User talk:Isra1337
Note: Currently I (Isra) am moving and looking for a job, so I may be a bit unresponsive. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 18:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Wrong title[edit source]
Could you delete this article please: Reasons to become an atheist/the funny version/the sensible version. I gave it the wrong title. Weri long wang 22:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Alright.[edit source]
I'd never even heard of quote-spamming before. I'm new here and I thought what I was saying was more universally funny than it was. Lesson learned.
If you have another problem with me, talk to me first. We could probably talk it out fairly easily.
Holy crap, dude![edit source]
Wow, thanks for the UOTY nom, man! I haven't been all that active in the past six months and probably don't have a chance in hell, but the gesture is very much appreciated. --Algorithm 01:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Unused template[edit source]
I created this template some time ago, but nobody used. Since you are in a template killing frenzy, you may choose to delete it or spare it whatever you think.
herr doktor needsAbolt [scream!] 20:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey Isra[edit source]
I'm looking for qualified judges for the next PLS, and I definately think you qualify. Leave me a message on my talk page if you're interested, or not. You could always just respond here, but I probably won't see it, as I often forget important things like who I've asked to judge for me.--<<>> 01:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
PotM[edit source]
It's about damn time.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 09:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Crappy video games[edit source]
I’ve decided I want to make a single article with a list of crap video games on it. I wrote a separate article about one of these games but it clearly isn’t long enough. Can you delete the AIRCARS article for me? Thanks. Weri long wang 17:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- I’ve uploaded a better version of the image Image:Athepray.PNG. Please can you delete this inferior one? Thanks. Weri long wang 19:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Is this funny?[edit source]
Can I ask for your critical views on the following section:
The true rulers of Wikipedia, otherwise known as the New Wikipedia Order (NWO), are the Wikipedia bots. These are viscous, evil, power hungry androids which run in the background and when nobody is watching, BAM! They strike with remorseless brutality. All the Wikipedia bots are thugs.
The most notorious Wikipedia bot is the brutal psychopath who goes by the name of OrpahBot. This heartless lunatic purposely targets husband and wife couples in an attempt to orphan an innocent child. He claims to be doing this because the parents don’t have their source and copyright status indicated. On Wikipedia copyright is guarded religiously and therefore the authorities have no legal recourse and OrphanBot always evades prosecution for the murderous actions.
In 2006 the children who had been orphaned finally captured OrphanBot, brought him to the orphanage and hung him using a traditional strangulation hanging. The picture taken from the newspaper Jyllands-Posten is shown to the right.
Is that reasonably funny? What's your view? Weri long wang 02:49, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks[edit source]
Thanks for the cookie. It's great to know I'm appreciated. Aaadddaaammm 02:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
XMas[edit source]
Bradaphraser was throwing away last year's Christmas cards, and realised they had This user is completely thoughtless, doesn't care about Multi-culturalism, and therefore DEMANDS you have yourself a Merry little Christmas... NOW! Failure to comply with result in disciplinary action up to and including excommunication from the Capitalist Church |
May you focus on your successes and forget your failures here at the end of the year. Never forget how we all improve one another's lives. Season's Greetings. (Be sure to pretend the template is talking about the applicable holiday, as necessary)--<<>> 17:35, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
--Naughtius Maximus F@H Woof! MeowMUN 02:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
PLS !!![edit source]
Your judge packet, sir. :)--<<>> 22:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
It's time![edit source]
Well, the time has finally come for judging the best at PLS. Since it'd be extremely hard (if not impossible) to fairly judge all 10 entries in your category in one sitting, it's recommended you start early and take it in stages. You were chosen as a judge because I trust your judgment when it comes to humor at Uncyclopedia, so you may use any method of choosing the winners that you deem fit. I do have space for you on the judging page to rank your top five favorite articles, in order, and give honorable mention to any other articles in your category that you deem "worthy" of being an Uncyclopedia article (which will then be unlocked after PLS is over). I'd prefer to have the entries almost fully judged by the Wednesday, the 7th of February, though the deadline isn't until the 10th. As such, be ready for me to be panicking if there's nothing done on your entry on the judging page by the 7th. Thank you again for judging, and enjoy the read (as many of the entries are quite funny this go around, in my opinion). Please contact me at my talkpage if you have any questions.--<<>> 00:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
No redeeming value?[edit source]
The objective, unbiased and politically neutral user Gamespot=666 has decided he doesn’t like this article I wrote, my response to this article. My article was obviously supposed to come from the other side but with a bit more droll and subtle humour (with exceptions of course – apes with big penises for example). Does this really have no redeeming value though? If so, why does the other? Weri long wang 23:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- Just about all the "Reasons to" articles are unfunny lists. To date, I've held off on just deleting them all, for some unknown reason. Is the time for purging them now? 02/10 00:11
- Well, the fair, unbiased and neutral user who tagged the page also decided not to follow NRV guidelines. The page is too old for NRV, and the wrong type of page for it anyway. Nevertheless, 1) pages get kept or deleted based on whether they are funny or not. politics is irrelavent. fairness is irrelavent. 2) I didn't see anything remotely approaching a joke there; and no, having a vaguely sarcastic tone to your page doesn't count as a joke. 3) pages are kept or deleted based on whether they are funny or not. 4) pages are kept or deleted based on whether they are funny or not.---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- So, no redeeming value then?Weri long wang 13:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you'd read the above comment, you'd find a bit of text which states "The page is too old for NRV...". Although if you missed that, you'll probably miss this as well. No, what I think we're both saying is "admin deletion on the grounds of not being funny". 02/10 15:08
- So, no redeeming value then?Weri long wang 13:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- Well, the fair, unbiased and neutral user who tagged the page also decided not to follow NRV guidelines. The page is too old for NRV, and the wrong type of page for it anyway. Nevertheless, 1) pages get kept or deleted based on whether they are funny or not. politics is irrelavent. fairness is irrelavent. 2) I didn't see anything remotely approaching a joke there; and no, having a vaguely sarcastic tone to your page doesn't count as a joke. 3) pages are kept or deleted based on whether they are funny or not. 4) pages are kept or deleted based on whether they are funny or not.---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Same thing in other words? And there's no need to be so hostile, I was only asking. Weri long wang 16:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not deleting it, and I don't see anyone else deleting it. It clearly had a lot more work put into it than a lot of the stuff around here. Still, it doesn't tickle my funnybone. If you want a second opinion, there is always Pee Review.
- I apologize for the hostility, but I do get sick of being a political referee on Uncyclopedia. We long ago agreed we weren't going to be fair or balanced, we were just going to let the funny stuff live and the stupid stuff die. Does that tend to bias the sight politicallly? Probably? Is that bias the opposite of my own? Yes. But it is a bias that occurs from which writers on the site are funny. Anyhow, there's no tag on the page now, and if you want comments we have a page for that. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Potatochoppers' Guild[edit source]
RadicalX invites you to join the Potatochoppers' Guild. Please read through our charter and decide whether or not you would like to join. If you would, please contact RadicalX to find out more! |
Account cleanup[edit source]
I’ve been just a little bit over zealous with image uploading over the years. Can you please delete the following images I uploaded but no longer (or never) used:
- Image:Whitehousecartman.jpg
- Image:GodDelusionBush.jpg
- Image:BChimp 1.JPG
- Image:BChimp 2.JPG
- Image:BChimp 3.JPG
- Image:BChimp 4.JPG
- Image:BChimp 5.JPG
- Image:BChimp 6.JPG
- Image:Preacher girl.jpg
- Image:The darks.PNG
- Image:Selfless gene.PNG
- Image:1904048382large.jpg
- Image:Crucify this.PNG
- Image:Drinkingfountain.JPG
- Image:Hypocrisy 1.jpg
- Image:Chemistry Book.jpg
- Image:800px-Pasdecabale.jpg
- Image:Magic the pasta.PNG
- Image:Magics14.jpg
- Image:Slanderbook.jpg
- Image:ArmyLogoSmall.PNG
- Image:Maxwell0926.jpg
- Image:Equa.PNG
- Image:Piratechart.PNG
- Image:Venn diagram ID png.PNG
- Image:Youngmewithdate.PNG
- Image:Nuke on eBay png.PNG
- Image:Legalization-of-marijuana-1.jpg
- Image:Icantbelieveitsnotbutter.jpg
- Image:Hitlerbenito.gif
- Image:InSouthPark.PNG
- Image:862237~Bob-Roberts-Posters.jpg
- Image:PNAC.PNG
- Image:Athe full.PNG
- Image:RepublicansJ.JPG
- Image:Farttofinish.PNG
- Image:Sin1.jpg
- Image:Statue-Of-Liberty.jpg
- Image:Happy stick figure with glasses.PNG
- Image:Factor.jpg
- Image:Religo-politics.jpg
- Image:Qwertyuiop-asdfghjkl;zxcvbnm,.JPG
- Image:Smaller george.JPG
- Image:Flamethrower copy jpg.JPG
- Image:She dont wanna hear it.PNG
- Image:Athe gothic text.PNG
Delete this page too: User talk:Weri long wang/History of conservatism
This user doesn’t seem to done anything useful
Thanks. Weri long wang 20:06, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks[edit source]
Lenoxus has awarded you a cookie! Now go play in traffic. |
For boosting my esteem by having my semi-original work automatically appear on so many mind-blowingly-lame articles. Lenoxus 03:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Hey Isra[edit source]
Your deletion method doesn't work. -- 23:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Huh? < blinks eyes, wakes up, realizes he left things on this website before the real world swallowed him whole > Quite probable. What deletion method? ---Rev. Isra (talk) 05:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks[edit source]
Weasel3689 would like to thank you for Lord of the Flies. Remember: Weasels Rule! |
Weasel 3689 06:01, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on the recent featured image and featured article.....you'll have to create some new stuff now. :) -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me)
Just found...[edit source]
This. You're an odd sort of person. Don't ever change. Have you considered changed the crappy existing page so that it matches your audio? Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 05:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Late Thanks[edit source]
OUI! Necropaxx's belated thanks go with you for voting positively on Siege of Bordeaux. Remember, les français ne sont jamais au dessus de dérision! Translate it yourself, je suis trop de fatigue. |