User talk:AE

This sofa was provided for Under user's convenience.

NO WHORING ZONE

I usually vote on VFH and I'll vote on your article(s) sooner or later. Whoring will just make me vote against your article(s).

NO MORE JOIN UNSOC REQUESTS

Sorry, but I don't have an interest in joining. If I had an interest in joining, I would've joined a long time ago

THINKER Loves You

AE. An A; an E. A&E? Are you trying to steal Biography from Peter Graves?! That is PETER'S show man! You leave Peter Graves alone! Or else he'll say "Hi, I'm Peter Graves." It's the only way he knows how to begin sentences.

Anyway, thank you for your vote on the Writer of the Year competition. For: one strong word that means so very much. From the bottom of my festering, boil-laden heart, thanks once more. --THINKER 05:52, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Frankly my dear...

Prettiestpretty thanks you for sucking-it-in and voting for UnBooks:Gone With d' Wind. Fondly, PP

Hugs, Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 21:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

EPIC FAIL!

	All Praise and Glory Be Yours!
	You have been emphatically thanked for voting for EPIC FAIL! on VFH.
	Due to the nature of the article, your thanks
	template has been stolen from the template
	that tells people a user has been infinibanned.
	EPIC FAIL!

~Fag x FS

review request

i've finally reviewed Fat Americans for you. sorry for the delay, i've been away from uncyc for far too long. anyway, hope i've been helpful! --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 22:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Proofread Templates

Hi, just an FYI, the {{Proofread}} template automagically adds the article to Category:Proofread which the team at UN:PS check for articles that need proofreading.

Please if you are removing the article from the list of articles needing proofreading, also remove the template off the page, as well, if you feel it no longer needs a once over.

Otherwise the two lists don't match. If you have any questions feel free to leave them on my talk page.

Thanks. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talk DUN VoNSE arc2.0 08:25, 03 February 2008

I removed the proofread category from my article that still had it--Æ 20:25, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

A couple things for you

First of all,

Rejoice, AE! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

Thanks for reviewing I don't know, your advice was appropriate and just what I need to give it the little push its been waiting for.

Also, you've been due for one of these:

I don't know why I haven't given you one of these yet. But I've only given out two others, giving you plenty of reason to gloat. =D ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF (@ 20:57 6 Feb, 2008)

No problem--Æ 21:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

VFH

HEY! What're you doing removing nominations from VFH? Especially wrongfully removing them as self nominations when they're clearly not. Did you even look at the history of the article before closing the nomination? Maybe you should stick to voting for now. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:04, 08 Feb 2008

Sorry. I did look at the page history and I thought the nominator rewrote it based on the number of revisions.--Æ 22:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Cheers

Seeker wants to reassure you that your nomination was worth it. Here's Ben Hurr winning a race. May you win all your races in a similar fashion.

Bad AE!

Hey man, if you update the Pee table, make sure you change the last reviewed article in the notes column next to your name so I can see which review you've just added to the table please. Helps when I come to update it later. Oh, and the final bit of maths at the bottom, the long bit that averages the score - that's each person's average, not all of the review scores (otherwise that bit would be absofuckinglutely huge!) So preview the page, find your average, and only edit that one, OK? It takes a few seconds, but keeps things more manageable in the long run.

And don't call me bad UU in your edit comment and then confuse the system like that, OK?! ;-) --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:48, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You realize I was only joking in the summary. It seems you forgot to add my review on I don't know on the list. --Æ 14:05, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Uh, I know you were joking, hence the wink - I was joking right back atcha buddy! And I'm pretty sure I added the I Don't Know review - check the average totaliser for your score - the 32 you gave that article is right in there. Unless I missed one, and I try not to do that! If you can show me a list of your recent reviews I can compare against what's up there, I'll double check it for you, but I'm not digging back all that way to double check!

And I'll see about reviewing Fat Americans this week some time, unless someone else gets to it first! Pippings! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee

You missed my number of reviews, I corrected it--Æ 17:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

And you missed your average, and your percentage - I corrected that! Touché, My worthy adversary. Your move! (Actually, I think that brings us up to date. I trawled through your history and checked up - no idea how I missed a review, and my apologies - keep going!) --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 18:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Hea! Well looks who just wandered onto AE's talk page! It's me! Hea guys. :) Talking about updating the Pee table... The thing which is bothering me is how people know which review was the last one added... The thing is that if it's done by having the "most recently" updated pee at the top is that actually it's possible for people to "double count" the same pee. Sometimes people add comments to the Pee after it has been written. Would that not move the review back up to the top of the recently reviewed list possibly making someone else add a review which had already been added by someone else? Maybe we should also include the date/time of when the last review was added. would that solve this problem, or is this not an issue? MrN 19:01, Feb 10

I already put the date of the last checked review by the side of it (in the American fashion of 2/10, as it's our good friend Cajek's page - I have to think about it every time, but there you go...) and I think that it's fairly rare that a comment will be added on the same day, so it should be fairly clear, I would have thought. But I'll change it to a date/timestamp next time I do it if you think it will help. Right, my dinner is ready, so I'm offski. Evening all! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 19:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I guess leaving your sig next to it might be helpful, as it has the dates stamp on it also... MrN 20:28, Feb 10

Or you can sign with ~~~~~--Æ 20:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

That's kind of what I meant. I do occasionally know what I'm on about! </light, bantering, friendly sarcasm> --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You might have noticed

That we have nearly 30 articles of VFH now. Ease up on the nominations please. Brigadier Sir Mordillo GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI³ AnotM VFH +S 21:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

What the heck?

Is there a reason you removed my unobtrusive, innocent comment from the Fat Americans PR without so much as an edit summary? --| - F N M - | | - B a n a n a ? - | 22:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Further discussion on my talk page. Brigadier Sir Mordillo GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI³ AnotM VFH +S 12:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally

I would have not listed the IP on ban patrol. It was not really "malicious" just someone poking their nose where it was not wanted... A bit like I did when I removed the quote in the first place... It's your page of course, and I understand that you don't want other people messing with it...

Oh, I must admire your determination with Fat Americans! I had no idea that someone would actually like that crappy stub enough to put all the effort into it as you have. Respect goes to you... :) MrN 00:16, Feb 12

Meh, I'm not going to reply, I'm just going to say let the scandal slide. --Æ 00:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Of Reviews and More Reviews

What up, my good fellow? Just a quickie: if you go for another review of Fat Americans after the one Bjorn's just done and I've commented on, can you either move what's there to the talk page before reverting the review page, or (preferrably) raise a new request called Fat Americans (resub) or something? It makes things easier to keep track of, and while I don't refer to previous reviews to define my own opinion, occasionally seeing old reviews can help a reviewer shed light on consistent problems you face with the article. I know it's helped me more than once before.

Of course, you can ignore this completely if you like - it's not a policy or anything, just a suggestion to make life a little easier.

Also, I know you asked me to give an in-depth review of the article, but I felt Bjorn's review was valid enough to stand, and simply made my comments below. I might have scored it a little differently myself, but it does highlight nicely what people may be missing about the article compared to how you intend it to be taken. So I hope you will find it useful and work on it again based on what's been said there.

Finally: the sun's out and I'm in a good mood! That's not relevant, but I wanted to end these comments on a nice, positive note. Yay sun! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 12:02, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

VFH

Did you read what I just wrote there? I asked users to REFRAIN from removing articles from the queue due to a currently unstable health system. The only reason I don't ban you is because I believe you just didn't see that. Seriously AE, my patience is growing thin with you. Stop removing articles from VFH! Brigadier Sir Mordillo GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI³ AnotM VFH +S 00:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see that message from VFH until a few minutes ago so sorry. --Æ 00:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Gayzilla

Why are you rewriting Gayzilla. I think part of its charm at the moment is that it is so badly written. That and the "fabulous" line (arguably one of the funniest on the site) set amidst the rambling help to make it a total classic. I seriously think you (or anyone else) are going to struggle to write something better than the current version. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

It was on VFD a few weeks ago. I thought it had the potential to be better, so I started rewriting it. In addition, I didn't find the article funny. Now that you pointed out the humo(u)r that I missed, I'll probably stop rewriting. --Æ 20:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't let me stop you.... :) -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

VFD

You filled VFD with 8 articles. Be careful, because adding too many at once might be considered spamming. (Like my dear friend Manforman used to do. *Sigh*) -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 02:16, Feb. 15, 2008

Well, there were only 6 articles on before which is quite unusual these days, and I have a list of articles for potential deletion, so I added them to the VFD queue. I still tried to leave some spaces, but I won't add to many articles to the queue in the future--Æ 02:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No, no. You might be allowed to VFD 8 articles at once. I'd ask Zombiebaron about it. It probably only apples when you fill it up to the limit. -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 02:26, Feb. 15, 2008

I don't think it's a big deal anyways, espacially as I left 6 spaces. --Æ 22:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks For Voting!

It's a bit of a delayed thank you (for this thing), but you deserve one nevertheless. I'd give you a hug, but all I have is this ballot paper...Perhaps you could fill it in again? No? I suppose not, thanks anyway! - Seeker

Really AE..

RE [1] I'm just not sure that's how it works. My understanding is that UU was keeping an eye on you, and he would have added you in good time I'm sure. I really think that making the decision that you have done what it takes to qualify entry was a little rude. I'm not going to revert you, but don't be surprised if the other members of Peeing are a little unhappy about what you did. MrN 22:13, Feb 16

Yeah, what he said. AE, you know it's not long before I check the pee queue - I do it daily, after all. The point of checking is that people don't get in for doing 5 reviews they think are good, otherwise that Gert5 would have made him/her/itself a member, and that would suck! So yeah, you have done 5 decent reviews, and you are in, but don't get impatient mate, OK?! Having said that: good work on those reviews, and keep it up - a few more of those will be a big help in keeping the queue manageable!

Now, to your Fat Americans query: I think it may be interesting to try and classify them as a sub-species of American - displaying many of the classic American traits (mention a couple, try to be amusing rather than insulting, you don't want it to feel even more ranty!) but with a few unique ones of their own to distinguish them as a sub-species. This then makes the point that you're not classifying all Americans as fat, and would probably help you keep more readers on-side, as it were. Hope this helps! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Paris Hilton

Why did you move Paris Hilton to Paris Hilton (hotel)?. A lot of new users will look at Paris Hilton's page (I know I did back in the day) and it would be nice if it was something worth reading. That's part of why I rewrote it in the first place. No one will read my article now unless they know what they're looking for. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  20:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

It seemed akward under the title Paris Hilton when he already have have three other Hilton related pages with the ( ) format. The disambig seemed to me more appropriate under Paris Hilton instead of Paris Hilton (disambiguation). Also, isn't your article along with the others linked in the disamb? Wouldn't that attract readers to read the Paris Hilton Articles? If you still disagree with me, you can revert, afterall, it's your page.--Æ 21:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I've reverted it. While your way does make some logical sense, I feel that my way worked better in terms of promoting good writing (having a "good" Paris Hilton page whilst keeping a shitty IP-driven version in the background to keep the IPs happy). I still think that, when visiting a disambiguation page, most people would go to the Paris Hilton (person) option first, as that is what they were looking for. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  11:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Fat Americans

Don't be too disheartened dude. I know you have put a lot of effort into this one, and it's awesome that you have. I think you have been fighting an uphill battle all the way though... Probably due to all the fat Americans who vote! Seriously though, you chose a subject which was always going to be difficult to get featured here. I kinda know how you feel actually... As you remember, I tried to get Gay featured. I put a LOT of effort into that one too, but people just did not get it. Sometimes they just don't, but it does not mean that you're a bad writer. Actually, I think you have improved a ridiculous amount in a very short period of time. When Gay did not make it last time, I had a word with Cajek and he recommended that I leave Gay alone for a while, maybe a few months (which I am doing) and to go work on something else. I think he was right. Sometimes it's best to work on something different, and then maybe come back with a fresh perspective, and maybe also a bit more knowledge about how VFH works... As for something different? How about Fat Canadians?  :-) Only joking... I think your next article will be really good. Whatever you decide to do for that... I'm looking forward to it. :) MrN 19:20, Feb 19

Thanks for the help and the support. I think you're one of the few intelligent editors at this wiki, you actually do worthwhile things unlike others and you get the jokes to articles. But why should I even bother writing a new article? I'd put so much work into it probably just for the trolls who don't understand the article to prevent it from being featured like they did with Fat Americans.

And ya know what else, I've had it with this place, I think I'm out. It's not any fun with the every day trolling, drama and etc. I did not expect to get into this garbage when I first registered.--Æ 20:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't be silly. That's just drama talking and you know it. You're not the first to get pissed off with VFH, and you will not be the last. If you leave, I will be gutted. But I know you're just feeling a bit pissed of right now, and you don't really mean it, so I will let that comment pass cos it's just not the kinda sensible thing which you normally say. You are becoming one of the people who really help to run the site, and I know you have a lot more useful things to do here. Oh, how about helping out with User:MrN9000/VFD List at some point? I have not checked the histories and what links here of that lot, but it's going to take me ages to get it all through VFD, and it would be great if you could help out. Would look a bit less like I was cabbaging the room all the time. :-) MrN 20:11, Feb 19

Oh mannnn, I just bust in here on this. AE, I hope you've had a bit of time to unwind and let off some steam over this now. I can understand you being disappointed after all the work you put in on your articles, to have them dismissed in the way they were. I think you took on a very difficult task in trying to get Fat Americans featured - it's the kind of deal that makes people go into the article wanting to vote against from the title alone, so you're already fighting an uphill battle. Some articles are just not going to get feature, and that may be one of them, however good you make it. BUT! Others may. Remember Why? Wear Clothes 3 Sizes Too Small? Pour the snake-oil salesman attitude all over that and who knows where it will go! Or as MrN says, try a brand new article. Sometimes, a break can help clear your perspective. I didn't write anything worthwhile for a couple of months, and now I'm getting going with it again. No idea if there are any features among my current crop, but I'm enjoying it again. Cajek said (on one of his rare recent visits) that since he stopped writing so prolifically he's remembered what funny is. If that's the case, I can't wait to see what he produces if/when he ever returns. You too man. You're a good guy, you've done a lot of good things for this site, and I really hope you come back refreshed, revitalised and ready to kick some comedy butt. But until then, whatever you do, enjoy it man! Tatty byes for now! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee10:21, Feb 23

Hi AE, I may be new but I understand what you are going through. I see that the heat of stress has gotten to you but I think some time off will help you just fine. And hey, when or if you come back. I'll expect the material to write to be much greater then when you first started.

Don't get me wrong, Fat Americans is a decent article. But fat jokes seem common in todays comedic world, but it's good and decent, I'll give you that. But I think that Alberto Gonzales is the one that has the most potential, cause of the things he did and his tendness to forget. I think that the article will become featured someday, and I hope that you will make it happen.

The vandals and trolling will get to you but you can ward them off with Extreme Sarcasm. Using Sarcastic Humor is a good way to tell vandals to fuck off and leave you alone. Anyways, I hope you come back. You have potential to be one of the greatest Uncyclopedia's ever seen, and for that, you are my favorite person. -- (talk) • (contribs) • (email me!) 11:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I got too angry over Fat Americans not being featured. I apologize for the above comments --Æ 22:26, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

Christopher Meloni thanks you and snubs the Academy for years of dickery.

Chris doesn't have a fancy graphic for you, but we hope you still a ceept this as thanks for making his dream come true! Thank you again for helping get Why?:Does Christopher Meloni not have an emmy yet? featured!--Dr. Fenwick 18:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi AE

I just indefblocked our fellow insignia as a suspected sock of NXWave. I think it would be a shame if you stay away due to the personality disorder of one demented user. As for the VFH issues, well, let it go, we all have better articles and not so better ones (I for one, take 30 bloody days to get a feature...pisses me off :). Anyhow, if you're still around many of us will be happy to see you again. Take care. ~ 22:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yea AE. Stop being a dick out there in the real world... It's all nasty and fully full of nastiness (or so I'm told)... Anyway, stop dicking around, and come back to help me keep the likes of this Mordillo character in line... Did you see what he did with the feature queue today? Dam, there may be an inquisition... Anyway, enough OK... Just revert all this latest crap off your talk page, and carry on where you left off eh? Mordillo is right, don't let the dick win. You are better than this. MrN 22:59, Feb 28

Thanks be to you, even though you seem to have left the site

Thankings from Led Thanks muchly for the vote for me on VFS. Now to abuse my powers... 03:38, 1 March 2008 TheLedBalloon (Talk | contribs) blocked <insert name here> (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite ‎(Muahahahaha!))

You may not read this, but thanks anyways for the vote, - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 05:07, Mar 1

Late Thanks

OUI! Necropaxx's belated thanks go with you for voting positively on Siege of Bordeaux. Remember, les français ne sont jamais au dessus de dérision! Translate it yourself, je suis trop de fatigue.

• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 00:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Dude.

Come back. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 23:44 Apr 3

Well I will say this for you AE. When you said you were gone, you really were not bullshitting. Fair play for that, most people normally just make a big fuss all over the place, and then don't actually bugger off! You however, appear to have pulled the trick off in fine style. Seriously though dude? At least pop in once in a while? What the hell happened? Just a few comments to the effect that you were a bit pissed off, and then you're gone? It would actually really be helpful if you could maybe just let us know why you left? As you may be aware, we are leaking good users (like you) all over the place, and it would be great to hear from ya. E-mail me if ya like. I noticed yours does not work. :-( MrN 00:02, Apr 4

Yeah. Seriously. Come back. --THE 01:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, man, we miss you.   Le Cejak • <Apr 04, 2008 [1:25]>

Yeah, seriously. I'm sorry I was such an ass to you. A long ban has made me a new person. -- Kip the Egg Talk Works 16:55, May. 13, 2008

AE, seriously, I think you should come back. As your adopter guy, I'm disappointed you have left. UNCYC needs you! - UnIdiot | | Talk | Contribs - 20:27, May 18

Yea, well AE knows my views, and I'm not sure he even checks this page anymore. Just in-case he does, I'm just saying that I have noticed a real improvement in the site of late. We now have some really shit hot admins, and the place is working better than it has for a while. You are always welcome AE. :-) MrN 20:48, May 18

Come back. We love. I...I love you. No, I'm not crying. I've got something in my eye. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 16:42, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Now really

WHERE ARE YOU!!!! MrN 00:03, Oct 14

Check out this you are listed first on our list of users we want to return. MrN 00:08, Oct 14

ONE YEAR LATER

And I still miss you. =[ —Sir SysRq (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Me too! Come back! --THE 17:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Baby come back. We can blame it all on SysRq. --EMC ^[TALK] 03:13 Jan 28 2010

I'm starting to think that he's never gonna pay us back for all those pizzas he ordered. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:02, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Gotta dance!!!

I love dancing, and i think you should to. That's why I'm giving you this:

WOO! You go granny! Dancing dude

My words...

This is the first time I returned to the site since leaving. I thank and say hi to you guys. --Æ 19:34, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

And it only took you 2.5 YEARS! Welcome back AE. ~ 19:52, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I'm taking a hiatus, but for a sighting of AE I have to make a brief exception to say hi AE! Hope you like seeing the feature template on your page! --UU - natter 08:18, Oct 13

Whatever next? -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Æ

We got his with Æ spam the other day --K evilLips MUN,CM,NS,3of7 14:17, April 20, 2011 (UTC)