Uncyclopedia talk:Top 10 Articles of 2013

Declaration of Gin-Dependence is missing from this list for 2013, even though it tied for third place on that year‘s "Best of" List. I assume this is a simple oversight and as the author of the article, I look forward to and thank the site’s admins for rectifying the oversight and correcting the official list to include the aforementioned article. Cheers! Sir NoNamesLeft (GUN) WotM NotM 20:04, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Top Tens are for featured articles. This article was never featured. ~ Kakun · talk 00:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Qakun, you are INCORRECT about my FEATURED article, Declaration of Gin-Dependence. The article WAS INDEED VOTED FOR AND FEATURED on DECEMBER 2, 2013 - BEFORE subsequently tying for THIRD PLACE in site user votes for placement on the list of "Top Ten Articles of 2013" in the late winter/early spring of 2014. I have computer file records establishing this fact, so I am not sure how/why Uncyclopedia itself could lack such confirming data. I must therefore insist this issue be corrected and my article Declaration of Gin-Dependence be restored to the Best of/Top Ten feature list for 2013 articles on the site. It was previously so listed, and I have computer data history files showing what the article looked like at the time of initially being "branded" as a Top 10 of 2013 article (back then, the award designation font Uncyclopedia placed on the the front page of the article after it won the vote was GREEN thing font, and it simultaneously said, "Featured Article" and "Top 10 of 2013" in said Green font. The article was also marked within its text to indicated (1) that it was a previously-featured artictle (with the date of feature listed) and ALSO that it was now a yearly Top Ten article (in the "Cream of the Crap" template box that was added post-award). I have date file proof of this as well. Finally, even as of TODAY (April 25, 2021), any viewer who brings up the article Declaration of Gin-Dependence from Uncyclopedia's current server and views it will see that the article REMAINS "branded" as a Top Ten of 2013 in the upper-left corner of the first page of the article (although the award "badge" font for Top 2013 articles has apparently since been changed to a multi-color, "Mardi Gras"-looking font), and the formerly-present indicia of the article's having previously been featured no longer appear within the article within any templates, notations, etc., for reasons I cannot fathom). In any event, NOW THAT YOU HAVE THE FULL AND CORRECT FACTS AND CAN SURELY VERIFY THESE FACTS BASED ON UNCYCLOPEDIA'S OWN SERVER HISTORY/RECORDS, I am hoping you will be less dismissive of my requested corrective/restorative action - a request which, the dialogue above makes plain, is one which you have, without any valid cause, summarily dismissed once already, justifying the dismissal solely on demonstrably false/incorrect (and thus baseless) reasoning. I would hope that you will "be the bigger person" now and redress this error in full, effectively reversing and correcting (1) all changes that knocked/"disappeared" my article out of its previously published and openly acknowledged status on Uncyclopedia (1) as a "Featured Article" on December 2, 2013; and then, (2) from its prior and proper inclusion on all relevant Uncyclopedia site lists/pages as one of (the most-voted-for, per the site's online tally of nominations and votes for the category at the time) of Uncyclopedia's "Top Ten Articles of 2013" as it was first acknowleged and openly published as such in the first half of 2014 per the site's own voting tally history for said category at the time. Your time and attention to this matter and it proper, prompt and accurate resolution/correction is appreciated. I look forward to seeing everything redressed and resolved to reflect the actual history and status of these issues concerning the article in question, as they were previously reflected on Uncyclopedia's website. Best - Sir NoNamesLeft (GUN) WotM NotM 20:22, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Dear Sir. Nonamesleft. Your issue is of great importance to us. We at uncyclopedia value our contributors greatly and we wish to resolve all issues in a speedy manner and to the highest level of customer service possible. For this reason, please be patient while we form a sub-committee which will evaluate the general conditions of this dispute and then propose the method by which we will form a general-standing-committee that will address all potential issues in the Autumn of 2021. At this meeting, we will take all issues, such as yours, and decide whether to elevate them to "issues of concern" or not. All issues must pass a rigorous legal test by which they are evaluated through the various articles of uncyclopedia's contstitution and amendments. After this meeting and a bloody orgy, if your issue is considered valid and of serious enough importance it will be passed on to the cabal which will is next scheduled to meet at an undetermined location in June 2025. They may decide to take up your case but are under no obligation to do so, even if the standing-committee recommends so. They can be motivated to take up some cases depending on the balance of their Swiss Bank Accounts (they have several Swiss Bank Accounts in both Zurich and Geneva). Please rest assured that your issue with the cream of the crap of 2013 will be rectified no later than 2035. In the mean time know that we deeply care about your concerns over the cream of the crap and that every time members of the Cabal snort a line of coke or bleat out goat sounds while orgasming during bloody orgies...that your concerns will be always in their mind. If you have any further concerns, please have your lawyer contact Aleister the next time he signs onto uncyclopedia.

Kindest regards

The Cabal.