User talk:Chronarion/archive2

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

God[edit source]

The present article with sections such as "the artist formerly known as god" and "how to contact god" are not funny. I don't think the funny and sharp version of the article is 'vile' in any way. Weri long wang 11:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Looking over it again, the article certainly isn't politically correct (God created people of colour to be slaves for white conservative Americans and Europeans for example) but it's all true! If you don't like it think how those poor Africans felt! I really don't think there's any need to be politically correct on Uncyclopedia; the article about Mohamed has the satirical cartoon attached to it which can't even be broadcast in Britain!Weri long wang 11:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

thanks![edit source]

Thanks, I wasn't sure if there was anyway with the IP address.--Sgore

Help needed[edit source]

After the newspapers from Romania went mad over the Romania Uncyclopedia page, there were over 27K visits to the page, making it the sixth most visited page. The problems are that some morons don't get it and keep "fixing" the article to an informative and boring blablabla (usually nationalist SOB's) or other morons are writing jokes which have no meaning for a non-Romanian. Besides that, the page really needs a split, as it became filled with pretty good material.

The problem is I am just a poor user and I won't start an edit war. I need your advice and/or collaboration on those three issues. TIA. --Luci S 05:16, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

"The newspapers went mad over Unencyclopedia" means that some journals, including one with over 150K readers (which is pretty big for a developing country of 22M inhabitants), have quoted the Romania page, probably because it was showing the dark, politically incorrect side of Romanians. In fact the newspapers haven't criticized it, as it fits their standards, like criticizing Gypsies or Manele or democratic politics as a weak mechanism. Their readers are also keen into this kind of ideas, thus it was a joy for some hundreds young men to fill the page with even more crap... it's like the gay problem on a smaller, Romanian side. E.g., when they write about economics, instead of focusing on the tragicomic fact that Romania doesn't count as economy, they were making up pictures of banknotes with Manele singers on them.
After a while, it is getting really boring. And after that, a bigger wave of people came to write something, (probably they forgot what, or they could only read English, but not write) and they started jokes about their classmates, or in Romanian. Whatever was the thing that make Romania a featured article, it is now gone.
The splitting thing is an issue as originally the page was thought as a huge mess, parodying Wikipedia obsession for shorter pages.--Luci S 20:28, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)


Huh?[edit source]

How can you be 'Uncyclopedian of the Year" when you are Uncyclopedia itself? ANIDN MENOSCWICZ Icons-flag-az.png 15:10, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

No, Sophia is Uncyclopedia. Chronarion is merely an agent of Sophia. --officer designate Club symbol.png Lugiatm Club symbol.png MUN NS CM ZM WH 19:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I absolutely love how I don't need to talk on my own page :) --Chronarion 00:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but removal of my entries by myself should count as modification and not nullifying the license. However, the Licensor is the only one able to delete a page in full. Is there any way I can have it removed without administrators reverting edits?

I care about You[edit source]