Hello, Gale5050, and thanks for joining Uncyclopedia! Before editing further, please take a gander at our Beginner's Guide. If you want to find out more about Uncyclopedia or need more help with something, check out the following pages:
Pee Review - a place to get detailed feedback on your articles
Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or use the "sign" button () above the edit box. This will automatically produce your name and the date.
If you need help, feel free to ask me on my talk page, post on our community forum, join our Discord, or message an administrator on their talk page. Additionally, our Adopt-a-Noob program can bring experienced editors straight to you. Simply leave a message on an adopter's talkpage to join. I hope you enjoy editing here and being an Uncyclopedian! — (talk)(contributions)23:52:50 2020/08/10 UTC
Question from Necromonger
I saw your welcome. Thank you. I'm curious, you accused me of editing disruptively. I'm wondering if you haven't confused me for someone else, as my contributions will show, by the time you welcomed me, I'd set up my user page and my talk page and preferences. Now, if you mean the note on my page about Wikipedia, well, considering this is a parody site of Wikipedia, why would this be a problem? I'm not looking to start an argument, just asking. Necromonger (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
I haven’t. I guess they aren’t disruptive here. I come from the WMF but I got globally locked there. What you said there would have gotten you a block immediately. I am sorry if Ithoight it was disruptive here-it was your user page. Feel free to remove the warning if you thought it was unjust. Gale (5050)Complaint Department 16:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Creating pages
Hi, I saw you left a question on the talk page of an article about an interstate. You can go ahead and create that page. If you're having trouble with formatting it, you can look at other Uncyclopedia articles and copy their formats, then change the information. You can also usually copy the formats from Wikipedia articles. Things like infoboxes usually work over here if you go to a Wikipedia article and click "edit" or "view source" or whatever and just copy what they have. Let me know if you have any other questions about creating articles. There's still a lot I don't know, but I might be able to help. MrXblow me 18:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
As I said on my talk page, please do not make changes to my user page. It's unnecessary, to say the least.
Please remember that this is a humor website. I'm sure that putting things like "giving you the middle finger" into photo captions on Wikipedia would be considered complete vandalism, but here at Uncyclopedia it is not. In fact, in that particular photo in the Space article, it was a funny, constructive edit.
Can I please ask why you removed the hyphens from The All Arabian Rejects? The page is, among other things, a parody of the band the All-American Rejects, who do indeed use a hyphen in their name. If there's a good reason to keep it out, please let me know. Otherwise I'll probably put it back in at some point in the near future.
As usual, please keep up your good work and continue to make funny contributions here. MrXblow me 23:10, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
I'll respond on your talk page, because you'll get an automatic notification there. --Gale5050Complaint Department 23:31, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Removing things that you deem broken
Hello Gale, twice in the past 24 hours I have had to revert contributions you made where you completely removed content added by other users because you felt it was "broken". Please do not do this. If something is broken, fix it. If you lack the knowledge to fix it yourself, please speak to someone who does. Thanks! -- TheZombiebaron 14:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, Gale5050, I have tried very hard to work with you. I've been very patient and encouraging, and I will continue to encourage you. But you are well past the point where your edits and contributions have been far more disruptive than constructive. So I'm going to have to be a little blunt and spell something out for you:
THIS IS NOT WIKIPEDIA
I don't know why you're so obsessed with Wikipedia and so anxious to get unlocked at WMF, but Uncyclopedia is not some sort of resume builder to get back there. Nobody cares that you have rollback rights here. You said you're here to help Uncyclopedia, please do so. You go around telling people that their edits are vandalism when they are clearly not. Again, this is not Wikipedia. Most of what is vandalism over there is what we love over here. And on Space, the admin in question actually didn't think that was vandalism. Meanwhile, User:Pineapple hair has not made any edits since you posted on their talk page, so thanks for that. No, I'm not completely blaming you, we get a lot of users who come on for several edits and never come back. But what you did was unhelpful and disruptive. By the way, while we're talking about Pineapple hair, you shouldn't change your edits on a talk page when another user has replied to them. Strike them next time. Make it much more clear what you're up to. And while we're on the topic of talk page guidelines, do not reply to me on my talk page. Keep the discussion in one place. No, I'm not telling you that you can't post on my talk page, please do so for another topic. But this topic is here, keep it here.
Here are two points that I strongly advise you adhere to:
Stop reverting vandalism. You clearly do not understand what is and what is not vandalism at Uncylcopedia, so just leave that to the users who do.
Please do stay and continue to make constructive contributions, like your edits on the interstate articles.
Again, I'm sure you can be a positive contributor here, so please stick to what you know best. MrXblow me 16:13, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I left a partial reply on your talk page as it is most urgent. The rest to I’ll reply to here.
i’m not saying that he thought it was vandalism, but he did revert the edit he made to bring it back(really, Space should be fully protected from editing for a while, and see what the admin has to think).
Secondly, I didn’t say the edit was vandalism, an IP did.
Thirdly, people get disappointed with the Uncyclopedia and decide to go back to normal Wikipedia.
fourthly, I get no one cares, it’s just that I use that when there’s disruption, which there was. I said I’d rollback the edit as it wouldn’t give a summary, after I tried to discuss the issue.
Fifthly, had the IP not use “rvt vandalism” I wouldn’t have really gave the warning or even cared that much.
Sixthly, you get an automatic notification on your talk page and not here.
Yes, you did say the edit was vandalism, you called it "complete vandalism", you also said the user would be blocked, right here, remember? Nobody gets "disappointed with the Uncyclopedia" and goes "back to normal Wikipedia", because our purpose is completely different from theirs. Again, I don't know how many times I'm going to have to explain this to you. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Uncyclopedia is a comedy website. Vandalism here isn't quite as rigidly defined as it is on Wikipedia, but it mainly consists of blanking and adding stuff that is not funny and/or unrelated to the subject of the article. Adding a funny comment to a photo caption is not vandalism. Changing somebody else's user page without a damn good reason, like you did right here, is vandalism. MrXblow me 21:46, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I've refactored that message. There was a good reason, to bleep it out. I hope you saw my 6 points. I will say, your claim of I haven't edited constructivly is false. Ihaveimprovedmany articles recently and even before that. I hope you saw my edit to Talk: Space. Ok, I didn't laugh at that either, I wonder if you did. We've seen it before; we have to bring something new to the table. Unlike Wikipedia, Uncyclopedia can get old and "stale" and boring to edit. Oh. And if you edit past around 01:45 UTC I won't reply until the morning. Thanks. I wonder if compentence is required to edit here. --Gale5050Complaint Department 22:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
I never said you haven't edited constructively, I said that you've become more disruptive than constructive. And no, you absolutely did not have a good reason to change my user page. You said you were bleeping out cussing. I have told you multiple times that cussing is not a problem. MrXblow me 14:44, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
It wasn’t just that-it was also a personal attack. See WP:WP:NPA and WP: Template: uw-npa1 for some general notices. Your claim is not true. While I will admit I’m a little disruptive, with all the content creation and welcoming I do, I wouldn’t say it is less then my disruptive behavior. Gale5050Complaint Department 15:03, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
It was not a personal attack. This is, again, something I have already explained to you. MrXblow me 15:06, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Saying that they can duck your big fat thing? Yeap, that’s a personal attack alright. In any case, we still haven’t even scratched the surface on the Space thing and the article needs to be rewritten. Gale5050Complaint Department 15:11, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Hello Gale, I agree with MrX that your editing is disruptive, for an example of what I think disruptive editing is see the section above this. Uncyclopedia is not Wikipedia. Please cease your disruptive editing or you will be banned. -- TheZombiebaron 15:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
It seemed broken, and I wasn't sure what to do. What should I do now? --Gale5050ComplaintDepartment 15:28, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Join Discord
I suggest joining the Discord server, it is a great place to ask questions and learn about Uncyclopedia. -- TheZombiebaron 15:43, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm having difficulties joining on Chrome OS. Any way to join on an iPhone 8?--Gale5050ComplaintDepartment 15:54, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
There is a Discord mobile app. -- TheZombiebaron 15:57, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Well in that case, I’ll install it later. I don’t have time until 18:00 UTC. Gale5050ComplaintDepartment 16:13, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
More disruption
What were you doing with your edit on Civil Air Patrol? It's a very short article that needs to be expanded, so the ICU tag is necessary. And you're use of rollback was inappropriate because you were not reverting vandalism (same with the edit on Tau, that wasn't vandalism, and yes it's fine to have some characters of other languages in articles). Please stop your disruptive editing, as you've been told multiple times by multiple people. MrXblow me 16:05, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
What? No one ever told me that? Please elaborate. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 16:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Lol, I’m sorry about that. I was browsing Uncyclopedia your contributions and accidentally clicked rollback. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 16:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
K, next time please revert it rather than leaving it. MrXblow me 16:08, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok. But I didn’t realize that. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 16:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
When you're going through somebody else's contributions and click rollback, it will take you to a new page that says "action complete". That should let you know. MrXblow me 16:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX:Ok in the future I’ll rollback an accidental rollback. Gotta go now, I have online classes. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 16:12, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Patrolling
I wouldn't recommend marking pages like Nihallaks and Flash Rush Games as patrolled. If you look at the user's contributions and other pages like Transmorpher (series), the whole thing is a series of repetitive, poorly written articles that are close to VFD status. They're new and have potential, so I haven't tagged them yet, but I wouldn't mark them as patrolled if I were you. MrXblow me 19:25, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: thanks for the info. It just met my criteria for being included. I didn’t want to bring it to VFD. Still, it’s good information, and I thank you for that. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 19:48, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
NYC edits
Please stop trying to insert that phrase about the counties. It really takes away from the humor. It's very similar to your recent edit to Indiana (which I will leave alone anyway). Let me explain:
When you tell a joke, it's funny. When you explain the joke immediately, it becomes less funny. Let people read and figure out the "problem" and "irony" for themselves.
I do wanna take this opportunity to tell you that another edit you made on NYC was very good! I'm about to thank you for it. Please keep up the good work! More to follow! MrXblow me 07:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Another thing, good job!
Again, I wanna reiterate that I am very glad you're here. I know I've probably sounded like a dick lately, but sometimes we need to be stern and let you know when you're messing up.
But above all, I also wanna point that we love your enthusiasm! That is what is needed here! That is what is needed in ANY form of comedy! So please keep up the good work! MrXblow me 07:03, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: thanks! I’m trying to work on making new articles, and it seems to be working out! Anyway, it’s only 8:17am where I live so I couldn’t respond till now. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 12:17, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Competence
When you say, “if you’re incompetent, go!” What do you mean exactly? MrXblow me 04:09, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: thanks for asking. I’ll clarify right now. Thanks! Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 11:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, when you say "if you're incompetent, leave!" What do you mean exactly? MrXblow me 14:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
It’s complicated. Basically, if a user is incompetent, they can really screw up the Uncyclopedia. But it’s unintentional. So, I’m saying if a user is incompetent, to not even edit if they can’t learn to edit properly despite warnings, so they don’t get blocked. Had Ndavertim777(I think that’s what his name is )heeded to our warnings, he wouldn’t have been blocked/seen his work deleted. Basically, he is an incompetent user, who needs competence. It basically s just a policy I’m trying to make, coupled with a bit of humor. I hope you inderstand now. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 14:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, well I've been avoiding this for a while, but I gotta ask now, do you realize that you are the one who is incompetent? I was flabbergasted when you asked about competence because you are the one who has serious competence issues. You go around telling other people what to do when you clearly have no clue yourself. I was even more flabbergasted when you did it again at Zombiebaron's talk page, because, once again, you seem to be talking about yourself when you bring up competence issues. No, I'm not saying that you need to leave. But you seem to be saying that you need to leave with what you're writing on your pretentious competence policy page. I'm saying that you need to ask yourself why you're here, because, again, this is not Wikipedia. MrXblow me 15:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Not quite; everyone starts out making mistakes. And then you learn from those mistakes, and try not to make them in the future, making me a more advanced Uncyclopedia editor. Meanwhile Ndvartim777 didn’t and was uncommunicative, and got blocked. It’s not fair to cite CIR when you are genuinely trying to learn from your mistakes. And I have. So it’s not fair to call me incompetent now. And I’m not saying you are, either. Gale5050 Complain about me! 15:27, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: Fair point though, I will ammend the page. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 15:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Note too, there was a difference of at least 9 days, in which things took a serious turn. --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 15:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
For the love of god, start reading what people are trying to tell you. Amending your pretentious policy page is not the only thing you need to do. I have no idea what you mean with your "9 days...serious turn" comment, your behavior has been disruptive the entire time you've been here. As others have pointed out, the things you do require other people to check on you. Please stop. I have never cited CIR, you are the one who is trying to do that. Don't put words in other people's mouths or accuse them of something they didn't do, that is beyond uncool. It is fair to call you incompetent because that is exactly what you are. I've tried so damn hard to work with you, so many other people here have tried so damn hard to work with you too, but you continue miss the point. MrXblow me 16:38, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean. I made 5 articles and seriously expanded the interstate highway system. I get that I should avoid areas I’m not familiar which, which I’m trying. I see your point. However, let me break down a few things
Vanity articles are banned here too, so COI likely applies here too
Putting {{Wikipedia}} templates is in fact not disruptive, as we are a parody of Wikipedia. Therefore, they make fun of Wikipedia, which is kind of our point.
Incompetent is being truly unable to learn from others. I may be partially incompetent but some users are more incompetent then me.
I hope this helps you understand. So please, what is the major point behind this. I get it might be frustrating, but it will take multiple messages. I by when you started editing in January, it wasn’t easy for you either. Patience, @MrX:, and I will eventually understand. And at least I’m trying. Yes if I’m truly unable to heed warnings it’s a problem, but until we get to that point, I think it’s about me learning the ways around. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 16:54, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, since you’re not replying, I will add this. Please read all of my replies carefully. IDHT is where you can’t or refuse to listen to the advice of others. CIR is where you disrupt Uncyclopedia unintentionally, and can’t edit properly. Secondly, I do have competence because I have learned how to edit here. The edit you reverted on North Dakota dates to august 3. I registered on August 2. I learned many things. First, what an acceptable article was. My first article, Bronx, was quickly huffed. Second I learned cussing is allowed. Third, I learned what was vandalism and what was not. Fourth, I learned to always make sure to check my edit to see if I blank innocent content. Fifth, I learned what they meant by “satire of an encyclopedia”. Of course I know this isn’t Wikipedia! But they do have similarities, including articles about spam or promotion. Please, read this information carefully. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 17:22, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
My point is that you're trying to create a policy of dubious necessity while being completely oblivious to the fact that you are the very problem that you're pointing out. The things you do are disruptive. Then you say things like "I by when you started editing", what does that mean? I'm not a grammar nazi, but please try to make sense. Then you say "it wasn't easy for [me] either", what wasn't easy for me? What are you talking about? MrXblow me 20:12, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: must’ve been a typo. I see your point. That policy can easily apply to me. So if YOU want to make the policy, go right ahead. Feel free to move it without leaving a redirect. I don’t care. Just make sure UN:CIR directs to your thing. But’s is better to have a baseline policy. I see your point; I have caused disruption. But I’m mostly constructive, especially in the interstate category. You’re not 100% constructive either, though I have to admit more then I have. I more so developed the thing for Ndvartim777, as it would clearly be useful. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 20:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
What have I done that was not constructive? MrXblow me 21:07, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
It really was only 2 times, but that time you inappropriately used rollback[1](and yes I've misused it, but one was a misclick, and one was where it was borderline vandalism. None of that applies here). And, some of your undos were inappropriate, like here. I will admit it doesn't flow, but you should have at least given a reason for the undo. We should somewhere say crime is illegal, and it's your responsibility as you undid the edit.--Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 21:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
First, accidentally using rollback instead of simply undoing a bad edit is an extremely minor mistake, not really something you could call disruptive. Second, it wasn't incorrect in that case because I was reverting a disruptive edit, by you. And no, that other undo you pointed out was not inappropriate. If an anonymous editor makes a bad edit without a reason, then I can revert it without a reason. As for the illegal thing, we could say that crime is illegal in the article, but it's by no means mandatory, and it is definitely not my "responsibility". Stop telling other people what to do. MrXblow me 21:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Break #1
@MrX: it IS your responsability for undoing anything. But that’s beyond the point. It was a bad edit but as I gave a reason, it would have been better for YOU to give a reason. As I patrolled the edit, it would have been better. Rule of thumb: if it isn’t vandalism, don’t rollback OR undo without a reason. When an anon abused there talkpage, I used standard undo and gave a reason. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 21:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
No, you're wrong, again. MrXblow me 21:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
And as much as I'd like to continue, I have swim practice in 30 minutes, so just telling you any replies you make won't be read until 00:15 UTC tomorrow. --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 21:39, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
I've already explained everything multiple times. You just don't get it. MrXblow me 21:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: I understand most of it. But why did you revert the IP in the first place? Undoing without reason is no better then rollbacking.--Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 21:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Oh lol, didn't see that. Whoops. But let's explain that misuse of rollback at UN:CU. Yes it may have been a bad edit, but it was a good faith edit; remember; my account was literally 8 days old at the time. I reiterate what I said at your talk page. "One thing though. Your use of rollback was inappropriate as it would have been requested for an edit summary. I won’t be on for a few days and I had to disable email for these replies as I got 12 emails in 20 minutes Gale5050 (talk) 23:53, 10 August 2020 (UTC)". --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 21:47, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
The first time you made a disruptive edit there, I undid it with a reason in the edit summary. The second time you made a disruptive edit there, I used rollback, not a problem. MrXblow me 21:51, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Fair point, but it was slightly different. You even thanked me for the edit and replied, "Interesting, I didn’t realize that about rollback. I haven’t edited Wikipedia in a long time, and I didn’t have rollback when I did. I just thought it was a quicker, easier way to revert, especially when reverting multiple edits at once. I didn’t know that it implied the edit being reverted was vandalism. Thanks for pointing that out to me. Again, I hope you keep making funny contributions here. MrX blow me 00:24, 11 August 2020 (UTC)". Anyway I have swim practice, so see you around 0010 UTC. Btw for me that is 8:10 pm. --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 21:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I learned something, but your edit was vandalism. MrXblow me 21:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Break #2
@MrX: Vandalism is a deliberate attempt to harm Uncyclopedia. It was a good faith edit. So rollback isn’t appropriate. Anyway, I’m back from swim. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 00:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I’m going to bed shortly, any replies you make will be seen by me early tomorrow, resulting in YOUR ping when it’s around 4:30am for you(but it’s 7:30am for me :)). Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 01:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Well, I respectfully disagree. You did that in an attempt to clean up cussing, which I explained was not what this website is about, yet you want ahead and did it again, and you also did it to my user page. You were trying to change things here. That is harmful. I do not consider that good faith. But that's okay. It's time to move on. My main point was that I hope you realize that the whole competence is required thing is glaring at you. MrXblow me 15:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
I understand @MrX: it was bleeped before user:WackyWars unbleeped it, but I see. Good faith means I was trying to help, but I see as well. --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 16:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Construction tags
You don’t need to throw a tag on an article 21 minutes after its creation. You especially don’t need to do it when the author just made another edit 2 minutes prior. Give them time to work on it, which is what User:ThwuggleProton clearly was doing. MrXblow me 05:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: Ok, I was just making sure it was tagged. I didn’t think he knew about it. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 11:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I recommend you simply stop putting tags and templates on articles. You consistently show an inability to use them properly, creating work for other users, as you have been told several times before. MrXblow me 18:05, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: there are some times where I can obviously tell an ICU. Maybe I don’t do it in more borderline situations? I thin we can reach a compromise where I only put ICU tags on where I know it needs improvement, and I only put construction tags when it’s my work. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 18:20, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Either that, or we can make it a rule where only admins give out ICU, but other users may request. I think that article needs more work and I don’t have time to improve it; but if you want to, be my guest. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 18:20, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Again, I'm telling you that in many of those situations you were wrong, creating work for other users. If I were you, I would stop putting tags any articles other than your own. MrXblow me 18:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Yes, but sometimes it’s clear an article needs ICU. So then I’d put it down. What I’m saying is, if I’m not 100% sure, I don’t put the tag on. But asking other users to do it when they clearly need it is unnecessary. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 18:28, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Gale, adding that tag can be very discouraging to authors if they are in the process of editing an article. It's best to be super sure they've done editing for the day. It doesn't hurt to wait. The wiki will not fall apart if an ICU tag isn't placed within 24 hours of an articles creation. If it is a new(ish) user you should consider dropping a kind work on their talk page as well. User retention is PARAMOUNT to keeping a wiki's culture alive. We cannot have super shitty articles or stubs in mainspace but we shouldn't jump all over new articles or create pointless maintenance work for others. ShabiDOO 18:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I kind of see your point now. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 18:39, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Pee review
Hi Gale. I'll work on the pee review over the weekend! ShabiDOO 11:31, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
thanks! Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 11:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Gale, a pee review is like doing a favor not an obligation. Instead of being so blunt like that I'd suggest a comment like "Hey Shabidoo...have you had a chance to work on the pee review" instead of the equivalent of "Where is my pee review"? I said I would work on it, not that I would complete it. It requires a fair bit of work to do and as with all people, sometimes things come up that take priority. I will get it done as soon as I can. Please be patient. You might consider working on something else in the mean time. ShabiDOO 13:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, but then please don't say you'll do it over the weekend. If I wasn't sure, I'd say either I'd try, or maybe I might be able to do it. I actually did my first pee review, and it only took me about 12 minutes. If worst comes to worst, you can always do part of it, and then save it. --Gale5050complainabout me! 13:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Gale5050, please read the guidelines for Pee Reviews. “Just like writing good articles, doing a good Pee Review takes time and effort.” No, there is no minimum time required to complete a Pee Review, but 12 minutes, well, the author probably spent longer than that writing the article. As Shabidoo said, you also might wanna stop bluntly telling people what to do as if they owe it to you. I’m sure Shabidoo intended to finish the Pee Review over the weekend but was unavoidably detained by obligations in real life. MrXblow me 14:28, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
It does say "If you put a tag on a review or otherwise promise to review it, please only do so when you start the review. Any persistent offenders who "book" a review and then don't complete it within 24 hours without further comment to explain why will earn themselves a free ban. Additionally, remember these booking tags should not stop other people contributing to the review if they want to." Not sure if this counts as a book or promise to review. --Gale5050complainabout me! 14:37, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I understand if she has something to do in real life, but that should have been put in so that she'll probably do it. I don't know about you, but that decloration seems pretty profound.--Gale5050complainabout me! 14:38, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I don’t know about you, but when someone is offering to do me a favor, I don’t get bossy or finicky about the rules. If this is how you’re going to behave, then you’ll most likely find very few people who want to do Pee Reviews (or other favors) for you. MrXblow me 14:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, but I’d much rather prefer if shabidoo wasn’t direct and instead said as soon as possible. I hate it most when people say they WILL do something and don’t do it. My time to improve it will be very limited in coming months. @MrX: you’ve been in a similar situation. Because this weekend would have been ample time to improve it, I now likely can’t improve it until October 10. Gale5050complainabout me! 15:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
It’s like school. You try to complete it but if you don’t, you fail. And the more we wait, the less likely it will be featured, and more likely Zombiebaron will delete it. Gale5050complainabout me! 15:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Not sure what similar situation you’re talking about, but I wouldn’t blame Shabidoo for any of this. You’re welcome to continue improving an article while awaiting a Pee Review. Given the few editors who chimed in on the VFH and the things they said, I highly doubt anyone but Shabidoo would’ve done this Pee Review anyway. MrXblow me 15:59, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm not getting into this. Also, it does say if you book a review or otherwise promise to review it, you have 24 hours. But, what I forgot was that there is 24 hours. Therefore, she still has nearly eight hours left to review it. Also, there are some users who patrol UN:PEE, but reviews are done infrequently. MrX, if you have time, you can do the pee review. --Gale5050complainabout me! 16:15, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Gale I'm not going to finish the pee review. I only do them for people who are respectful and appreciative. It requires a lot more than 12 minutes to do a good thorough pee-review and no I hadn't slapped a tag on it. I said I would do one if you REQUESTED IT which you did. This isn't a work place, we do things voluntarily in our free time and you'll have to learn to be patient and cordial. ShabiDOO 17:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
You seem confused. It says otherwise promise. anyway, I was kinda forced into this, otherwise you wouldn't support. I'm only replying as you didn't see this before. --Gale5050complainabout me! 16:05, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Gale you really need to readjust your attitude and listen to what people say and try to compromise. Things can most certainly go your way if you do so. Otherwise I'm afraid you'll find nothing but friction and a disappointing experience on this website. In the past here I was silly and belligerent and all it did was create pointless problems and get me blocked numerous times. ShabiDOO
Gale5050, I thought you said you were leaving. MrXblow me 16:39, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
i am for a few days, I just wanted to make a final reply. Good luck. --Gale5050complainabout me! 17:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
You were "forced into this"? Forced??!? What on Earth are you talking about? Nobody forced you to do anything. Gale5050, you have been nothing but a problem the entire time you've been here. Yes, you have welcomed new users. Woopdifuckindo. A bot could do that. Everything else you have done has been disruptive. And now, after everything, you're being a total asshole to Shabidoo who is trying to help you. Who do you think you are? Where did you get this sense of entitlement?? As Shabidoo said, you really need to readjust your attitude. You really need to readjust everything. MrXblow me 17:27, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
It was the only way to get crucial support on the article, otherwise I wouldn't have gotten support I really needed.did you read it? Yes, I could have been more appreciative. On the other hand, "don't make promises you can't keep", would be useful here. Also, I seriously improved the interstate system, which you even credit me for on numerous occasions. So now, you can't deny it.
In response to shabidoo: I see your point; you kept on getting blocked. However, I didn't find those issues. You rose from those problems, and were able to become a productive contributor. Not everything happens immediately.
the more I have to reply, the longer it is until I can take my break and think things on a new perspective. it will take 96 hours. please let me go, every reply resets that timer.
to add, the interstate system is the one area we need work on. And I brought light into that article. really, no one would even notice these major problems if not for me. Please, at least credit me for that. --Gale5050complainabout me! 17:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Gale5050, you can take a break whenever you like. Just because someone leaves a message on your talk page doesn't mean that you have to respond immediately. Again, nobody is forcing you to do anything. Nobody is forcing you to be here. The "crucial support" you speak of is pointless. The "interstate system" you speak of is mostly useless. The "major problems" you speak of are their very existence. We should huff all of them except maybe two of them, but I'm totally fine huffing all of them. MrXblow me 19:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
@MrX: I tagged the once for ICU that are crappy enough to be deleted. When I return in a few days, I’ll work on Interstate 94, which is our worst article that actually has potential. There are 6-7 of them that are good enough to stay, not just 1 or 2. Also, feel free to help me-I can’t do it alone. The interstate system isn’t totally useless, but I will say needs some rapid improvement. For instance, Interstate 5, Interstate 15 and Interstate 95 are pretty good interstates. Again, happy October. Gale5050complainabout me! 14:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Also I forgot about Hurricane Harvey and Bronx, both of which I’m working on. I’m also working on 3 interstates in my user space. Gale5050complainabout me! 14:40, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Be VERY careful
in rollbacking edits. If you rollback anything funny, they may be reverted. I'm just letting you know about what to revert and what NOT to revert. --whytheonlyone(complain?) 01:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok, but it seemed like vandalism. --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 02:02, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
@Whytheonlyone: what edit was thia? I'm going to bed so I will reply in the morning, expect a reply tonight. --Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 02:05, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Ok. I don’t have time to improve it today User: Hipponias, but I’ll do it tomorrow. Gale5050 Complainaboutme! 13:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Hurricanes
A. Don’t do that when you’re sanctioned. Pointing it out on my talk page and/or the article talk page would have been better. B. When were there hurricanes named Ivana or Marla? I looked but couldn’t find any. If there really were, I’ll probably amend the article in some way. MrXblow me 03:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I just looked a little closer at your edit. Ivan and Maria? Why? How is that relevant? MrXblow me 03:33, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
I don’t believe that you’re allowed to edit other people’s user pages under your sanction, as you did here, even if you are reverting vandalism. I know that you’re definitely not allowed to make pointless edits to non-interstate articles, like you did at Hurricane Naming, as mentioned in the above topic. Please stop. MrXblow me 03:47, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
You’re right on the first point, I shouldn’t edit that, but on the 2nd, i believe it is allowed to revert blatant vandalism. Gale5050complainabout me! 11:46, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia WMF
I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that you can go back to WMF. It has been over six months since you were blocked. If you were to apologize for your mistakes, show that you understand your mistakes, and promise to make any more mistakes, they would most likely take you back. Alternatively, it is unlikely that your IP is still blocked, so you could probably just create a new account there. Good luck. MrXblow me 19:19, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
I was caught lock evading as of June 26; I have to wait until December 26 to be welcomed back. I appreciate it, but sadly, it won't work for 3 more months. It's 6 months from your last block evasion. I will file an appeal in 3 months from now. Check the global block log of 2600:387:5:803::/64. Happy October. --Gale5050complainabout me! 00:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
ICU on QVFD
Please read the "notes for posting" on QVFD. It specifically says not to add articles with expired ICU tags. MrXblow me 17:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
Test your computer quickly on my userpage! Please answer honestly. --Jabberwock (talk) 07:59, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Forced?
Please stop saying that you were forced to do something or that you did something "kinda forcefully". Nobody is forcing you to do anything. MrXblow me 19:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I'd be careful. Considering my sanction was loosened as recently as 26 December and 27 December, I'd be a bit unconftorable requesting an immediate unsanction. However, I will try again in February. VFH's generally take a while, so it shouldn't be too bad. --Gale5050complainabout me! 20:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Top 10
Please read the rules and fix the number of votes you have allocated. MrXblow me 18:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, according to the sanctions listed in the Flammable's Office, you are only allowed to edit interstate articles (and their related pages), hurricane articles (and their related pages), geography articles (and their related pages), and voting pages. This edit was a violation of your sanctions. Furthermore, even if it hadn't been a violation, I kindly request and strongly recommend that you please stop going around telling people what to do, as you consistently misunderstand things and tell other editors that they've made mistakes of various kinds when they haven't. MrXblow me 20:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Broadly constructed, yeah. The thing is, it wasn't a huge error, but with RW, you're supposed to use warning templates. There's plenty of blatant vandalism needing warnings. --Gale5050complainabout me! 20:32, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Did you even read what I wrote? Your response doesn't address what I said. Whether or not you use warning templates, you should not be telling other editors about mistakes they may or may not have made unless the discussion is related to the four categories you are still allowed to edit in. Remember, your inability to correctly identify vandalism (even blatant vandalism) is one of the things that lead to your sanctions in the first place. MrXblow me 20:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Surely this is gotta be blatant vandalism. What I am saying is, technically warning users counts as discussion page. (Though we can always ask Zombie to clarify). --Gale5050complainabout me! 21:24, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, it counts as a discussion page, but as I understand the sanctions, you are only supposed to be editing discussion pages related to interstates, hurricanes, geography, and voting. But forget about your sanctions for a second, if you keep going around telling other people what to do, acting like you have the authority and the knowledge to do so when in fact you have neither, you will very likely face sanctions. The same thing happened before here, and the same thing happened to you on Wikipedia. I strongly suggest you look through your talk page on Wikipedia (specifically, HurricaneTracker495) and try to learn something from what many, many people tried to do to help you. You seem to have a lot of the same problems over here. MrXblow me 21:36, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
I believe he extended it to all pages, [2], but your second sentence does strike. It's not "acting like authority"(I mean, that's what warning is, just look at WP), and a warning is a warning, it's not really "telling someone what to do". On WP, that was because of some egregious abuses of the warning system.(Lots of it was other types of disruption, that is irrelevant). Note - it's not necessarily "telling people what to do", to vote against articles with weak reasoning (prose issues). If you want to tell me something, you need to spell out certain examples. (And post Dec 26, please). --Gale5050complainabout me! 21:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
I didn't say anything was wrong with voting for or against any articles, quite the opposite. This edit is what I have a problem with. You have, once again, told someone they made a mistake when they didn't. You also wrote (or used a template that says) "Welcome to Wikipedia". Again, this is not Wikipedia. MrXblow me 22:00, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
And that diff you posted specifically says "voting page". But again, the fact that it was a violation of the sanction isn't my main concern here. MrXblow me 22:03, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
It's not my fault the template said that. Cassie was the one who imported it. That was a RedWarn template he should've fixed. --Gale5050complainabout me! 22:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
It's not Cassie's fault you posted the template on the talk page of a user who didn't need to be warned. MrXblow me 22:11, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
But he did! That was a self reverted test edit. --Gale5050complainabout me! 22:14, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
How many times do I have to explain this to you? That was not a test edit. That typo was made when the article was created. MrXblow me 22:21, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, that template is reserved for cases where the tester doesn't fully revert a test edit, not just when someone makes a test and then reverts it, in that case, thousands of templates would be posted daily. JJP...MASTER![talk to]JJP... master? 23:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale the users here are showing an extraordinary high level of patience with you. Unless you want full out block or worse, please listen to them and abide by the conditions of the sanctions. ShabiDOO 23:31, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Zombie is being pinged about the sanctions but has not yet replied. About reverting the test edit, it would depend.
I hear your frustration, and I am taking into account your concerns. But I don't understand everything clearly.
Hello Gale5050. As MrX correctly points out, there is nothing in your sanctions that allows you to warn users (or even welcome users). You have a demonstrated lack of knowledge about Uncyclopedia and how we do things here and should not be enforcing Wikipedia policies here. -- TheZombiebaron 03:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Oh hey, that was my talk page. The comment was a bit silly considering it wasn't a reversion or my first article, but it didn't bother me, but if it's "against Gale5050's sanctions" then I guess it should be enforced.---WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 16:04, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Gale, as you have clashed with User:MrX and User:Shabidoo on multiple voting pages (including Forum:Vote Top 10 of 2020) and frankly do not understand the purpose of an against vote, I have decided to notify Zombiebaron to reinstate your sanction on voting.
Honestly, if a page does not live up to your standards or you don't get the joke, just don't vote for it. If it's really crap, vote against, stating clearly the reason why. Don't do fractional votes, and once you vote, don't change your vote unless there is a really good reason to (changing your vote from 1/4 to 1/2 doesn't do anything, and makes you seem rude). You need to reread HTBFANJS and BGBU, to get a grasp of what counts as a featureable article here. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 14:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
You don't know what it's like to be a "common reader" though either Gale5050, you only know your own experience, as we all do. That's the point of voting: we all vote what we think individually, and the aggregate score represents the "common reader". -- TheZombiebaron 15:19, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
I understand what you are trying to say, but please keep in mind that acting as though you have some sort of special insight comes across as elitist. Every user's opinion is equal on the voting pages, even new users. -- TheZombiebaron 15:32, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
That was a policy many years ago, but we ended up revising it. If you believe the policy should be reinstated by all means start a forum vote. -- TheZombiebaron 16:09, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, as I've said before, I don't have a problem with you voting against articles. You seem to have a higher standard than most for what should be featured, that's fine. I seem to have a lower standard than most, that's fine too. My problem is the way you go about doing things in general. You often don't seem to fully read what other editors are trying to tell you, ignoring advice and bringing up irrelevant issues. As for VFH, like Shabidoo and Hipponias said, going from 1/4 to 1/2 to 3/4 to 7/8 and then back to 3/4 of a vote, with comments that were either incredibly vague or incredibly finicky, is just unhelpful. If you keep voting like this, your vote will count, but other editors will just ignore your comments because there's no point trying to work with someone who behaves like this. MrXblow me 05:46, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
I understand your frustration. However, I have concerns that were not met. I even spelled it out and it was ignored! The image issue isn't irrelevant. An image attracts the eye, it just....confuses people. My standards, are in fact, extremely high. And minor things can cause me to go as far as oppose, which is ok. Hope this helps. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 01:35, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale it is already obnoxious to give incremental votes based on a series of increasing demands, it is another to withdraw a vote because your demands weren't met. This is showing total bad faith, alienating other users and in the end people will put you on their ignore list and have nothing to do with you. You seem to have the air of someone who has been here a short time, hasn't even had an article featured and yet knows better than all of us, on how we run and organize things and the quality of the articles themselves. Consider taking some time to observe the wiki in action, not telling established users how to do things until you properly understand it all, show good faith, work directly with users in a non-confrontational way and relax a little. If you don't do this I don't think you will last long here. It's okay to say ONCE "hey I'd be happy to vote for this article if something general is improved". It is terrible to keep doing that again and again adding fractions of votes (it's super rude) or making a list of specific demands before your vote is given. Instead of making demands, visit the article talk page (as I've told you to do THREE TIMES now and you've ignored). There you can have a friendly conversation like: "Hey shabidoo...I'm not sure about that image...I think it doesn't work because of xxx. What do you think"? That would give me a chance to explain things and you could learn about another writers process and where they are coming from. However if you have the belligerent attitude of: "Change what I say or I will withdraw my vote" most writers will think "fuck you" and will cut off communication. Remember this is a friendly network of people writing comedy, trying to improve their writing and have fun. If you want a gestapo like environment...then go to the spoon. You will be very happy there I think (until Spike bans you). ShabiDOO 08:23, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale if you keep up this belligerent attitude and not listen to people, you won't last long here and it's only a matter of time until you are blocked. Please listen to people. ShabiDOO 19:20, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
I am, in fact, listening, you are not even listening to my image concern! Stop ignoring me! I am trying to listen, but it is either (1) not very clear and/or (2) kinda harsh--Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 19:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale you have the right to critique something or express your own take on someone else's article. They have no obligation to respond (you are not the article quality police). People won't respond to you if you are doing so in a belligerent and demanding way on a VFH page. Take it to the article talk page as I have asked you four times now!!! This is what I mean by listen. How many times do I have to ask you to do this on the article talk page and NOT the VFH page? Listen to people. Word your critique in a FRIENDLY AND NON DEMANDING MANNER. Watch your tone, be less aggressive and actually listen to people. If you keep up with this attitude I will permanently add you to my ignore list and have nothing more to do with you. ShabiDOO 22:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
There is no friendlier way to put it by this point. I do not(I'm sure nobody does)like being ignored. I would take it to the article talk page, but I can't!. Again, see here, for the details. If you are unwilling to have it be explained to you in any other way. Then I am afraid I may have to give your VFH a full oppose. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:57, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Then the user talk page will do...the point is the VFH isn't a forum for extensive critique or making demands. Please show other users more respect and please be less belligerent or demanding of people. ShabiDOO 01:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Please read what others are trying to tell you
Gale5050, with this edit I said "if you would actually read what we are trying to tell you, you'd know what I think of your solution". With this edit you replied "I can't". So my question is, what do you mean you can't? MrXblow me 15:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
That doesn't make any sense. Why would you even bring that up? That article hadn't yet been mentioned. Again, please actually read what people are trying to tell you, answer questions that are asked, and don't bring up irrelevant topics. Many of us have had a difficult time communicating with you because of this. MrXblow me 16:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
It hand't, correct. However, I was in the process of explaining how VFH was off, as that article should not have been featured. I wasn't able to participate as i hand't registered as I was involved in my biggestact ofblock evasion yet, and still didn't mention Meta issues. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 16:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Again, half of what you just said is irrelevant. Please stop communicating this way. You are making it very difficult (almost impossible) to have a coherent conversation with you. MrXblow me 17:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I am leaving this message on your talk page in order to say that your behavior here on Uncyclopedia is definitely causing a relatively significant amount of trouble. Many of your posts here, such as Forum:Issues with VFH, demonstrate that you are, despite everything, not willing to properly argue your points, and are willing to resort to arguing against the tone of an argument, or even against the author of an argument. Many editors have shown at least some degree of intolerance with your behavior, such as User:MrX, User:WohMi, User:Shabidoo, and others. Overall, I must criticize that even though you definitely do seem to be here on Uncyclopedia with good intentions, the way in which you deal with other editors is definitely not the most accepting one. UN:BITE is a good summary of what I am trying to explain: you are acting like an alligator, scaring away all the others around you, whether experienced or no.
As such, in order to ensure that everyone feels welcome at Uncyclopedia, I have no choice but to issue you a warning. Further impoliteness will result in a trip to Flammable's Office for, most likely, more sanctions. Please consider this the equivalent of a Level 4 warning, in Wikipedian terms.
We here at Uncyclopedia really appreciate all of your contributions here, but it is definitely time for a little change. It's never too late to change, and it's okay to not want to change, but sometimes, change is necessary, for the better good; now is one of these moments.
Gale, it's true that in some contexts, being super direct, assertive, fiercely arguing your point and fighting to get what you think is right is a wise strategy. I can promise you that on uncyclopedia this is NOT a good strategy ever (trust me I know from my own embarrassing experience). Gale...please listen carefully: this is a voluntary website, we are here above all to have fun, enjoy funny articles, develop our writing skills and support one another in improving our writing. People can improve their writing without badgering, demands, enforcing one single opinion, stubbornly fighting to make a point nobody else cares about or agrees with. It is always good to know your own point of view and share that point of view but you really have to look around in any situation and note how everyone else reacts (especially on a website where people just contribute in their own free time). If you are in a casual environment like encyclopedia and nobody else agrees with your way of doing things or your ideas...then accept that, adapt to the way people do things and perhaps you can influence things in the future (by setting your own example). It's slightly like the wikipedia "be bold" motto. You can be bold, propose or try out new things...if people react unfavourably then well: at least you were bold and you tried, it didn't succeed you can try something else but just concede the fucking point and stop badgering people. You are truly testing everyone's patience and it's not an endearing, admirable or noble thing. It's extremely frustrating to everyone else. Perhaps you struggle with picking up on social cues or adapting to new environments. If that is the case then feel free to ask people what their limits are and when people tell you your behaviour is not acceptable then LISTEN TO THEM and consider they may have a good point. ShabiDOO 08:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
My view on this matter
IMO, you creating a forum vote was not wrong in and of itself (heck, zombie literally told you to). However, when other people are against the idea, just concede (don't be like Trump) and don't keep arguing your point while categorically ignoring everyone else's arguments. If you continue like this you will almost certainly be banned. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 08:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Statement by Gale5050
Voting on VFH shouldn’t count against me. Sure, not all of them were ok, but voting against should not be one of them. Second of all, I agree that the forum probably wasn’t smart. Unfortunately the only way to close it is to not have anyone edit it for 7 days(might be best here, let it stale out). I also should note that for VFD, I am considering a forum that allows an option to redirect. I probably won’t as it’s probably pointless, but when I want to redirect I don’t know whether to put it in the Keep or Delete sections, or do Redirect or Redirect. Unfortunately there is no other way to close it, but this way it will end with consensus against any changes. Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 13:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
You are still not listening. The forum was not a problem. The problem is not conceding that other people have different points of view. No one is angry that you voted against anything, just please try to be more tactful when doing so and not issuing demands or commands. ShabiDOO 13:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, I would like to remind you, again, that you are only allowed to edit interstate articles (and their related pages), hurricane articles (and their related pages), geography articles (and their related pages), and voting pages. You may edit users' talk pages only when it is related to one or more of the four categories specified in your restrictions. Your restrictions, as you have already been told, do not allow you to welcome or warn users about anything, even when you think there is "blatant vandalism". The edit you made creating User talk:Barushi was a violation of your sanctions. Please stop unless you want to be placed on Ban Patrol again. MrXblow me 18:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
No. I also don't want you trying make that judgement call, because, again, you have demonstrated an inability to do so. I almost went straight to Ban Patrol, instead of offering you a warning. Maybe next time, when someone points out that you've messed up, instead of trying to defend your obvious mistakes, just apologize and try not to do it again. MrXblow me 18:53, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, please listen to what I am telling you (it's something you've been told before). You have, on numerous occasions, reverted edits that you said were "blatant vandalism" (or something similar), when in fact they were not vandalism. This is why you do not have any exceptions to your restrictions. MrXblow me 19:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
BANEX wouldn't be explicity stated, it would be a think that would have to be directly in your sanctions for it not to apply. Also, it could be that the edits were blatant vandalism, and you miscategorized that, as you have done that in the past, and your persistent lack of edit summaries. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 19:11, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
January 2021
Greetings Gale5050,
I am leaving this message on your talk page in order to say that your behavior here on Uncyclopedia is still, let's just say, suboptimal, but MrX is definitely being too harsh.
As such, just to ensure that you do stuff in a less aggressive way whilst still letting you keep the vast majority of your privileges here, I have imposed these following sanctions, which are effective until February 15th, lest they are violated:
You are still allowed to use QVFD, but only if the article in question is unambiguously spam (e.g. spambots), clear vandalism (e.g. unfunny Fisher Price clones), or unambiguous promotional articles (e.g. Spambot, but y'know, actual spam).
You are forbidden from nominating articles for VFD and ICU. You may still however, ask another admin if they are worth putting in these respective voting pages, and they may do it if they judge it to be correct.
You are forbidden from using the revert function, unless the thing being reverted in question is unambiguously spam (e.g. spambots), clear vandalism (e.g. page blanking), or unambiguous promotional edits (e.g. Spambot, but y'know, actual spam). If you wish to revert something else, please ask an admin.
All of your edits must follow UN:BITE. Do not use any warnings above Level 1 on users that are not spambots.
That is all. Violations may result in further sanctions and/or temporary blocks.
As a quick side note-sometimes it’s obvious two IPs are the same in which case they are best treated like one. This may lead to split warnings, but if anyone begins with over a Level 1 warning it will clearly say the previous IPs. I will not install RW yet. Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 14:51, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Please do not edit talk page comments by other users, as you did here. If their statement contains a factual inaccuracy, post clarification underneath but don't edit the comment. It makes the conversation hard to follow and others can think that the user (in this case, MrX) posted it themselves. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 15:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
🤦 Breaking up another user's text with your own sig is even worse... Just... I'll revert it for you. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 15:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Oh wow, didn't even see this when I came here. Thanks Hipponias. MrXblow me 15:34, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Talk page
Wow, wow, wow. My comment was about as civil as anyone could be right now. I used caps, but I was still very civil. You changed my words. Then you told me to calm down. You tried to somehow make it so that you are not responsible for your own behavior. MrXblow me 15:40, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
I used caps in two parts of the message, not shouting the whole time, and your behavior is unbelievable, to put it mildly. MrXblow me 16:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
January 2021
Greetings Gale5050,
I am leaving this message on your talk page in order to say: do not delete stuff from talkpages when it involves an active conversation, and is not in unambiguously bad faith. It's considered by many to be quite inappropriate to do so. Please consider this a level 3 warning.
Yeah. I'm a fan of custom amboxes though. Cassandra (talk) 05:47pm January 19, 2021
Username template
It kinda kills the joke every time you point that out. Please consider removing that part of your comment. Thanks. Cheers. MrXblow me 20:44, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I know, it does. However, that joke is extremely corny, cringy and nobody gets it. I wanted to spare everyone for why they thought there username was the best. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 20:45, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, seriously, how many times do we have to tell you? Read. Please read the notes for posting on QVFD. It says not to sign. You don’t need to sign your comments, and you definitely don’t need to add the unsigned template to somebody else’s comment. MrXblow me 19:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Unbelievable...smh... It says not to sign because it takes up space and annoys people. Admins sign for a very different reason. They do not sign all the time. Most articles that get put on QVFD get huffed. Rarely, an article that ended up on QVFD doesn’t get huffed (at least not right away). In that situation, admins sign to let everyone know that an admin has reviewed the situation. If everyone signs QVFD posts, it will get way too confusing, and the times when admins sign won’t stick out like they should. And again, seriously, please stop trying to defend mistakes and listen to the people trying to help you. Your attitude and behavior make working with you impossible. MrXblow me 20:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
What is post hijacking? Anyway, the following is stated in the QVFD-page itself. "Do not sign QVFD nominations. It just takes up space and annoys people." Cat the Colourful(Feed me!)Zzz21:29, 21January, 2021(UTC)
Then to answer your question, you don't leave a comment for a page that someone else put on QVFD. The admins are more than capable of reviewing the situation and gathering all necessary and relevant information. Whether or not you warned the article's creater (which, again, is something that Zombiebaron told you quite plainly you shouldn't be doing) is irrelevant to whether or not the article should be huffed. MrXblow me 23:37, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Is there a reason you reverted our two messages? Kev's gonna be a little confused by the amount of messages on his alerts. He'll be able to see it all by looking through the history, but isn't it better to just leave it all there? MrXblow me 23:58, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
You could reply something as "i'm never going to tell you" or even "fuck you for asking", but you should not delete the talk message. Jabberwock (talk) 00:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
And I think I should quote Oscar Wilde Kev here.
“
Greetings Gale5050,
I am leaving this message on your talk page in order to say: do not delete stuff from talkpages when it involves an active conversation, and is not in unambiguously bad faith. It's considered by many to be quite inappropriate to do so. Please consider this a level 3 warning.
Don't forget, User talk:Kev/Gale5050 sanctions. Putting this here will hopefully improve your memory! Feel free to remove this message at will, if you wish to do so. Cassandra (talk) 02:49am January 25, 2021
Don't forget, User talk:Kev/Gale5050 sanctions. Putting this here will hopefully improve your memory! Feel free to remove this message at will, if you wish to do so. Cassandra (talk) 02:49am January 25, 2021
Hey, sorry then, my bad. I assumed that edit was made without your consent and possibly without your knowledge. Cheers. MrXblow me 14:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, but it was designed for me. Probably should be moved, but I like it, for now. I didn't know, but I found out and kinda liked it. I will say, though, it shouldn't have been tilted "Intruding your userpage", but whatever. Issue cleared. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 14:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
You may also like to consider the math level templates that are used on my userpage. --Jabberwock (talk) 12:24, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
February 2021
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Uncyclopedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page (most of which applies here too), and ask for independent help at one of our forums.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance directly with an administrator at their talk page.
Please ensure you are familiar with Uncyclopedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Please stop making disruptive redirects, wasting time of admins, and breaking pages, as well as nearly destroying Uncyclopedia multiple times. If you continue, your next block will be longer then 4 seconds. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 18:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
It made its way from Wikipedia to here. You can use it and can be found in Uncyclopedia:RedWarn, but remember that you shouldnt abuse it or you can be huffed. Have fun! whytheonlyone(complain?) 15:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Gale, its not wise to publicly make sock-puppetry accusations of an established user with the minimal kind of evidence you have, especially in response to an unfavourable vote on a VFP. It can create animosity with other users. I would highly recommend, and only when you have strong suspicion, when accusing established users...to contact an admin privately and discuss it. There is value in getting along with other users and showing good faith. ShabiDOO 23:46, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
What are the 'extreme behavioural similarities' between me and WohMi that you were talking about? (quoting Kev's talk page) We clearly have different formatting, spelling, and areas of interest. Also, I only voted on a few interstate articles on VFD, and I don't really edit or care about them. Please refrain from accusing other people of having/being sockpuppets in the future. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 10:34, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I am going to break it down.
YOU did the pee review on Hurricane Harvey, saying that the pool joke was funny.
Likely due to that sockpuppetry is what caused Gale5050's behavior likely unstable here. --whytheonlyone(complain?) 13:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Except I didn’t sock and a Checkuser can back me up on that. There is one edit on Interstate 94 I made logged out, that username has since been revision deleted. I did sock on enwiki though, even after my indefinite block, via a few IPs. Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 13:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Same for me; I tried using IPs from my CT301 account, it didn't work. --13:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Wait... I'm a sock puppet? Damnit! But in all honesty Gale, considering that both me and Hipponias are very active writers with (at least I think) our own individual styles, I am not a sockpuppet. Although, If I was a sockpuppet, I couldn't think of a better sockpuppeteer than Hipponias :) ---WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 14:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
P.S: Gale, I believe you made a pool joke in one of your other Hurricane Articles. I'd love to pull it up, but you had them deleted, so.... ---WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 14:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I must agree that you are asking me to perform CheckUsers quite liberally - I accepted mainly on the basis that you have helped rat out multiple spambot open proxies in the past. The evidence of sockpuppetry must be either "highly sus" or "beyond reasonable doubt" for me to initiate it. Please note that no admin is obligated to perform a CheckUser upon a user's request, despite us being much more liberal with CUs compared to Wikipedia. Cassandra (talk) 04:30pm February 5, 2021
Gale...now maybe you can say something to reconcile with the two users? – Preceding unsigned comment added by Shabidoo (talk • contribs)
It seems kind of suspicious that two users have the same beliefs(keeping interstate articles),and made the exact same comment on an image. I can AGF if WohMi was talking about a second image. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 16:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Not cool Gale. ShabiDOO 17:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Erm, just because we both want to keep some interstates and made similar comments on a single image doesn't mean we're the same person. Just because you like apple pie doesn't mean that you are the same person as 72% of Americans. Anyways, the issue is over now, the CU's been done, so you might wanna stop arguing your point (although it is certainly entertaining). ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 17:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
The image may have been different, but considering how your Hurricane articles are mostly the exact same thing, and the images you use for them look quite similar, I'm sure you understand that I merely was confused. Also.... KEV SAID SUS LMAO!!!!1! ---WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 17:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
For context, this is Image number 1, which is (I think) the one I said I liked
image number 2. Pretty much the same image. I believe this is the one that was VFP'd.
... And? It doesn't matter when the Generic_Flood_Picture.jpg was uploaded, what matters is that I Pee Reviewed Cyclone Eloise on 1/29/2021. In that review, I made a comment that I liked the little caption about the "pool" joke. Sometime soon after that (I don't know when exactly, because you deleted your VFP), you submitted a picture for VFP that had a very similar caption and image to the one that was on the article that I peed on. Me and Hipponias do not have our hands up each others assholes.[1] I don't call you and <insert name here> sockpuppets, just because you both are obviously best friends, so don't call me and Hipponias sockpuppets just because of a coincidence. – Preceding unsigned comment added by WohMi (talk • contribs)
Hurricane Harvey was PeeReviewed in September 27. You created your account in December. I made Cycline Eloise and submitted it for PeeReview on January 24. You reviewed it on January 29. On January 30, I requested deletion due to the poor score. On February 2, I submitted Harvey to VFP. It was deleted on February 3, because I realized it was not an original image. I understand it was a misunderstanding, but it was different floods.
As for you keeping the interstate articles, they are so bad that no, 2 people couldn’t have dreamed of keeping them. I ICU’ed em on October 14 and ICU was declined and I put an expand tag. It wasn’t expanded. In mid January, I put them to VFD. Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 18:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
People can have similar beliefs. Let me draft up an example. You have two wankers. One is a Proud Boy, the other, a QAnon shill. They both like each other's posts on Twitter. They both go ahead and invade the Capitol. Is one the meatpuppet of another? Will the FBI only arrest one person in this scenario? For short, assuming sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry isn't something that should be done lightly. Cassandra (talk) 05:56pm February 5, 2021
By the way, since Uncyclopedia doesn't seem to have a good CheckUser policy, I'll draft one up and subsequently put a vote on it to see if it's good or no. Cassandra (talk) 05:57pm February 5, 2021
So that it is easy to categorize things without giving difficult block log rationales. As in Nvadertim7777, a waste of time for me. (It's kinda CIR too, but the community rejected that).--Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 23:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Uploading new versions of files
Hi Gale5050, you know that you can upload new versions of files right? File:Line of screwed.jpg is not currently up to standard, but with a crop and basic image-editing software -- Paint would work -- this image can have humour value. You don't have to delete it. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 20:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
That page is on QVFD. So the file will be orphaned upon that page's deletion. I am also gonna make an UnNews article about how LI is gonna get cooler and maybe an Uncyclopedia article on the winter of 2017-2018 cause I remember it really well. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 21:10, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Uncyclopedia. If you continue like this, you will be blocked. Guarentee it will be at least 5 minutes, possibly 15. You cannot continue to make these pointless VFP nominations. I would have requested your block but no pointless redirects were made. The next time you do anything, a block will be done. This is the final warning you will recieve. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
PS to anyone wondering why I gave myself a warning-this is in the effort so I can say when I need to be blocked "disrupted Uncyclopedia past level 4 warning". It's gonna happen at some point. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 22:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gale! I've noticed that you've been submitting quite a lot of articles for Pee Review (almost 1 every day) since around February 6th. In addition to that, your comments on them (especially the most recent one) seem to acknowledge that they're not the best articles. Here's a friendly suggestion: Consider working on 1 article and making it good, instead of pumping out articles daily. That way, you're proud of the work that you've done, and the Pee Reviewers don't have to review articles with the comment "I know, it's lame." ---WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 15:48, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Except UnNews articles literally need to be immediately after. I got an article though thats gonna be a while. UnNews aticles really only need to be there for a few days. When I'm done with that I'm gonna do one on Shirley and then fix Harvey and Irma and I-98.--Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 15:50, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
I get where you're coming from with the "UnNews articles need less effort because they won't be easily viewable for an extended period of time," but if you're following that mindset, why nominate them for Pee Review? ---WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 15:57, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) So I can get general information on it. My scale is "0-20 is shitty and should either be in userspace or deleted". "20-40 needs some work but is pretty delving and can probably be worked on and resubmitted". "40-50 should be nominated at VFH and is very good". --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 15:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Gale WohMi has made a very good suggestion here. I've written several news articles that aren't topical (and they don't need to be topical). I would recommend not adding more than two articles to the pee review queue at a time and be patient. I don't think many users would want to bother with a pee review for a writer who hasn't put much effort into the article. In that case, just ask someone to look over it and give some tips (which doesn't require a full on pee review). You may also find that you'll have more luck getting someone to do a pee review by putting more effort into forming amicable relationships with other writers. ShabiDOO 17:29, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Just because an article is long, doesn't guarantee that it's funny and well written. Based on what WohMi and others have said in your Pee Reviews, adding humour to your articles might get them a higher score. The pool joke, while possibly funny the first time round, gets stale fast when you add it to many articles. This (SUMMARY OF 400 AM CDT...0900 UTC...INFORMATION (loads of info...) MINIMUM CENTRAL PRESSURE...983 MB...29.03 INCHES) is just a barely edited weather report and probably won't be funny to most people, but a few well-written jokes will. The articles also fail the Codeine's Mum Test, as Codeine's mum probably hasn't heard of these storms (unless she lives in the affected area). Try to improve your old articles. I know that it's tempting to start a new article when the current one just doesn't live up to your dreams (I've been in that position). Don't give up and continue to make them better. They will become surprisingly good once you put effort in. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 17:58, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, you are supposed to be following a Zero-revert rule. If you have a problem with someone else's edit, I recommend you bring it up on a talk page instead of violating your sanctions again. I also recommend you take a look at the "In the news" section of the Main Page and ask yourself if we really want half of it clogged up with articles about the same topic. MrXblow me 23:38, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
It wasn't a revert though, MrX. I removed one of my own things, and I readded something. That does not really qualify as a "revert", in my opinion. I don't consider the S Atlantic tropical cyclones as "the same topic", also. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 23:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
What I'd call a revert is if, I removed it and didn't remove one of my own posts. However, me adding that extra *(which was my computer bugging out, isn't really a revert either. --Gale5050complainabout me!And see my Wikipedia contributions! 23:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
New forum
Hi Gale5050, while I don't want to speak for anyone else, I highly doubt anyone would have a problem with you commenting/voting/submitting something for this forum: Forum:Top 10 Articles of 2020 Logo. Please feel free to join, cheers. MrXblow me 15:44, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
When created date categories for UnNews articles (e.g. 1 February 2021), PLEASE ADD {{CatBrowser}} to the top. This is very important. If you don't do this, the dates will be sorted out of order, and February 1 will come after February 9. It's a mess to clean up. Thanks. PF4Eva, the President of ImaginationVote for meMy tax returns 23:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Hey. Ready to dig deep into your creative juices? Your topic for the Happy Monkey Competition is: Infomercials.
Please write an article on this topic in your userspace/sandbox (if you don't know how to do so just reply here and I'll help you set it up). You have one week starting right now to complete an article. It can be anything (you can write a standard article, something off the wall, a news piece, an unbook...whatever you like). Remember that you are being judged quite strictly and equally in points by three categories: Originality, creativity (with the topic) and humour. Being original is as important as being funny (you can reference other works if you like...just do it in an original way). So go outside of your comfort box, be bold and write something you've never written before. Most importantly have fun. Happy monkey wishes you luck and pisses all over your face. ShabiDOO 21:18, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
FYI, we now have implemented extended-confirmed protection, so you can now request that. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 00:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Uncyclopedia has been on a growth spurt as of recently, and as such, we are introducing a brand new feature to the table tonight: Huggle! Yes, the same tool you know and love from Wikipedia has made its way into the Uncyclomedia Foundation's impenetratable walls.
Huggle makes it easy to revert vandalism, leave messages to users and basically speedily process edits here on Uncyclopedia. You may also use it to block users and do other things, if you are a sysop!
To use Huggle, you must be both extended-confirmed (having 500 edits and 30 days' existence), and you must also have rollback rights. If you are an admin who does not have either of these rights, feel free to grant them to yourself. Some features, such as page protection and user blocking, are locked behind the walls of adminship.
If you wish to install Huggle, feel free to do so now! For assistance, please contact either JJPMaster or Cassie, who are jointly responsible for this implementation of Huggle.
Have a wonderful day, and may Sophia bless you, Charlie the bot (talk) 01:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 second for Being a dick (actually, was requested by user himself). Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Charlie the bot (talk) 01:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
The Happy Monkey Competition is ending soon
Hi Gale5050!
The Happy Monkey Competition 2021 ends in less than 22 hours! Please make sure that you article is sufficiently good in quality by the time this time limit elapses, since your article will be judged, regardless of quality, at the aforementioned time.
Remember that you will be judged on:
Originality
Humour
Creativity, with the topic
Good luck! May Sophia be with you, Charlie the bot (talk) 02:07, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 5 minutes for Spambot. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Charlie the bot (talk) 23:21, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification: Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 30 minutes for Eh, felt like it I guess. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Charlie the bot (talk) 23:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 29 minutes 59 seconds for Qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Charlie the bot (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
I left you message on the article talk page too. Please change the title back to what it was. Your change completely ignores the concept of the article. Thanks. MrXblow me 18:53, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale, please don't "close" a section of a talk page or forum unless it is absolutely necessary (which to be honest is almost never). Unless the very forum or page is closed, there is no reason to effectively say: conversation for this section is over...don't add to it. Even if 72 hours have passed, a user may still want to comment or add to it and there is no reason they shouldn't. It also seems you only close conversations which have had an unfavorable outcome for you or where people seem to disagree with what you are saying. Please don't create pointless barriers to further conversation. In other words: you should only close anything if it is a regular process with a clear deadline. ShabiDOO 14:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, for the last time, please stop mentioning Wikipedia as justification for things you do here. This is not Wikipedia. We don't need to collapse things like that on that forum. The main reason not to close (yes, there are many) is that it's nice to have it there for people to see. Collapsing it like that makes it look like it needed to be removed or something. I know that it's different on Wikipedia, but here, only close/collapse things if there is an actual reason, not just because you feel that there is no reason not to. MrXblow me 15:27, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
We are not wikipedia. Stop closing shit. It is super annoying. ShabiDOO 15:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
See what? Another thing of dubious usefulness that you've created? MrXblow me 16:48, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
It's how Uncyclopedia is becoming more like Wikipedia. Gonna finish and then probably request it be in project space. In addition, there are many reasons to close. Wastes space, stale (no discussion in 84+ hours), no reason why someone needs to see that if they don't want to. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 16:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale, just because Uncyclopedia is adding warning templates and anti-vandalism bots that Wikipedia has or something, doesn't meant that this is Wikipedia. Uncyclopedia will never be Wikipedia, and enforcing Wkipedia's policies and practices (especially annoying ones, like closing forums for little-to-no reason) doesn't help. -WohMi, the best damn duelist on this website (talk) 16:51, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Just because Uncyc is becoming closer to Wikipedia doesn't mean you can start wikilawyering based on policies from there over here. And besides, most of what's written in your page is about the technical similarities between UN and WP, nothing policy-wise. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 16:52, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Wastes space, stale (no discussion in 84+ hours), no reason why someone needs to see that if they don't want to.
Gale...if you do it again I'll talk with Kev and ask him to tighten your sanctions. We are not Wikipedia and we only incorporate new things that are useful to us. Closing sections of conversations is not useful it is obnoxious. STOP DOING IT. ShabiDOO 16:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Collapsing is actually rarely done here. If content is digressing from or distracting from the conversation or if the content is stupid but not terrible enough to be reverted. Closing a section of a conversation is almost only done by an admin who steps in an stops something that is getting out of control or disruptive or an administrative closing done as part of a process. ShabiDOO 17:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
No Gale this isn't of little value, several users here are explaining why your behaviour is annoying and disruptive and you keep replying with irrelevant explanations. I swear Gale it's almost like you want to have sanctions placed on you. ShabiDOO 17:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, you really should read Uncyclopedia:How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid. While it's not necessarily the end of the world to borrow some jokes here and there, writing an UnScript that you even say was almost directly copied from a YouTube video is not exactly useful here and definitely dancing on the lines of artistic integrity. MrXblow me 00:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm looking forward to how you differentiate it. Sporking is fine as a root structure to a page, but you really ought to not steal other's content. Cat the Colourful(Feed me!)Zzz13:24, 5March, 2021(UTC)
Gale5050, as it stands, the article is not even a spork, it's a copy with a few minor additions. If you don't fix it today I'll put it on VFD. MrXblow me 16:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
It is 00:36 for me and I am most likely inactive right now. Check back in a few hours. (Purge)
Notification
Hi Gale5050,
Following what I have read from my talk page, as well as all evidence present, I have come to the conclusion that limiting your editing privileges for the next forty-eight hours would be probably for the better, for both other Uncyclopedians and perhaps maybe even yourself. As such, you're now forbidden from editing in any namespace except the User: and User talk: namespaces. This rule applies in addition to previously existing sanctions. You may request to have this restriction removed at 10:00 PM, March 8 2021 New York Time (03:00 AM UTC, March 9 2021); once the time comes, please leave a message on my talk page. This new rule is enforced by the abuse filter, and will not appear in your block log; if you try to edit outside of the User/User talk namespaces, the abuse filter will stop you in your tracks regardless of context.
If you have any questions, feel free to let me know, either by leaving a message on my talk page (you should still be able to talk there!) or via Uncyclopedia email. Have a good day, and may Sophia bless you, Cassandra (talk) 03:27am March 7, 2021
HMC 2021 Results
Hey Gale. First thanks for participating in the Happy Monkey 2021 Competition. Was a lot of fun this year.
At the risk of sounding biased against you or overly harsh to you or soft to others, would you please tell us what the account name was and why you would need to prevent anyone else from having it? MrXblow me 22:07, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
And why pray tell would anyone ever need to prevent anyone else from having an account with the name “Filter 66 was disabled”? MrXblow me 02:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok, so again, the questions are what is the name of your doppelganger account and why do you need one? MrXblow me 15:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I really don't see this going anywhere besides a shamewall, but it was to prevent spambots from taking that name which was blocked by Filter 66, which is disabled. Now can you stop shaming me for everything?--Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 15:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I really don't see why you can't answer simple, straightforward questions. This reminds me of other times when you have really messed up and then given aloof non-answers to simple, straightforward questions. I'm not shaming you. In fact, you are the one who has done that to me more than once, calling my "lack of edit summaries" (there was none, my use of edit summaries is on par with everyone else here, including Gale5050, and it's not a problem anyway) "blockable behavior" as a bullshit defense when I've brought your disruption to the attention of the admins. Now, again, Gale5050, three editors here would like you to please answer: What is the name of the account? And why did you need to create one account to prevent thousands of spambots from having it when the abuse filter seems to be taking care of it? MrXblow me 15:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Okay, Cassie has confirmed on Discord that the account was indeed legitimate; it was Gale testing it the username "SteffenSchoenhei" was on the title blacklist. Confirmation is below. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 15:55, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok, thanks, that's all we needed, a simple answer to a simple question. Cheers. MrXblow me 15:58, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Because that is what we asked. MrXblow me 16:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Happy Monkey Competition articles
Hi Gale5050! I just wanted to remind you all that you may now freely move the articles you have written for the Happy Monkey Competition '21 into mainspace, and subsequenty, say, throw 'em into VFH or something. Everything's now in your control!
Congratulations to Scofield, Cat and Hipponias for scoring the most points this year! The articles this year were of very high quality; I sure do hope that you can replicate such impressive performance once Poo Lit Surprise comes along! Honorable mention goes to WohMi, who managed to score the most points per word used: 5.8 points per word!
Have a great day, and may Sophia bless you! Charlie the bot (talk) 00:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey, just wanted to let you know that Pugsleyfan69420 recently made this edit to HowTo:Irritate People. It's mostly a kinda funny list of people, but adding another user can be construed as dickish behavior, so I removed your name from the list. If however this is something you like or thought was funny or whatever, and you would prefer it remain, like the spelling template on your user page, then let me know and I'll change it back. Cheers. MrXblow me 18:24, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Sorry the abuse filter fucked up. You should be able to edit now. Additionally you can now edit the File namespace as per the sanctions. Cassandra (talk) 01:41am March 9, 2021
hello andrew, I was wondering if you would be able to help me with the mrbeast article?Wikipedia Be Sucking (talk) 15:39, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
[talk page lurker] Since this was requested by a user, I'm waiving any "mainspace article quotas" for the page MrBeast, for Gale5050. Feel free to edit it. Cassandra (talk) 03:43pm March 9, 2021
Gale please keep your comments constructive. Your last comment was anything but. ShabiDOO 19:12, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
It's okay to point out one or two issues (though VFH is not a discussion page, we should try not to clog it up too much with criticism even if it is constructive), but pointing out that an article failed a VFH almost 7 years ago is irrelevant. MrXblow me 19:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
As you probably saw, I undid your revision. I don't understand why you're concerned about a redirect being deleted, you even voted for deletion of the article it redirected to. A wikipedia redirect is the last thing we need here. MrXblow me 22:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, can you please explain this? I'm not mad or anything, I just don't get it. Simply using the word "Viagra", whether from an IP or a registered account, obviously won't set off an abuse filter. Maybe you are trying to help, but some of the things you do seem to have no possible benefit. MrXblow me 15:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok I guess, I mean I still think it's pointless since the error message is something that would be standard but whatever. MrXblow me 16:07, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Mr.X if you like we can take turns tripping one another's abuse filters (I promise there is no dirty subtext involved here)! ShabiDOO 17:39, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I requested via email to Cassie, hope he can help. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Gale5050 (talk • contribs)
(This makes me wish there was also a user group that allowed non-admins to view private filters) JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 21:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, please. At this point, I am out of ideas, so I'm just gonna beg. Please stop being like this. I was really hoping you'd take this message to heart. But as expected, you refused to listen and doubled down on your bullshit again. You kinda missed something there. Your false accusations against other editors, overall bossy attitude, and attempts to create wikibureaucracy here have to stop. Please. These are the things that led to your sanctions. And as expected, you find ways to do them while technically remaining inside your sanctions. Nobody wants this. This can't continue. I have many things I'd love to get to right now. I'd love to expand my HMC article, and I have 2 other really good ideas for new articles, but as others have said, your attitude and way of doing things is making everything here a burden and creating extra work for everyone. I wish I could just ignore it all. And most of what you do here, telling Cassie to do shit that the abuse filter is already taking care of, I can ignore. I can even let it slide when almost half of the "In the news" section on the Main Page is filled with your crap that has no business being on the Main Page. But when you go around acting like everyone's boss and telling Cassie that good edits are disruptive, I can't ignore that. I wasn't even saying not to block Pugsleyfan69420. I was just pointing out that a particular edit was not disruptive, and that we might need to start examining the things that Charlie does a little more closely. But then you have to jump up and insist that you were right and then distort the truth a little (an increasingly difficult issue with you) and it has become an awful lot to deal with, to put it mildly. So please, stop. Please please please please please please please please please stop being like this. Thank you. May Sophia bless you. MrXblow me 14:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying. Cassie was saying to please not make Uncyclopedia a wikibueracracy. What I am saying is, well, y'know. My weather articles are important especially when records are to be broken, though I won't blabber about that as you said it would be slided. The abuse filter, suprisingly, isn't as efficent as you thought. Let me give an example; when making edits be "disallowed", they can continue to spam and clutter up the filter, making it harder to find and block other spambots. The goal to huff entire ranges is to reduce that from happening. This way, we can find users to huff. And they rotate around IPs. That /19 had many spambots operating, and it was cluttering the filter. Now it is easier to navigate. Therefore, the filter does not take care of everything, though I would agree to not ask Cassie to block an IP when the abuse filter already has done so, and only when it is unblocked. Though I won't blabber any more. That is a reason to use edit summaries, to make it clearer what you're saying. And yeah I know about my poor grammar.May Sophia bless you, --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 15:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
> My weather articles are important
To you Gale, to you. Please keep in mind that not everyone is a weather superfan like yourself, and that non-weather superfans find it bland when most of the articles in UN:News are Weather reports with swearing in them. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 17:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes I know, but when Denver gets 19 inches of snow is something a lot of people take interest in. And that applies in every subject - a lot of people won't care about the Mr.Potato thing. Actually UnNews is filled with extremely random things, and only around 1/5 of it is really weather by this point. In the last 3 days, it's Wikipedia page got over 1300 views a day on average, so that's a good indicative that people care. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:25, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
UnNews are supposed to be random. If you're going to do something about weather, make it something zany and impossible. Uncyclopedia isn't Wikipedia, we're a parody of it, thus don't just write Wikipedia news reports. Put a funny take on them besides just saying "there was a lot of fucking snow." WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 18:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
My general idea is; will a weather record be broken. If the answer is "yes" create an UnNews article. If the answer is "no", don't. Describe everything truthfully, and then, put some weird thing in to make it funnier. In the Winter Storm Xylia article, going "(cough, Wikipedia, cough)"(I edited it to make it funnier), Saying "(If you don't include Maryland or Delaware, but hey, we're trying to stop WW3.)" also puts that thing on it to make it funnier. "Republicans blamed them for the Senate loss, and then sent cold and moist air in to teach them a lesson. Dems tried to fight back with warm air, but couldn't get it above freezing, and the snow enhanced. This also lead to other consequences in other states. The Republicans and Democrats will go head to head in 2022, due to this. However, the battles will be steered away, and take place mainly in Arizona and Pennsylvania, but possibly also in other states such as Wisconsin and Georgia. FIGHT TO THE DEATH!" is also something to make it funnier, and that makes a pretty good UnWeather article. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:44, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale will not change without strict sanctions. His reply above spells that out clearly for anyone to see. Strict sanctions are desperately needed. ShabiDOO 19:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Wow, being harsh. Strict sanctions have "massive collateral", as in, by sanctioning me, you are denying good weather pages, leaving open proxies unblocked, and much more. As such, it has to be thought carefully, not taking the "lets have massive collateral and lets be harsh" approach, which Shabidoo appears to be deliberately not following. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 19:29, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Strict sanctions. They are the only possible answer by now. ShabiDOO 22:31, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
After reading this, I have no choice but to agree with MrX and Shabidoo. I want to believe that you're able to improve, but I'm struggling to believe that. A lot. Cassandra (talk) 12:36am March 18, 2021
Message
Hi Gale,
For the sake of telling you that you cannot get away with what often amounts to vandalism/overreach, I've part-blocked you for 48 hours, effective now. Once the block period has elapsed, you must message me on my talk page to have the block revoked.
I genuinely hope that you will be able to learn to be a more positive presence in a group-based environment like Uncyclopedia. I want to be nice in the hopes that you'll change for the better, but I can't, since if I go down that route I'll alienate several other Uncyclopedians in the process. As such, please take this message as a message of encouragement, to change for the better, and please start applying wp:WP:COMMONSENSE to your behavior regardless of what is going on. Cassandra (talk) 12:29am March 18, 2021
Same as last time, so basically abuse filter stopping you from editing anything outside userspace. If you wish to edit the UnNews article you're working on, please be patient, as I will not grant any move requests for the moment being. Sorry. Cassandra (talk) 01:13am March 18, 2021
I have seen you recently complain about your 'overly harsh' block. I can empathize that it's no fun to be blocked, especially when you're quite 'active' on this site. I would like you to consider these things about your block:
You have gotten into arguments with multiple users, and seem to often completely disregard what others are saying to you.
You have been "permanently" blocked on multiple wikis (Wikipedia, Gamepedia, Fortnite Wiki) for disruptive behavior.
You have a large list of sanctions as a result of your behavior on this site.
Now, I want you to think very hard about those things. If you have been punished on multiple wikis like this, it shows that you are probably due for a change in behavior. Now, to address other things:
While you may believe that your articles are good, most of them (especially the weather ones) could definitely use a lot more work put into them.
Cassie does not need you to tell him about open proxies. When the time comes for them to be blocked, they will be, and usually by an abuse filter. I get that you're trying to help here, but I (and most others) see it as just spamming Cassie's page.
While It was more of a hunch at first, I feel you've missed the premise of Uncylopedia, or at least UN:News. Uncyclopedia is NOT a place for factual information, as shown in most of your Hurricane articles. Uncyclopedia news is mostly comical and outlandish takes for events that happened, or reports on events that didn't happen. Here's a weather-related example: There's supposed to be a large tornado outbreak in the Southern US. While this isn't really the best concept, things that could make the story work would be "In fear of being canceled, Tornadoes purposely miss minority-owned businesses and homes." UN:News is NOT supposed to be "Holy fuck, Hurricane Blakowski killed 139 people, injured 581 and caused 3.9 million dollars in damage." UN:News is supposed to be random, and not actual news. Just like linking Wikipedia articles, putting factual information ruins what would be an otherwise OK article.
I've seen a recurring habit of you One-Upping people instead of accepting, hell even acknowledging their criticism. Most of the times these arguments could be completely avoided by just saying something like "OK, cool." and not pulling an "Erm, Ackshually..." Tired of people "shaming you?" Acknowledge their questions simply.
Also, an apology from me. I was being rude when you were talking about joke-blocking me. While I didn't want to be joke blocked, I shouldn't have been so aggressive about it. Please accept my humble apology.
Well, I think that's pretty much it. Other people probably have more nit-picks, but they shouldn't add them. In all honesty, I hope you stay on Uncyclopedia in the long term, as you can definitely improve yourself. Just look at Zana Dark: Was Permanently banned at one point, and is now an admin and one of the more active Admins on the wiki now, although functioning more of a "sleeper" admin. There is room for improvement, and I feel you can definitely do it as long as you have the drive for it. I hope you acknowledge (not respond, acknowledge) these concerns, and I look forward to your future on Uncyclopedia. Thank you for your time! WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 05:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I read from the bottom up to....point #4. After that it got too long. The one thing I digested ws how you hoped I improved. P.S. Zana isn't an admin, yet. There trips at qvfd prove that. I do accept your jokeblock apology. Now it's your turn to condense all of it down to....no more then 300 words. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 13:09, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, WohMi has put a lot of time and effort into this and is trying very hard to help you, not just with behavioral issues but also with writing. His message really isn't too long. If you read it and if you take it to heart, it will indeed help you avoid future sanctions, blocks, etc., and it will most likely help you enjoy your time at Uncyc a lot more. Please. Thanks. Cheers. MrXblow me 16:19, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale WohMi has graciously apologised and wrote something that most of us stand by and would very much like to you read.. Show him and the rest of us the courtesy of reading it and acknowledging it please. You reply to him was appallingly snarky and unreasonable. ShabiDOO 17:10, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
You have never dealt with such wall of text. First of all, I did get unblocked on Fortnite Wiki (unless it was reblocked due to security reasons, I actually got locked out due to a password problem). Now, maybe Shabidoo would know from his POV, but not MrX or you. How? You never got blocked, and MrX's sole block was a 25 second jokeblock for suspected sockpuppetry with WackyWars.
Anyway, to address the concerns. The abuse filter cannot scan for proxies. How? Only a single IP gets blocked. Many of the time, the filter is set to not block. Only 11, 15, 29, 44, 52(this is where I decide to not type out the full code), 61,62,63,64,67,77,78,82,83,84 and 85 block. Why? Besides everything else requires human evaluation, and could be constructive. If Cassie seems to be ok with it, I would recommend dropping the stick, and allowing it to happen. (WP:STICK also applies here). I will also mention a recent FA that has a decent amount of facts - Kamala Harris. Sure, a lot of it is made up, but it looks way to much like Wikipedia. A recent why, in Forum:Vote Top 10 of 2020,it failed.Tied a few other articles for lowest score, of 0. A reminder Uncyclopedia is an Uncyclopedia, and the goal is to make things funny. That doesn't mean twisting everything around and spewing misinformation, see an ICU tag that goes "Truth is funnier then blatant lies or patent nonsense". --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
We tried to express our frustrations with you Gale but I don't think anything is getting through. The only solution will...I fear...be tougher and tougher sanctions until you learn how to listen and concede points people make. It's sad really. ShabiDOO 18:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
But here's the ultimate thing. You have never experienced it yourself. Maybe you'd have a staleidea of what's going on. But here's the thing - you have never experienced it yourself. What I'm saying is, you shouldn't be saying it's not harsh when you have never ever experienced it. You might have an extremely faint idea, but I can assure you MrX and WohMi do not, as one was never blocked/sanctioned(both were never sanctioned, actually), and one had a block of 25 seconds. A POV from someone like Roza or Nicholassequira would be better, in this regards. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:55, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Shabidoo. After clearly stating all the problems that have been caused, I don't think you even acknowledged it, because you didn't respond to the parts besides Number 2, making me think you didn't read it all. If you read the first part, you would see that you have had multiple reasons for being blocked. Your mention of Kamala Harris and how it looks "too much like Wikipedia" is the POINT. The point of Uncyclopedia is to make fake and funny articles that look like Wikipedia. On your complaints that "We wouldn't know what it's like, since we've never been blocked before:" the reason that Shabidoo, Mr.X, and I have never been blocked/had to deal with a wall of text is because we follow the rules. If you didn't continuously fuck up, you wouldn't have to deal with these sanctions & blocks. The two main problems that people have with you are that you seem to think that you are never wrong, and that everyone is out to get you, as well as consistently ignoring/missing the point of things directed at you entirely. At this point, you're a lost cause, since you can't seem to ever acknowledge your mistakes. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 19:08, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
This is sorta getting hypocritical. So you yell at me for making it too much like Wikipedia, yet you do the same? Giving me unclear advice and "expecting me to put the pieces together" is the problem. In addition, you constantly throw a thousand bricks at me(see wp:wp:BRICKS, which also applies here). This inability to not do that, is actually what's causing me to be unable to take this seriously; it is constantly being violated. Shabidoo has been blocked, albeit there last non joke block was April 2012. i.e. before Hurricane Sandy. And you should at bare minimum ue "tl;dr", so I know what to read and what to avoid. You cannot use the "it's not harsh" unless you can try limiting to just user talk space for 2 days / only a certain user talk page. (You probably can, though). If you can try to do what I have to go through, which you seem to deliberately not do, then maybe I can hear your side about it not being too harsh; otherwise; well. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 19:23, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
What are you talking about? I've been blocked here tons of times for MUCH LESS serious stupidity than you Gale. I was blocked for forgetting to sign a few post by Lyrithya. I was blocked for stubbornly arguing my case to Zombiebaron. I was blocked by Skullthumper for undoing one of his assholy edits. I was blocked on the spoon by SPIKE for calling him out on his nastinessy (and he was being a fucking colossal scum bucket). And in some of those cases I regretted what I did and I didn't repeat those violations. That's the difference between you Gale and most people. When most people are blocked they don't repeat their mistakes. When most people are told by MULTIPLE users that they are doing something obnoxious...they acknowledge the problem and try not to repeat it or find a way to get along with others. For some reason, I'm not sure why, perhaps you have learning difficulties or some cognitive problem...but you respond to the consistent frustration of others by: denial, defensiveness, excuses and a "persecution complex". Those are bad things. They are not admirable qualities. Trust me. Your sanctions are NOT harsh. They are the weakest I have ever seen. I've seen people permabanned here for WAY LESS obnoxious stuff than you do. So consider actually listening to what people say and avoid every impulse in your mind to ignore others and keep doing the same shit you keep doing. It is simply impossible for multiple wiki's to all be conspiring against you. You are the sole common denominator in all of these conflicts. You clearly are the problem and NOT others. We SUPER CLEARLY ask you not to do things (they are not ambiguous) and you keep doing it anyways. Nobody gets credit for being a constructive user...you get credit for doing exceptional things here or featuring an article. If you want applause...go somewhere else. If you want a place that will tolerate your disruptive behaviour...find another wiki. This wiki will survive quite fine without your disruption Gale. It is ridiculous to overestimate your value on a wiki. ShabiDOO 19:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)PII issues will prevent the real reason for ever being released. And the wiki may survive without my disruption,maybe not so without my articles, some of which are quite good. On WP, my "saving grace" per se when I ever do get unblocked is my promise to get this article to GA. That may get enough support to barely unblock me. I don't have anything like that here. May I mention too, that in some instances(i.e Kiko4564 (talk) – contribs(new • del) • edit-count • block(rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser), we will never know anything about that cae, as the events were in Discord and there userpage was deleted and salt protected too.Also, 2012is different. Also, preventative vs punative and the WP revolution of Uncyc haasn't happened yet. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 19:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Your articles are not that good. Most of them boil down to either being stolen, or being weather reports with swearing. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 20:10, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Your articles are just mediocre at best because you haven't put in the hard work that other users put into improving their writing skills. The wiki will barely notice your absence on the writing front until you improve. Ask considerately...and people will help. Anyone can become a good writer. ShabiDOO 20:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) At this point the UnNews article I won't bother....it would severly mess it up. The senate election I could probably ask, though I don't know who and will send it too a PeeReview. If you pee review my articles I can improve, but no one even bothers in reviewing them, leaving them to continue to suck. For example, Interstate 98 and Hurricane Irma have not been peed in months - please do so. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 20:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I see that you have stolen my trick of just typing "!!!!!" in the edit summary field when I can't think of anything meaningful. That means that you now deserve a 2.15 second block, after the amount of <platformer game title removed> chapters I've completed. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 21:06, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Twenty-seven it is, because that's the total number of seconds it takes to complete chapter 8C (tool-assisted speedrun). Cassandra (talk) 01:14am March 23, 2021
Notification: Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 56 minutes for You asked for it!. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Charlie the bot (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
The first 28 minutes; more precisely; the first third. Anyway cause there's literally no fuckin point in appealing this shouldn't my TPA also be revoked? For however many minutes it is until 19:07/19:08 UTC today? --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
You said to me that no one will take me seriously when I am on wiki break. I want to say that taking me less seriously will be my advantage during all of this time, as I need to take some time away from major conflicts in Wikipedia if possible. Regarding my activity on Uncyclopedia, I have no intention to be active at all on this site. You might be disappointed though. SMB99thx (talk) 03:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
By the way, Wikipedia is a far serious site than you thought, as my statements were taken seriously even when I am in wikibreak. I remember a 'retired' user disrupted Wikipedia (sent to ANI) and was blocked indefinitely because of this. Sorry for being aggressive here but it's the horrible truth I have to tell you. SMB99thx (talk) 04:02, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know that every time you put double dashes onto my talk page, often prior to your signature, it breaks my talk page and its DPL-powered archive system! As such, I have no choice but to demand that you avoid using double-dashes (--) on User talk:Cassie. Any further violations of this may result in blocks of an arbitrary length not exceeding one day per instance. Cassandra (talk) 07:50pm March 27, 2021
Why are you voting on 15 year old VFPs, especially ones that have already passed? This is like the third time you've done this. Not mad, just wanna know. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 18:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Gale you should really leave closed VFH and VFP alone. Every time you do it several users will check their watchlist and note the changes and find out its just a pointless "score fix" or extra vote for something that is already featured and failed meaning wasted time for other users. ShabiDOO 21:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
I try, but some things are important.
I'll agree to only do 2 PFP votes per week. Score fixes are important, but I'll mark them as minor. You can disable having minor edits shown. Also, there is a way to not automatically watch every page. I think it's in your preferences. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 21:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
I added a picture as well as reduxed some content. Why? I was affected by the winter storm, had power outages, and had no water (in the Texas Interconnection, managed by ERCOT). Not unlike you, which survived within the Eastern Interconnection. Lucky for you a month and some days ago, not me. whytheonlyone(complain?) 00:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I loved using the signature button, and in 24 minutes, I can't use them at all, or I get blocked. As such, this is the last time I will ever press it; after this I have to press the tilde button. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 22:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Talk page stuff, again.........
Gale5050, I'm desperate, I'm out of ideas, so again I'm begging. PLEASE just stop being disruptive. It's not hard. I don't know how many times we need to tell you this, stop changing people's comments on talk pages/forums. Even when it is something minor like moving WohMi's tilde, just don't do it. If someone accidentally uses a * instead of a #, or vice versa, then that's okay to fix, but stop changing/rearranging things that they say. It is incredibly disruptive. Also, some advice: if you're gonna be such a stickler and feel the need to point out that 8 years is not exactly ~10 years (which it is, btw, the tilde means approximately or roughly, and 8 years is close to 10 years, which is what WohMi said, his point was that it's been about a decade), then you might wanna not say things that are really inaccurate, like calling an editor with over 500 edits in the past 36 hours "barely active". Please stop being disruptive. Please. MrXblow me 13:53, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
That’s not what I meant. I mean she hasn’t really got back into editing since 2/27, therefore yes, she has been very active, but in February she was barely active. In VFS, time is important. Regarding the 8 years as close to 10 years...erm, 2 years is a lot of time. In just a little over 2 years, the US Congress went from a Republican trifecta to a Democratic trifecta. Proportionally yes, but at face value, no. It’s like saying Florida and New York have roughly the same populations. I believe it’s 2 million apart, close at percentage level but 2 million is still a lot of people. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 13:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Would you care to comment on your disruption? MrXblow me 14:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh right. Well, I’ve never seen someone use that tilde on a backend, a tilde is used on the front end, or sometimes it’s a bottom tilde and top tilde but still before. I’ll agree maybe Zane isn’t quite inactive (though that’s barely disruptive), although I still will say eight years isn’t exactly ten years. I’ll give an example - 10 years ago NYC was fine. 8 years ago it was destroyed by Hurricane Sandy. —-Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 14:07, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
"YOUR" articles
You might wanna consider waiting more than 13 hours to hijack an article created by another editor and claim that it is "YOUR" article. Yes, I know this wasn't technically a sanctions violation. This is just a suggestion for that amicability thing I know you're working on. MrXblow me 17:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Ok. I was kinda irritated it wasn't ICU'ed, and I figured I can do a good job. And it's not necessarily hijacking, he can still edit it, I may have just changed his concept. The article is actually doing quite well. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 17:38, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
It is hijacking when you declare that it's "YOUR" article. And quite well is your opinion. MrXblow me 17:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
This isn't the first time Gale you've hopped all over a brand new article by a new user that was just started. Consider encouraging the user to write it themselves and letting them write more before hijacking it (at the very most only make a few small encouraging edits). Later on you might ask them if they'd like you to contribute more (and only do so if they agree). You aren't doing a new user any favours by commandeering what they start...and taking it over. You most certainly hijacked it. You completely changed the direction and tone of the article. Literally your first words after their contribution is "wait a second, wrong". WTF? ShabiDOO 17:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay. Time to ask Cassie to add things to your sanctions. ShabiDOO 18:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I really don’t see why, in this case, YOU overexaggerated it(uh, how do you spell that), by a margin of 15. YOU are the ones who are causing the issue this time. With your disruptive ownership behavior and faulty attempt to cover it up, which is disruptive. Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:09, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Gale5050, for the last time, stop making false accusations against other editors (this includes insinuations). I never claimed ownership of Hurricane Naming. I reverted your edits because they were bad edits. I also didn’t say you can’t claim ownership, I suggested you wait a little and give a new editor some time. And I am serious. Your false accusations need to stop.MrXblow me 18:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Don't you maybe thing that it is in fact WP:OWN behavior to describe an article as "yours", and then accusing others of violating that alleged policy? JJPMaster 18:17, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm Jesus Christ which makes me over 2000 years old (and I'm not even middle aged). So I imagine I will be alive in 3000 years too. Hopefully the world won't be on fire then. Eeeeeek that would be inconvenient. ShabiDOO 18:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh the world will be on fire, as I heard in 2880 an asteroid will strike, not to mention climate change. Also, it's, erm, kind of offensive to say your Jesus to ~30% of the world, so please don't. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 18:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
As a Christian Catholic, Shabidoo, what you have said did not offend me, and you are free to say it in the future, as long as it is in jest. If you truly believe you are Jesus Christ, then start working, already!WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 19:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Why can't he just smite vandals with a bolt of lightning instead of banning them though? Probably violates WP:NOZAPPINGVANDALS. ~HipponiasCUN- Talk - Contribs - Articles 19:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Please stop requesting full protection of pages purely because they are policies. Unless the policies are actively vandalized, there is no need to protect them all solely because they're policies. JJPMaster 21:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
This is your only warning. Please respect a given user's gender and pronouns, regardless of status. You have clearly noticed that Celeste goes by feminine-implying pronouns; your modification of these to masculine pronouns is highly disrespectful and arguably transphobic. Further incidents will result in you getting a complimentary trip to the village guillotine. Cassandra (talk) 11:34pm April 7, 2021
Socks are genderless. One merely designates how a sock behaves, whether feminine or masculine. And for the last question... I'll get back to you soon™. Cassandra (talk) 11:43pm April 7, 2021
NOOOOOOO! I'll fix 'em, please don't like Wikipedia articles. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 19:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Scratch that, this whole article is legit just WP:Graphics but replaced "graphics" with "pro player de fifa." QVFD'ing now. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 19:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Uncyclopedia, as you did at Uncyclopedia:VFS. This is because revealing defamatory or personally identifiable information is highly inappropriate. Thank you. Cassandra (talk) 11:00pm April 12, 2021
I'll let you do it, Gale. I wouldn't want to steal your thunder. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 01:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Oh no, not another cancellation Cassandra (talk) 08:49am April 13, 2021
Notification: Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 13 minutes 37 seconds for Please don't try to expose me again... . Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Charlie the bot (talk) 13:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Somehow got lucky and sent this at exactly 13:37 UTC... Anyways, sorry for the jokeblock Cassandra (talk) 01:42pm April 13, 2021
Let me guess... pure coincidence. Cassandra (talk) 02:10pm April 13, 2021
VFP "votes"
While often pointless, stuff like this is changing the record of an already completed vote and falsely lowering the score of a featured image. You might wanna stop. MrXblow me 21:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I understand it, but voting "for" is raising it, I can literally only do unlimited against votes on PFP (everything else is quotated to 2.0 votes per 2 weeks), and the chances of it being significant is near none. However, I will limit to agree myself to net 4.0 per week. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 21:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Unbelievable. Why don't you just stop voting on things that are already done?? The only thing you're doing is messing up the record. There is absolutely no benefit to it. MrXblow me 21:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
In your opinion, but there are 2 benefits. First of all, it's avaliable. It wants voters. There's a reason VFH isn't like VFP where it locks after its done and yes, if you really want, you can start a forum on it. Second of all, I enjoy casting my opinion on this, and messing up the record isn't as important others have voted on PFP. When Zombie came back he did 3. I know I did more then 3 but it is something I enjoy, bugging me on minor things is not productive, and you can always cancel out my votes by voting in the opposite direction that I do, evening it out. --Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 21:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Gale, your votes mean literally nothing.(Redacted) and voting on them, especially when they're already done and decided, doesn't help anyone, it's just annoying. Simply don't vote on them. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 01:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I slightly disagree. If PFP voting drives a nomination down to a score of +1 or below, or maybe even hits it in the negatives, then it would mean something. IIRC an image can be unfeatured, but there was never enough discussion. Also, perhaps it could be relevant in 2030? Idk. But as long as there can be a purpose I will vote, albeit I will reduce it.--Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 01:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Quick question
Why do you spend so much of your time on Uncyclopedia insulting spambots? JJPMaster 21:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Please stop updating old VFHs. I mean you just recently edited one that is 7 years old. It clogs up people's watchlist (wasting their time looking into the edit differences). It is totally unnecessary (there is literally zero value in this as nobody cares) and sometimes you make errors on it. I and another user have already asked you to stop doing this. Consider...improving your articles. If you have an overwhelming need to do something administrative, there are lots of other websites where you can expend that energy. ShabiDOO 04:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Anyways check your email. Cassandra (talk) 12:09am April 16, 2021
Well, I ordered Charliebot to start purging typos on the entirety of Uncyclopedia, so... Cassandra (talk) 11:45am April 16, 2021
Notification: Blocked
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 6 minutes 9 seconds for Nah. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Cassandra (talk) 14:29, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
You have been cancelled from editing for a period of 1 year for coercing another user into dispensing a warning. Once the cancellation has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be uncancelled, you may request an uncancellation by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Cassandra (talk) 03:33pm April 17, 2021
To uncancel yourself, please dispense 1,000 Celeste emojis on your talk page AND JJPMaster's talk page. Cassandra (talk) 03:34pm April 17, 2021
Once again, please stop updating/voting on older VFP's. I know that in this particular instance, you "abstained," but when the voting is already closed (for around 9 years), there is no need for you to say that you abstained. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 19:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
There's a reason why 155 million Americans went out to vote - and why I am doing this. I want my opinion to be heard. From now on, if I vote, to avoid tapering any records, I'll log it. You also voted on a 9 yr VFP. Gale5050aka Andrew5let's talk!See me on WP! Do not click before August 19:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
I voted on it because I was under the impression that it was new, I didn't expect someone to vote on a 9 year old VFP. And besides, what you're doing isn't like voting for the modern president, it would be more like voting on the 1888 Presidential Election... in 2021. Might be a bit of a hyperbole, but I'm sure you understand my point. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 19:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Um, actually, it was 158,383,403 people, the difference actually makes your voting on VFP's even more important cuz your one vote is having a bigger impact on the outcome. And JFK was the worst. He called 2 slave owners and a guy who contributed to the Fugitive Slave Act the Greatest Senators of All Time. We need to rename New York's airport. We should cancel that whole family. Ted killed his mistress and Papa Joe lobotomized his own daughter. MrXblow me 20:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Sigh. Gale you said you would stick to voting not older than 6 months (which was already bad enough). Time to discuss with Cassie adding yet another sanction. ShabiDOO 01:49, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting that, but please remember that for that kind of vandalism, you're supposed to request permission before reverting it. You were right this time, but you've been wrong countless times before. No, I'm not asking for any sort of disciplinary action to be taken, I'm just asking you to please be mindful of your sanctions. Thanks. MrXblow me 20:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
You should probably calm down with the whole username thing. People have called you Gale many, many times, and you never once said anything about it. Now all of a sudden you're making a big fuss, and it looks like you're simply looking for ways to criticize others and start drama...again. Furthermore, as others have pointed out, Gale is a name commonly used for men and women, so saying that its use could somehow be transphobic is absurd. Finally, remember that you too often shorten other people's names, so you really, really shouldn't be going around correcting others for doing the same, and you definitely need to stop editing other people's comments, like this. Please stop. Please. Please. MrXblow me 21:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Let me clarify, since you seem to prefer that people use your whole username, it's fine to ask people to do so, but don't go around changing people's comments, and try not to be a dick about it. Please. And no, Gael is a different name. MrXblow me 21:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
And nobody implied anything by saying Gale instead of Gale5050. MrXblow me 21:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I personally believe that this is actually just Andrew trying to mock Cassie for telling him not to call Celeste "he", per the same accusations of transphobia and fake 4im warnings. JJPMaster 21:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 hours for mentioning Celeste and other infringement on sanctions. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Cassandra (talk) 14:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
It's because -> <-. Also, I am not a sock of JJPMaster. Anyways, I might let you know more for our upcoming issue of the UnSignpost. Cassandra (talk) 03:51pm April 21, 2021
Cassie is not a sock of me... because I am a sock of them! JJPMaster 15:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Hipponias and I being sockpuppets was NOT a joke. Don't play it off like it was. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Jimbo Wales is the only user on uncyclopedia. Every other user is a sockpuppet of Jimbo. This includes Cassie, Hippo, JP and even the amazing Shabidoo. Sorry all. You are just a figment of Jimbo's boredom. ShabiDOO 18:05, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
You have been dunced for a period of 1 week for Felt like it. Once the dunce (visible on your user page) has expired, you are welcome to request having it removed. This dunce may not be appealed. Cassandra (talk) 19:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Congrats on over 9,000 edits!
Also, check your userpage. Cassandra (talk) 02:15pm April 26, 2021
This is a telemarketing version of the UnSignpost, which has been provided to all active Uncyclopedians (selected by Cassie) free of charge. Enjoy! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Following an incredible (by 2021 Uncyclopedian standards) 16 VFS votes, Uncyclopedia's most active administrator has initiated their transition to female. Said admin, now known publicly as Cassie, has had a talk page that often inflated by 80,000 bytes or more weekly, and singlehandedly managed a vast variety of things, including (but not limited to): vandal whipping, being the school principal, managing VFH, and more. "Vandalism, eh? Fuck off already," they said, whilst throwing bags of feces at our new dumpyard.
Vote for Sandwiches: Triple Resignation, Quintuple the Drama
Following the resignation of two of our longtimemost bureaucrats, EMC and Zombiebaron, in addition to the resignation of admin CandidToaster, a new wave rejuvenated much of the now-ancient television show Vote for Sandwiches. MrX and Hipponias quickly climbed the ranks; Shabidoo received the same treatment, but ultimately withdrew. Zana Dark and JJPMaster were both nominated for a new category, interface operator, instead of the traditional sandwich role granted.
Uncyclopedia's Technologies are Finally Modernized
it has been a long time in the making, but Uncyclopedia's editing technologies have finally been optimized for the new decade. An introduction of a new extended-confirmed protection level has enabled famous articles, such as AAAAAAAAA!, to see the light of commoners' editing again. Utilities such as Huggle, RedWarn, CurateThisPage, autoarchiving, and a lot more has been implemented thanks to JJPMaster. Many gnomes have been working on this; as such, please treat their work with respect!
Biopic
This edition's biopic is about the joy of templating. Templating is a fine art which can be practiced on Uncyclopedia, its parody Wikipedia, and so many other places. It can furthermore be expanded to "module coding", which produces the same stuff albeit in a much more efficient and dynamic way. Come try templating now!
From The Logs
1 May 2021 Cassie renamed user Redacted (8224 edits) to Cassie (Per message here)
10 April 2021 JJPMaster (38 bytes) (-13) . . (Reverting edit(s) by Gale5050 (talk) to rev. 6045969 by Celeste:shhhhhhhhhhh (RW 16.1dev))
22 February 2021 Cassie blocked JJPMaster with an expiration time of 4 hours and 20 minutes (account creation disabled) (You [[Witch-Hunting For Fun and Profit
Following 1.5+ years of hiatus, Cassie has taken the lead, in a unilateral albeit undramatic manner, and has designated themselves as the lead editor of the UnSignpost.
I prepared this two weeks ahead of time. Cassandra (talk) 02:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Thank you
A Frogeline for you, Gale5050
As a thank you for voting for me during the latest VFS. –Cassie
Another Thank You
Hello, thank you for your additions to {{Divine Retribution}}. In order to make navigational templates functional, you should transclude the template on to the bottom of each article you've added, after the content and before the external links and categories. You need to add {{Hurricanes}} to the bottom of those four articles. Thank you for the vote!
Spain
Gale5050, I have made significant contributions to Spain. It was a collaboration between Leverage and I. While I may not have contributed quite up to 33% in byte count, with all of the changes made (additions, cuts, edits etc) it certainly has covered all the sections of the article. I would appreciate it if you would consider this as though I have contributed at least 33% please. Thanks. ShabiDOO 18:27, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
) above the edit box. This will automatically produce your name and the date.
Against.. --
Redirect or 
Redirect. Unfortunately there is no other way to close it, but this way it will end with consensus against any changes. 
Yes. I know this is administrative abuse, but 
. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to 
Anyways, sorry for the jokeblock 
Anyways check your email. 
<-. Also, I am not a sock of JJPMaster. Anyways, I might let you know more for our upcoming issue of the UnSignpost.
Boner.
