmurphy KUN 21:59, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)


The Education section of FSM needs dire parsing help/rework. It looks heavily sporked, but I can't take care of it because I need to submit an application today for which I haven't finished writing/revising the essays. Can anyone helps?--Flammable CUN 18:07, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

God, I tried, and 10 minutes later started to seriously consider just whacking the whole section. I was debating putting in a bit about the holy (and basil) book and 15 condiments (a full half-score more than moses, and 3x more than mohammad) but realized they would go better under religion. Then I realized that the whole ED section was crap. Any reason not to just whack it? --Famine OUN Burninator 16:23, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I believe that would be a quarter-score, friend. Your fish is untied. --PantsMacKenzie 00:10, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)


I've added a random image thing to You. It freaks the heck out of me, but maybe I am easily entertained. Comments? Do you "get" it? Is it lame? Splaka 12:38, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Beginner's guide? Too much?

I realized that a lot of the clashes we have are due to people not being familiar with writing "standards," deletion policy, and acceptable admin behavior, or because of communication issues. However, it has become far too long, but in the interest of having the material available if needed, I saved it anyway. Here it is: Uncyclopedia:Beginner's Guide to Being an Uncyclopedian. --Flammable CUN 02:05, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Any way to make a link to that appear at the top of all edit pages for anonymous users? With a disclaimer like "Vandalism and patent nonsense is not satire!"? Splaka 02:31, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Another reason to eschew patent nonsense is that Nytrospawn owns the patent. See way down below. --Marcos_Malo S7fc BOotS | Talk 08:26, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Vote for the Holy Mantle of Adminship User:Marcos Malo

Marcos_Malo (talk) – contribs (newdel)edit-countblock (remlist)all logsgroups
"n the meantime, I think I could be a lot more effective and efficient on QVFD if someone would make me an admin." - User:Marcos Malo from Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedian_of_the_Month#User:Marcos_Malo.

  • For Over 500 edits, sterling work on QVFD/VFD, edits on a range of subjects (instead of say latvia), Only thing is not been here a full month but I'm willing to overlook that here. --Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 22:58, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Im willing to overlook Elvis's overlookingness --Nytrospawn 23:18, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

While I don't like to do it, I withhold my vote. I like Eminem's style, commitment, and edits. I don't like the short time in residence. I'd rather not vote for admin with a "eh, I guess" attitude. You're on my radar now, Eminem - wow me. ;) --Famine 23:58, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

TheF project has swayed my opinion vastly. For. --Famine OUN Burninator 24:40, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I don't see why not. --Chronarion 01:08, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
FORTY BEANS IN THIS STEW. Sterling job. For, even it if makes me have to use the "crap deleted" stamp on my wall less often.--Flammable CUN 02:05, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Yes, absolutely agree. The Holy Mantle it should be. --KP CUN 02:30, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Give unto him that is called Marcos Malo a pointy admin stick so that he may prod the turds as they float by. --Gay2.gifIMBJRGay2.gif 11:41, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)


  • Chron's too much of a lazy, insane recluse to actually do it, so by the power of Sophia, I'm playing the role of the Megatron tonight. Since there are no objections, I hereby Dub thee, User:Marcos Malo an admin. Please take these complementary Holy Hand Muffins with which to smiteth thine n00benemies.--Flammable CUN 00:51, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll humbly do my best, even if it means cutting back on that most precious of drugs, Sleep. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 11:14, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Quick Vote For Move?

Question, should pages like these, newly anonymous not-quite-QVFD-material be moved to Undictionary (by the run-of-the-mill user) as soon as they are found (and if no one bothers to expand them)? And, if there is no page that links to them (or if there are very few that can easily be changed), should the created redirect be put on QVFD? (Am I being too much of a tattle-tale? Is it wrong to be entertained by the deletion log more than Sauron?) Splaka 21:12, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Rap Music, Womyn, Superconductivity, Stanley Kubrick, Evil Kloeten & The Dalli Dallis, Randomites, European Space Agency, Gillian McKeith, Velvet Revolver, Syringe, Swatch, Fizz, Hooter clamp

I don't have a problem with users moving stuff, especialy to/from undictonary, thats why instructions have been plastered all over the place to encourage this. Remember a when you move a page a redirect is left at the old page location to the new one anyway (you should fix any double redirects you cause however)--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 22:47, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I was mostly wondering if it was ok to fill UnCyc with redirect pages as a consequence. I moved the above pages and in the case of only 1 or 2 pages linking to it I fixed those links (Kubick had too many and someone might expand the article anyhow). Cheers! Splaka 23:17, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I actually prefer not a redirect, but a link to the Undictionary article instead. This way we can get a regular article too, in it's place. --Chronarion 01:09, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Illogical, illogical, conflicting input, I am NOMAD, I am perfect *assplode*.... I think you can delete the redirects on all those links except Kubrick. Splaka 01:19, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

One risk in not leaving the redirect is that the same sub-stub will keep getting re-created in the main article space. --Carlb 17:54, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Image Links

Are they possible? I've tried [[Link|[[Image:image]]]] but it doesnt work :( thanks for your help :)--Insertwackynamehere CUN 15:52, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Try, for example, Image:Canadianidiot.png, which is the following in wiki form:
--Gay2.gifIMBJRGay2.gif 18:50, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I think he is trying to turn an image into a link link this (HTML) <a href="blah"><img src="MyArse.jpg" /></a> however I personal havn't seen it done, has anyone else?--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 22:50, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Yeah what Elvis said, but thanks IMBJR :)--Insertwackynamehere CUN 01:27, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

(I just saw this on another wiki.) There is a way, but it's discouragingly inelegant: you could use a redirect. For example, put #REDIRECT [[Canadian Idiot]] into the image:Canadianidiot.png page and then clicking the image should redirect you to the article page from the image page. Downsides: it'll do this to every instance of the image on the wiki; you won't be able to write a description for the image page; and, most troubling, it has the added effect of placing the image at the top of the article, which is rather unattractive. I tried it out with image:Mickey Pill.jpg so you can see what it's like. I'll revert it after a bit. --Rcmurphy KUN 03:11, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, If you just want to keep n00bs away from the image's page you can use #REDIRECT [[Special:Randompage]], it doesn't put the image at the top and provides no linkback. But yah, even more inelegant. Splaka 03:18, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
heh yeah I thought of that but it seems a bit hacky. however, an interesting way which may fix that image problem is to have it redirect to middleman page which than redirects to the real page? But thats a hacky double redirect in the end, and I havent even tried it :P I wonder why the mediawiki creators didnt want image links --Insertwackynamehere CUN VFP 13:42, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)
k for archival purposes, solution is here: User_talk:Insertwackynamehere#Better_never_than_late.21_or..._something --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere Icons-world.gif CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere 00:13, 16 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Night Watchman

I think we need something of a night watchman. While I like culling crap pages, waking up to find 20 pages that need complete and utter annihilation, 23 that need reverting, and various and sundry stupid questions in my talk page isn't always pleasant, especially before coffee. Are there any Web-obsessed West-coasters, Cyber-Inuit, or Hard-wired Hawaiians that could give us a hand? (I'm Eastern Time)--Flammable CUN 15:10, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Well my western time only gives me an extra three hours, one of which I'll probably spend sleeping, but with school coming up and the need for procrastination and all, if the powers that be want to grant me the powers of deletion I would try my hand at it. --Spintherism 19:10, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I volunteer to keep QVFDing crap pages as they appear for whoever you electonimate to the position, being left-coast too. Muahaha. Splaka 20:23, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
EST and repressed childhood trauma expressed in vast swathes of destruction make me unsuitable for the job. Oh, and my summer vacation just ended and my 60hr work-weeks are starting up again. But I promise to continue burninating things in QVFD on occasion. Splaka's been fueling that fire for me. --Famine 23:38, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Vote                Now!

I resurected and cleaned up Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedian of the Month this month I've added two nominations User:IMBJR and User:Marcos Malo, vote, nominate, do your funky thang.--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 08:49, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Could I instead "play that funky music, white boy?"--Flammable CUN 15:13, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
What ever floats your boat--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 15:24, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I desperately need another tag in my sig, so I'd really appreciate if everyone and their sock puppets voted for me. --Marcos_Malo OUN S7fc BOotS Bur. | Talk 11:17, 26 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Somebody make an article for this


ROTFLMAO (a start (bit obvious))

Silence. Beautiful silence.

Ah. This is paradise--the time of night where all the Americans are sleeping, the Australians are working, the europeans are just waking up to go to work, and I'm awake because I need a life.--Flammable CUN 05:59, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'm clocking out. Godspeed ship of fools, vessel upon which satire makes its lonely voyage through the sea of humorlessness. Goodnight you Princes of Misinformation, you Kings of 'Nowledge Erroneous!--Flammable CUN 06:54, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Batten down the hatches; I'm out for the night. Good luck.--Flammable CUN 05:29, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Cheesium - From Uncyclopedia - There is currently no text in this page. Would you like to create Cheesium or Search for Cheesium in Uncyclopedia?

Nah, can't be! Uncyclopedia is out of Cheesium??? Please tell me I've missed something here - there's an impressive RadicalX image of the Chessium atom itself, four articles (space-time continuum, Idiotic Table of the Elements, religion and American Pi) which refer to the stuff in some form, and even a French-language article desencyclopedie:fromagium as part of a translation of the Idiotic Table of Éléments.

So which one of you smartarses polished off the rest of the Cheesium at six in the morning? and is it time to head off to blahblahs soup-я-market for more? --Carlb 15:52, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Went shopping, restocked. --Famine 16:36, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Well. It's finally come to this. I want an uncyc mug. On my desk. Rcmurphy, might you co-license the logo to us under a commercial license? --Sophia 03:19, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'd be delighted to. How would I go about making that official? Just show me where to sign. --Rcmurphy

KUN 05:19, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I trust that you won't sue me, so I think that's good enough. As Grand Poo Bah, I demand someone else do the work and then allow me to buy the item.--Sophia 01:45, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
cafepress.com does this sort of thing, usually for free. All they do is take a cut of the profits, you know, like the Mafia --Nytrospawn 13:56, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Maybe (assuming the oringinal artist's agree) we can do a range of featured images? --Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 16:33, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Sounds like a $$$$ idea --Nytrospawn 21:04, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Between the image and url...Slogans? "Girls gone Wilde" "My page got QVFD'd and all I got was this lousy tee-shirt" "Vandalize Poland!" "Sauron: Lord of the Dance" "{{stub}}" "Uncyclopedia! Because you can't [[masturbate]] to [[cannibal]] [[midget]] [[porn]] all day!" Splaka 21:16, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)
It might be more fitting to just have the picture's caption if it's something besides the logo. --Spintherism 01:02, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
P.S. Might it be on somewhat shaky ground to use most of the featured images, considering the majority of them are based on other people's original art? Maybe it would be best to just stick with the logo. --Spintherism 01:05, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I think if you are doing a direct parody of something, then you are within your legal rights. Contrarily, you shouldn't use something that isn't being made fun of... for example: Penny Arcade used "Strawberry Shortcake" to parody American McGee's games and was taken to task for it, it would have been interesting to see the outcome had they decided to get lawyers involved. But you are probably right on both counts. IMHO any featured image that is 100% original or based on public domain sources (and if the author agrees) could be printed. And only the logo version should get various slogans. Splaka 01:14, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC) (Not a copyright laywer, just plays one on TV)
IF someone does set this up, where should the cold hard cash go, I get the impression that Wikicities hosting is being supported by the google ads, does Sophia have a charity we can launder send the cash too, or can the cafepress prices be set so as not to make a profit?--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 08:56, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
At cafepress.com you can set your prices, I believe. See this link from their faq Splaka 09:04, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Cafepress is rather more expensive than I expected it to be. Eleven bucks base price for a small mug? Ouch. But then, I don't know of a better alternative, so there you go. By the way, Splaka, I love "Vandalize Poland!" Truly inspired. --Rcmurphy KUN 19:36, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Re: "Vandalize Poland!", I put it on my watch list, and it's been vandalized 3 times in the last 26 hours. I don't think we need that slogan on a mug! Evil... Splaka 09:01, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Your right there are pages that got vandalised a lot more often (3 times a day how I longed for Romania to only get hit three times a day at times) --Sir Elvis KUN FIC Bur. | Petition 11:11, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
About the money laundering charity, Id say the most logical charity would be something that promotes litteracy, seeing as how some of our "contributors" seem to lack it --Nytrospawn 19:50, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I certainly would be glad to purchase a coffee mug. or T-Shirt. or penwiper. or other random junk! yay! --PantsMacKenzie 06:55, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'd love to have a {{Stub}} or {{Rewrite}} mug.--Flammable CUN 23:46, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
The only thing is that Stub and Rewrite are Wikipedia staples as well. Maybe {{Wilde}} or something. --Rcmurphy KUN 02:34, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

So then...who would like to have the honor of starting this thing? Anybody? Anybody? --Rcmurphy KUN 21:01, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Id elect RadicalX since many of his images are on our featured list --Nytrospawn 23:25, 25 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I think Raddy died or something. I've hardly seen him around at all in the past few weeks. I don't know how many of the featured images would look good on mugs or shirts, either, though EYE BEAMS!!! would certainly look excellent. --Rcmurphy KUN 02:34, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

C'mon, guys. There might just be a Feather in Your Cap award waiting for whoever does the deed. How's that for a reward? --Rcmurphy KUN 02:34, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'll do it, but the award matters not. I just need time in which to do it. I'm going back up to school today and will have a week with essentially nothing to do. So, I'll look into setting stuff up then. I'm gonna need some higher quality pictures to work with, and exact merchandise that people want. So... Send me the images to my username at gmail.com and I'll get right on it... soon. --PantsMacKenzie 10:10, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)
So, I'm looking at cafepress, and it is indeed somewhat expensive. Depending. It looks like $11 base price for a coffee mug. I'd probably set the selling price even with the base price, unless people actually want to donate money (that's another can of worms). Cafepress also has the drawback that unless you're a premium shop, you can only have one of each individual item in the store. So, I can have one mug, one t-shirt, etc. This means that there can only be one image for each item. I'm currently on a trial subscription for a Premium Shop, which means that I'm testing stuff. After 2 weeks of trial, it becomes $6/month, or $60 for the whole year. Anyone else know of any other merchandising websites? I'm open to suggestions. --PantsMacKenzie 11:19, 27 Aug 2005 (UTC)

How bout setting up pre-orders? So we know how many to sell? That way we'll know how many we can sell before actually selling anything, or paying for any services. Then I guess we can have a rotating selection --Nytrospawn 00:34, 28 Aug 2005 (UTC)


How do I create (& link to) a new Oscar Wilde quote at the beginning of an article? How do I get the O.W. formatting?

This (guess this should be turned into a seperate "help" article and linked somewhere and maybe add Wilde to the list of UnProjects on the Community Portal) should explain it, I'm off to bed now but if you have any problems post here and someone should be able to help.--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 23:00, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

After the x000nth request, I made this into a help page. See Uncyclopedia:Wilde. --Famine 00:08, 31 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Is it enough to just mark an article as stub? Will helpful idiots find it and make it shinier? Because I started with a quick idea on what to do to Genitive, but I ran out of diarrhea at some point, and some other idiot will have to finish it. Bringa 15:59, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

This is the place to post a request for other idiots to work on it. That, or the talk page.--Flammable CUN 16:04, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Awesomeness! Thus, I request idiot-monkey-assistance! Ideally the article would continue exploring the history of the genitive and its modern usage (I was trying to be funny by misusing it in as many ways as I could think of in my third paragraph; might not be funny after all. Consider all of the article open game! I'll add nonsense as I find the time)

Help out my rashly-created pages

I'd love to have your help to make my new pages even gooder.

Pithy Saying Man, who needs more case studies.

The Red Page, for which each link is to an Editing page.

Beirut, the capital city of drinking games.

Sorry, thought you were replacing stuff with other, not your own stuff. Try to add on to your own statements form now on, as it confuses the admins less.--Flammable CUN 01:01, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I think anime/onime needs to be split

Earlier, Oal (talk) – contribs (newdel)edit-countblock (remlist)all logsgroups moved parts of Onime and Talk:Onime into the main body of anime. I think that makes it look clumsy and inconsistent, and should probably be changed back. Thoughts?--Flammable CUN 19:10, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Take em out, since they are already 2 different articles --Nytrospawn 19:46, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

You do it! It's time for my nap --Flammable CUN 20:07, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Night, Night --Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 20:08, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Im not doing nothin' --Nytrospawn 20:32, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Fine! See if I make you pie ever again!--Flammable CUN 20:42, 21 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Fun Templates

I have 4 new templates for your use.

And what do they do? Mostly nothing. However, 1 time in 50, each template will produce a truly random sighting of Elvis, a UFO, Big Foot, or the Loch Ness monster. Put these all over Uncyclopedia and let the random sightings begin! --KP CUN 19:06, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

If you can’t decide which one you like, here’s one more template: Template:Really random sighting. It will produce one of the rare sightings 2% of the time. --KP CUN 19:29, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Any reason for creating five templates instead of just the one? --Carlb 01:57, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Laziness. --KP CUN 06:06, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

OHS NOES WE'RE BEING ATTACKED BY VAIN ASSHOLE LOSER IDIOT MORON FREAK! HALP! (TalkContribs (del)Block (rem-lst-all)WhoisCityProxy?WP Edits) did a sprighty job of trying to blank UnNews:Untransmitted Dads Army script discovered containing information about Sherrod. Gave a hyperban. Discuss freely. --Flammable CUN 00:14, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I posted something about it on the Ban Patrol page, but didn't do anything. I think that IP is Sherrod h(im)erself since that IP originally erased the picture of her from the article. --Darkdan 00:18, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I say I would give IT a 24 year ban for being an internet fuckshit --Nytrospawn 00:49, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Entire contribution of and (TalkContribs (del)Block (rem-lst-all)WhoisCityProxy?WP Edits) [2] is to remove "Sherrod Degrippo" from articles; both as synonymous with Sherrod as the userID's wikipedia:user:encydra, wikipedia:user:encydra2 et al, flagged as wikipedia:user:girlvinyl sockpuppets here. Oh, and the bear is Catholic. *yawn* --Carlb 01:12, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Apparently the war has shifted to the front page of Uncyclopedia. Did anyone see the inflamatory "In the news" item (that I just posted, heh heh). --Marcos_Malo S7fc BOotS | Talk 01:38, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Oh my god. It is now fully on. I say this is midly moronic to point and scream "HEEEEY THAT OTHER WEBSITE IS RUN BY AN ATTENTION WHORE" but it is tragically stupid from said attention whore to edit out references to herself. well... that's it. That's irony and sarcasm. That I'm pointing out. In an ironic and sarcastic tone. And also a lack of a notion of when to stop. That I'm pointing out. In a lack of a notion of when t --Sunsneezer 05:02, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Rename/Reattribute/Change Fluids/Rotate Tires

Ok, shows how much I was paying attention. I was hitchhiking around this page for a few days dressed in my birthday IP, browsing. I then decided to get a gas guzzling username of my very own. I went to the dealer, checked them all out, selected the appropriate color and options, and drove off (about 24 hours ago). Since then I've been cruisin' and picking up chick tracts. But, I just realized I left the dealer missing an R. That or someone stole it while I was parked downtown. (Ok, so I mistyped my username, and didn't even realize for 24 hours! Weird, I have been really out of it lately, suffering Wikipedia burnout (or smoulderout).., Just wondering if it is possible to rename users here?) Splaka (#2933) -> Splarka ? (just askin) Splaka 21:29, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

As I uderstand it, changing a username means having to go into the database directly and change it, you could always change your signature and/or create a redirect of User:Splarka to User:Splaka --Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 22:57, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Ok, just thought I'd ask (since some other wikis have automated processes to do such, of course, they don't have {{bat fuck insane}} so I guess it works out even. Splaka 23:21, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Indeed. I'd say just register the new nick, and, if you're feeling ambitious, redirect the old to the new. You won't have a complete list of contributions on the new nick, but after 1500 more edits, it probably won't matter that you lost a few. --Famine 13:46, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Actually, you'd want not to create a redirect directly, but to go to your old user and usertalk pages and hit the "move" button. Moving the page to your new user/talk pages would leave the redirects automatically. --Carlb 15:39, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, complex, I'll just go around saying "Arrr" a lot instead. Thanks though. Arrr. Splaka 18:51, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)

This weekend

I'll be out of town this weekend and I might not have internet access. Someone want to update the featured image and featured article while I'm out? Thankee... --Rcmurphy KUN 17:01, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Is it against Unc. policy to wager on featured articles? Can we set up an office pool? --Marcos_Malo S7fc BOotS | Talk 18:31, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Actually, whoever updates could probably make some side cash here...under the table, if you know what I mean... --Rcmurphy KUN 19:20, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I'll change 'em for you --Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 19:39, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I'll wager ten pounds er dollars on Random humour--Presley 19:43, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I'll wager 50 quatloos on the new ... ahem, wrong planet. --IMBJR 20:47, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)
Thanks mate, much obliged. --Rcmurphy KUN 02:13, 22 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Hey, KP..

I found your secret. Ha ha. And here it is.


That is far too mundane to be the true secret hidden deep within Uncyclopedia. --KP CUN 16:08, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Then the secret is Dennis. Hey, admins, could you look at my proposal below?-=Cheeseboi 21:54, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I told him to use ROT26. --Marcos_Malo S7fc BOotS | Talk 09:21, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Style Guide

I just wrote a style guide. At the end, I got tired of typing and cut it short. Sorry. --Cheeseboi 14:42, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Nice parody of how editing is supposed to be done around here. I just hope it's not too confusing to new users - we don't want them to follow it and mess everything up. --Famine 02:20, 19 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Dare I mention we could use such a place? We could add things like Jim Belushi to it (though that's not a particularly good e.g. - but it inspired me to think of the idea). --IMBJR 17:37, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure I see the point of the new section. How would an unbiography on Jim Belushi differ from a normal article on Jim Belushi?
You might be right. I just checked Wikipedia, and they don't have an equivalent Biography namespace. --IMBJR 09:25, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)
I think it's unecessary really, just in the regular NS is fine. --Sophia 22:47, 18 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Undictionary namespace

Undictionary: should be made a proper namespace. Currently, any talk page that should be "Undictionary talk:article" is instead named "Talk:Undictionary:article". - Guest 14:02, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I had a shuffty to try to find out how (i'm sure I saw a page on doing it a bit ago) but I can't find it anywhere, besides I'm not sure what would happen if we did.--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 14:21, 20 Aug 2005 (UTC)


England has been pretty severely vandalized over time, and I can't quite make out where to begin fixing it. Maybe someone with admin powers could take a look? (TalkContribs (del)Block (rem-lst-all)WhoisCityProxy?WP Edits) Blocked for 48 hours.--Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 13:55, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Shhh. Can you find the secret?

I’ve been informed that a secret lies deep within Uncyclopedia. Where could it be? --KP CUN 05:30, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)


Stop "StopKill"

[3] and [4] , I am really starting to hate that guy. Hate with A VENGENCE --Nytrospawn 22:36, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Let's just hope no one uses your trigger word and unleashes all that sublinimal training you have received from violent video games. --Marcos_Malo S7fc BOotS | Talk 22:48, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Lets pray that SimCity didnt give me wtf magical powers of telepathy --Nytrospawn 00:00, 17 Aug 2005 (UTC)