User:SPIKE/PLS-09

This file concerns my entries in the 8th Poo Lit Surprise competition in 2009.

Clip-on tie

Since you're a noob, I'm just dropping by to note that your entry, User:SPIKE/Clip-on tie, as it currently stands, is invalid. It's exactly the same as Clip-on tie, which was created before Poo Lit started. If you're entering that page as a rewrite in Poo Lit, it must be rewritten. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:36, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads-up. The article in my namespace is an exact copy of Clip-on tie, because the instructions were to move it there for the submission. I did rewrite Clip-on tie as described in the table. If my rewrite of Clip-on tie in the public namespace started before the competition started, that is a valid complaint and I agree the entry is invalid. Spıke ¬  23:58 17-Oct-09

Rules of baseball

Discussion partly copied from another talk page

This replacement nomination of mine is not exactly pure either. As I point out in the table, perhaps 20% of it is still substantially as it was in the article on Baseball. I made nominations in the relevant categories because someone in a Forum cited the PLS apathy as evidence of the cosmic decline of Uncyclopedia, and the two nominations I have now are my only work confined to the nomination period. You may remove this nomination if warranted, with no hard feelings. Spıke ¬  03:20 18-Oct-09

Yeah, um. That. To be safe, you have a day to cut out the non-original stuff, or you can just give up ("Give up." Tyler takes hands off steering wheel. "Just. Give. Up." Several near misses with traffic follow. Car falls off road, rolls down hill. Antagonist loses consciousness). You're having no luck with this, are you? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:43, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

I shall do no such thing, but instead withdraw the nomination. Whoever wrote the original Section 3 of Baseball (up to 7-Oct) sounds like a Brit who never watched a game, but he succeeded at humor in a few cases. A recent arrival of two months (me) should not totally discard the work that came before in order to win a prize. (No one else should either.) PS--Fantastic Four is comparable, totally within the nomination period but also not all mine. But you might enjoy it if you saw the movie. Spıke ¬  03:56 18-Oct-09

Spike, here's a suggestion: Rewrite Rules of Baseball on your user space and cut out whatever would disqualify you. I don't think anyone's going to think you're violating any ethics by doing whatever version you want on your own user space. If you're concerned about it being changed in mainspace, simply ask that it's not. (And by the way, stop being noble--that's my schtick). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:05, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

See? Aren't you glad you followed my suggestion? Congrats on your PLS win! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  00:53, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

FORTRAN

Copied from User talk:Modusoperandi

You've taken User:SPIKE/FORTRAN out of the PLS Rewrite competition on the grounds that it is an exact copy of FORTRAN. Yes it is. I merged FORTRAN and Fortran, between 14-Oct and 18-Oct, and on 18-Oct, copied it to my user space as seems to be required for PLS. What did I do wrong? Spıke ¬  03:05 24-Oct-09

Unless I'm terribly mistaken, merging two existing pages is not a rewrite. It's a merge. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:26, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

There was plenty of rewriting. But if those are the rules, so be it. Thanks for the reply. Spıke ¬  03:36 24-Oct-09

I've just done a comparison of Fortran and FORTRAN and User:SPIKE/FORTRAN. Spike has done a fair amount of rewriting along with this merge, in that what he has produced has been significantly more then the sum of the two independent previous articles. The fact that he has changed the version in Main space to be the same as the version he is submitting to PLS is not quite within the letter of the rules, but is also not against the letter of the rules. It was rewritten during the relevant period, and is quality work. But, again, you are the casting vote and the only one that counts here, M, so completely in your hands as to what to do. (As long as it doesn't include banning me for being annoying.) Pup t 04:01, 24/10/2009

SPIKE should have mentioned that earlier. HOW comes??? 04:04, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, but then again the fact that he's mentioning it now suggests that he may not have realised until today. He's said several times before that he keeps his watchlist down to a minimum (forgive me for not looking for it) and on the actual nom he does mention that it is a merge of the two articles, and looking at the history supports it. Nobody actually informed him of the fact that it had been removed from contention on his talkpage - myself included, as I did notice it and was cheering it on as an underdog, and was surprised when it was removed without comment from Spike. (God, I'm good at this devil's advocate business.) Pup t 04:15, 24/10/2009

Okay. I've undone what I did, and asked the judges to take into account your article. My apologies. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 04:21, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Indeed I had even taken PLS off my watch list and thus was a few days late seeing it had been Un-nominated. I have not done work in my workspace for the purpose of winning PLS; again, when I saw the gripe that the low number of nominations meant the death of Uncyclopedia, I picked my best shots and made copies in my userspace (not the other way around). This may mean that all my nominations are invalid; if so, I am happy to continue editing and leave the prizes for the people who like fame--but it's neat that y'all are looking out for me. Spıke ¬  11:10 24-Oct-09

Hardly. I'm out to get you and PuppyOnTheRadio is only protecting you because you've got his same rare blood type. It's a dog-eat-dog world here, m'lad. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 13:08, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

So does this mean that you're in second place? Grats! Pup 06:44, 25/10/2009