User talk:Matt lobster/Archive2

PREVIOUSLY

HowTo:Escape Prison

Hi, I did a rewrite on this and is there a reason you reverted my edit? Originally, I had to revert your edits for two reasons (1), the end is meant to be short, and (2), the abortion section is meant to be short. If there's any other reasons your doing this, tell me, and I hope you don't take this personally--Æ 23:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't it completely ruin the point of the article if you only include a single sentence on actually escaping from prison, and it isn't even that funny? Brevity is nice, but you've got to have some meat on the bones if 90 percent of the article is about getting into jail, not escaping. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 23:16, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

The old version isn't really fleshed out nor is it funny, so I had to rv it. The reason this version only had one line, well, I'm to lazy to explain, so read Cajek's talk page for further anaylysis. HowTo:Stop Playing the Accordion (where I got some ideas for my article) also has only one line about no longer playing the accordion. As I said earlier in the edit summary, I'm not done yet, and I'm still expanding--Æ 00:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You've basically made it less funny. I don't think many people would say otherwise. Not only that but you've included an unfunny section where a baby is aborted by a woman getting stabbed in the stomach. It's pathetic. mAttlobster. (hello) 11:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

/Me bursts in unexpectedly Matt, cool it. Constructive criticism, please. ("It's pathetic" is reserved for... nobody.)   Le Cejak • <-> Dec 02:04, 2

Sorry mum mAttlobster. (hello) 12:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Is ok. I guess I'm a "mum" now.   Le Cejak • <-> Dec 2, 14:33

Cajek, matt cooled it. The dispute is over--Æ 02:19, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Good. 50% of my pee reviews by new users have the disclaimer at the top "PLEASE DON'T SAY THIS SUCKS, JERKS! I'M NEW AND I WANT HELP!" which usually is very sad. I'm rambling now...   Le Cejak • <-> Dec 02:41, 2

But can you please stop the reverts? Apart from the stab, you'll see jokes about the Ann Coulter, the south, and Roe v. Wade. Also, your end (from the original) isn't very funny. If you still disagree, can we make a compromise? --Æ 13:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I think just having the get out of jail free card doesn't work. I think stabbing someone in the chest is plain nasty and not at all funny. Maybe get someone else's opinion on that and see if it's similar to mine or yours. If you need the abortion thing, make it funny not just nasty. If you want to remove the stuff at the end then I guess I wont revert it. But I don't think it works on its own. Have fun mAttlobster. (hello) 15:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I've given the chest thing second thought, and I came to realize it just isn't funny. I'll make modifacations to it and it won't be nasty like it was. I'll resumbit to Pee Review and I might expand the end. Cheers--Æ 18:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Have a not-shitty Christmas!

	Heya, The Led Balloon here, wishing you merry Christmas, or any other holiday you feel like celebrating. Just remember what it's all really about: NO WORK, NO SCHOOL, FREE STUFF!!!
	Here's to hoping your school(or work) calendar for December doesn't look too much like this...

Merry Christmas, - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:34, Dec 17

	AE has awarded you a beer in which you help build your own Christmasbeerbottletree (shown right)
	Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Merry Christmas!--Æ 02:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas. ~ Mitch

-- Mitch 13:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Just wondered why?

You removed the Noodle Dance section I just added to FSM? I took that from Noodle Dance which is about to die on VFH. Is the Noodle Dance not a well know part of FSM culture? Tis no biggie, I just wondered what your thoughts were. MrN 12:32, Jan 12

Chuck Norris Disambiguation

I have added to the Chuck Norris Disambiguation page and three times you have removed it. Please may I ask why this is as I only wish for others to see my own personal tribute to Chuck Norris. Please do not do this again. -- C. Norris ^(talk) 10:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Norris doesn't do personal....probably. mAttlobster. (hello) 21:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Norris tag

Why did you take the below tag off Chuck Norris/Paradox?

Chuck Norris Tolerates This Article

Mr Norris has allowed this article to live. Editing or deleting this page will result in terminal roundhouse kicking. Should you be the writer of this article, then fear for your life and pet grue.

“This tag may cause death”

~ Captain Obvious on this tag

---

Thank you

Thank you for re-enplacing the tag -- C. Norris ^(talk) 11:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice

To see you back in the land of the living... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

More Stupid Chuck Norris Shit

Why do you keep removing the World of Warcraft "facts"? -- REGRETTENENBAUMIS DEAD TALK! 01:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Well it seems like an odd thing to have in there. None of them seem that funny if you don't understand World of Warcraft or probably even if you do? Maybe the should be under a World of Warcraft article? Anyway...if you really want them in I wont delete them again. mAttlobster. (hello) 09:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I see. I'm sick of the Chuck Norris, it's just that I hate vandalism more. Good call, there! -- REGRETTENENBAUMIS DEAD TALK! 21:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You would, just to say that you had

Very funny comment to a picture - well done. The article shows a lot of promise too. Asahatter (annoy) 21:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Door Handle

Fair enough. It will take me a bit of time to get fully used to what constitutes funny and what constitutes everything else, guidelines or no. For the record, I didn't view it as spamming (although god knows it was to spamming what tofu is to meat) and tried to make it organic as opposed to "THIS IS AN ARTICLE GO READ". If I had no shame, I would have linked it into a featured article or something. If doorknobs has a page, then dammit, so can door handles. Anyway, thanks for the heads up. [[BlueDexter 21:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)]]

Exo

Can you see my article: Extrasolar planets? —Flutter Tuwoolookie! | My History | Brute! 02:55, 19 July 2009

Star Trek and You

First, let me apologize for my cutting, nasty remarks about the Star Trek article. I stand by them, but want you to understand they weren't directed at you personally. I read your article (with a few minor edits by others) Star Trek (British Version). While I can't say that's one of my favorite article on Uncyclopedia, I think it's much better than the Star Trek article. Your British version holds together, has a consistent feel, and is written in a consistent style. And by the way, I also read UnNews:Man who claimed to have found God arrested for wasting police time. That is one of my favorite articles on Uncyclopedia! I'm not just saying that to be nice--I loved it.

The Star Trek article, on the other hand, is a hodgepodge that tries going in 50 directions at once and, like a ship that would try to do that, falls apart. I think what you ran into was the same thing I ran into trying to edit Lost in Space. There was a lot of crap in there and I tried to fix it so it would look and smell better. But the crap still stunk. I had been hesitant about throwing out too much that was written by others, but the Pee Review I got basically said do it. I think it's much harder to rewrite an already existing and bad article than it is to start one from scratch, and my reviewer agreed.

If you can write like you did on the man claiming to find God article, I would love to have you work on Star Trek! Please consider applying for Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization and voting for Star Trek. I'd be happy to say, "Welcome Aboard!" Binky The WonderSkull 05:23, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek universe

Thanks for "englishing" and please continue to do so if you have time. I'll add some more things from the German article tomorrow, for tonight I'm finished. NaturalBornKieler (talk) 21:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Down Down Down

STOMPING THROUGH THE FABRIC OF YOUR SOCIETY Seriously though, where would you be without me? Would drama ever be the same again? It's so very simple. The great monster rises from the water and pauses dramatically while shimmering in the moonlight. He slowly looks into the camera and utters a deep resonating scream that encompasses all our deepest fears. Spotlights search the dark horizon to find his massive hulk of reptilian glory a mere kilometer from the heart of the great industrial city. Slowly, the great beast steps onto dry land and his rein of terror begins. Buildings crumble before him as he appears to be endlessly searching for something. Something to appease unknown demonic desires as yet to be defined. Of course, it's really just an act. The confused searching thing gets em' all nervous, that's for sure. The bottom line is simple. Please don't use atomic weapons, OK? Your vote for Godzilla vs. Vaginus is a step in the right direction and hopefully some measure of your mammalian guilt will be relieved. Thank you so much. ;-) xxx Gojira

Matt Lobster! Down Down Down! anyone else make B-52 jokes about your ID? Thanks for the vote, Matt!--    20:48, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

FROM THE DESK OF GUILDENSTERNENSTEIN

Thank you for supporting my soon-to-be featured article.

Your support is greatly appreciated.

—Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 21:33, September 11, 2009 (UTC)

---

Barack Obama's Teleprompter

Hey, did you disapprove of my addition to this article? - --JeNeSaisPas 18:00, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

It's the current featured article and your edits, though not devoid of skill, do not at all match the article. Why not edit something non-featured? mAttlobster. (hello) 18:01, September 12, 2009 (UTC)

There's a lobster loose!

Hey Look! It's only filled with happy sand guys!! I swear to god, we're going to lose this war if Hitler keeps sending me on these ridiculous wild goose chases. We wasted a whole year running around Europe to look for the Spear of Destiny and all we found was a bunch of people who claimed to own it. We must have killed fifty people and all we have is a truck full of worthless, rusty spear heads and rotting wooden poles to show for it! Now it looks like we'll be spending 1942 finding out how many people have an Ark of the Covenant and collecting a pile of dusty, acacia wood furniture for the Fuhrer in the process. This is not why I became a Nazi. The bling with all the swastikas is nice but I look like Black Leather Jacket Dork when I'm standing here in this dark, musty craphole with the likes of Captain Doofus and Towel Head Priest Guy!

There was a DJ in CA who called himself "Lobster" and he'd always play a sample of Bill Murray saying "There's a lobster loose" from the film "Caddyshack". This has been Unimportant Lobster Trivia for Friday, September 18th. Thanks for your vote--    12:57, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

VFH

I vandalized the page because I was already into deep, I was trying to help the site, honestly most of the featured articles have been shit lately. No one is willing to vote for a newcomer either even thoughm my writing is better than nearly all the featured content. --Legolas11 20:15, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Having noticed this I thought I would just mention a couple of things, hope you don't mind me doing this on your talk page Lobster. It seems to me Legolas that you have gotten some pretty constructive feedback and advice on your article from the people on the VFH nom and these people's comments could have been infinitely worse. The first article I ever put onto VFH was ripped apart and tossed back at me in bloody tatters, so your experience is not unique. I have taken a look at some of your work and you do seem to have potential and a reasonable style of writing, so I would implore you not to take your frustrations out through vandalism. Please try and bear in mind that your opinion of featured articles is fine, but you don't like it when their authors complain about your work, if you want to help the site then you have to listen to criticism and work with what you have. We also vote for plenty of newcomers, we appreciate people writing well regardless of their uncyc age. But if at first your attempts are knocked back try to persevere and listen to what other people think as, regrettably, is them who decide which articles get featured. I hope you can continue to contribute (minus the vandalism). --ChiefjusticeDS 20:28, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Reviews

Hi Matt - thanks for taking the time out to do a review. Question though - did you read the guidelines? (And, come to that, did you read the guy's request? He said "don't just say it's listy", so what do you say? "It's Listy". Er...) Anyway, if you do another review, perhaps you'd consider looking at the guidelines and leaving something a little more in-depth and helpful next time? That would be great. See you around! --UU - natter 19:59, Sep 21

Point taken about guidelines, a fair criticism indeed . Have tried to be more helpful. But can't avoid mentioning the listy nature. That's the main problem with the article in my opinion. And it is just my opinion nothing more. mAttlobster. (hello) 20:37, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Hah, you edit conflicted me coming here to thank you for your fast work! I agree it's listy, but he wanted more feedback, which is what I'd say you've now given him. Thanks - appreciate it. --UU - natter 20:40, Sep 21

Thanks for reviewing The Feline Fiasco - I agree with a lot of the stuff you said, I'd like to open up the talk page later and discuss a few things you mentioned too. I'm starting to get the impression you don't like listy things, since you touched on the same thing in my review! It's not for everyone I guess :) Thanks again, chat soon! --Morgz789 05:52, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Marble Thanks

John Smith would like to thank you! For Helping him get through Marble Madness and defeat the evil bully, Benny Smith (no relation).

   Orian57    Talk   00:24 23 September 2009

Protip

When nominating redirects on QVFD, be sure to use the {{redirect}} {{template}} so the admin doesn't accidentally follow the redirect and delete the destination. It's possible that a particularly inattentive admin would delete your article because he thinks it's an author request. Just sayin'. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 21:16, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

I see - thanks for info. mAttlobster. (hello) 21:20, September 27, 2009 (UTC)

Jack Bauer Facts

• Hey, Matt. Is it OK if I remove the dreaded {{VFD}} from Jack Bauer Facts? You're cool!!!--Funnybony 22:26, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

As I said, I don't object. But it's not really up to me. mAttlobster. (hello) 22:28, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Welcome

to IC. Feel free to add the appropriate template to your userpage and whatnot. -OptyC Sucks! CUN17:15, 9 Oct

Your image

Let me put on my battle suit!!!

made me laugh. Have this:

Necropaxx has awarded you a cookie! Now go play in traffic.

• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Wednesday, 22:03, Oct 14

Lionel Richie Dancing Pee Review

I Pee Reviewed Lionel Richie Ceiling Dance Conspiracy Theory based on version 4159295 of 14 Oct. 2009]. I hope this helps! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  06:33, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for...

User:POTR/Template:Lateral Thanking Pup t 03:59, 20/10/2009

Mentlegen

Love, User:Why do I need to provide this?/sig3 and WHERE brooklyn at??? 00:35, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

What did you mean?

On Uncyclopedia:VFH/Jamie Lynn Spears you wrote "Against. This is getting rediculous." What did you mean? DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 00:27, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

I would say the following:

A) I'm not seen as a particularly important person on Uncylopedia to have an opinion taken from.
B) I think the nomination was purely based on nepotism. (Why I said it was ridiculous, but it also seems totally unfinished, like you lost interest in.)
C) Your article was unfinished and unambitious.
D) You can obviously write - and why not just keep getting better. That said, I've not had featured articles so don't worry too much about what I say. mAttlobster. (hello) 00:37, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

I think there's an honesty missing from Uncylcopedia that used to exit. Too much you pat my back, I'll pat yours. Too much thoughts of "I'm going to get revenge." That's why I think it's just about writing the articles. If you run out of ideas - stick it on the pee.

I don't know what you mean by patting backs. I only vote for articles I like. If you think being nice to ppl helps and being mean hurts well it probably does! If you disagree with Why?'s nom then you need to talk to Why. But I know he wouldn't do that he didn't even vote for his own article or for himself as NotM. And I got Jamie Lynn Pee Reviewed; did you see that part? A lot of ppl think it should be longer, so I withdrew it to work on it. But really, it's longer than the Wikipedia article. But what do you mean by unfinished? Do you mean it doesn't have an ending? DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:17, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

• Seeing as how I'm being accused here, I want to give an answer to your accusation and comments.

• First, I will not nominate an article I don't think is well written just because I happen to know someone on a website. I'm working to build a positive reputation here, and nominating lousy articles is not the way to do that. That would either make me look like a fool or a scoundrel, and I don't want either reputation. I nominated it because I thought it was well-written and better than many of the articles nominated.

• Second, your opinion is as valid as anyone else's. The only "scale of opinion" I know of here is between admins and non-admins (I think admin votes count higher on some things, but I'm honestly not sure how that works), but I don't particularly mind that because admins have earned it. And I recently had an admin sincerely ask me my opinion on an article, for which I have a great deal of respect.

• Third, we can all agree that articles should be evaluated solely on their content. But in the real world, personal feelings do come into play. Some of us try very hard to be objective. I do so by trying to ignore who wrote an article until after I read it, but of course that's not always possible.

• Fourth, before you think I scored Star Trek influenced by your comments above, I didn't read them until after I posted below that I'd completed your review. I saw Miley's name right above that, and glanced to see what it was about.

• Fifth, in the future, if you're going to accuse me of something, please do so on my talk page so I can see it and respond to it.

• Sixth, happy editing, and I wish you good luck in the future and hope my review helps (and no, that's not sarcastic. It builds my ego to think I can help someone, and helping someone who accuses me makes it all the sweeter). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:36, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

On point 2: Admins get double vote privilege on Forums and VFS, but not on any of the ?otMs or VFH/VFP, although there has been some argument about that in the past. The only other area here is that the admin is the one who makes the final call as to which article will become FA when two articles are tied, although they are supposed to be guided by the health of the nominations themselves. They can also withdraw an article from VFH upon author request (and possibly if the article can be deemed too offensive or potentially litigious, as I know of one article being removed from Uncyc altogether for that reason.)

On the rest of what has been said, Matt has his right to his opinion on the article, and having made a statement about nepotism, and seeing that Why has refuted it, there's nothing more than can be done here except to accept things the way they are. All the parties involved here have at one stage or another expressed their desire to see Uncyclopedia continue to improve, and it works better when we work harmoniously. Pup t 06:23, 24/10/2009

All I would ask is that we all take a moment to listen to the Princess Diana version of 'Candle in the Wind' - just so's we remember what's important. mAttlobster. (hello) 08:13, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Not as good as this version. Pup t 08:23, 24/10/2009

Whilst on the one hand I'm offended by anyone hinting that David Blunt could be bettered (and incidentally next time you hint at this please do it on his userpage), that is possibly the best UnTunes I've ever seen. Thank you mAttlobster. (hello) 08:28, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek Pee Review

I Pee Reviewed Star Trek based on version 4178096 of 00:22, October 24, 2009. I hope this helps! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:15, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

You are leaving

and I am saddened by this. The reason for you leaving (near as I can tell) is because you got a bad review for your article. That hurts. I know. I have gotten bad reviews and not gotten over it for days. I hated to think that after all the work I had put in, after I had given my all, some stupid user who can barely tell which way is up go and say, "This isn't funny." That hurt so much to me. And I know it must hurt to have your article, your own article, given a score equal with VFD material. I know you are hurting. You might think that quitting Uncyclopedia is the natural course of action--after all, you'd just come back after a period of inactivity and all of a sudden you find that you "aren't funny." Why even try any more? And so you delete your user page, and sign off in an unrelated forum. Uncyclopedia has left you behind, so now all that's left to do is bow out gracefully.

But you know something?

Uncyclopedia has not left you behind. Not in the least. It is not the end. So what if someone thought your article was trash? So what?! Does it really matter what another user thought about it? No! What matters is what you think about it. Uncyclopedia is not about snagging features! Uncyclopedia is about writing an article that makes you laugh. If you liked your article, there's nothing left to worry about. All that's lost is a shot at a feature, which is not as important as people make it out to be.

But what if you saw that the reviewer was right? What then? Do you give up? Do you call it quits on Uncyclopedia even if the reviewer was absolutely right? NO! You make it better. You do not give up over a poor review. You use that review to improve your article. That's what it's there for! No matter how low the score was, there is something you can take from the review to make it better. Why even bother to make it better, though? Because it is your article! You deserve to have funny articles to your name! Why should you have to admit to creating an article only as good as any other VFD-able piece of garbage when you don't need to?! You can improve your article. You can make it funnier. You can. "No, I can't." You only can't if you don't try. Even if it takes blanking the page and starting with a completely different concept, you will still be taking steps in the right direction!

What if the article is beyond saving? What if what you were thinking earlier was absolute inanity? What if there is no possible way your article is going to improve? Then let go of that article. Just forget about it. You had a momentary lapse of humor. No biggie. You'll write funnier in the future. It is that simple. Just move on. You do not need to quit Uncyclopedia simply because you produced a dud. When a new mother gives birth to a stillborn baby, does she stop having children? Not if she knows what's good for her. Does it hurt? Heck yes. It hurts in ways I can't even comprehend. But she will get over it. She will let go of her feelings of inadequacy and give birth to a beautiful baby in the future. The same goes for you and your writing. Even though your article was a miscarriage, you don't have to stop. You can move on. Because you know you'll do something funnier later on.

"But now that I look at my articles, I realize I'm not funny in any of them." If it wasn't on purpose, than it wasn't your fault. Uncyclopedia has an enormously helpful guide for turning writers of unfunny articles into very funny writers. It works. This is stone-cold fact. If you read it, and follow it, I know you can get funnier. It may take a while. This is true. Heck, it took me 6 months after starting to produce something featureable. Even then, it was still by virtue of having it reviewed 6 times, rather than the humor of my writing. I hadn't read HTBFANJS. Imagine how much shorter it would have taken me if I had read it. I believe that you are in nearly the same as I was. If you read the guide, I know you can improve.

What if worse comes to worse, and you have no more new ideas for articles. No more opportunities for being funny. You are cursed with writer's block from now on. Is that the end? NO! Even then, it is still not the end. There are several users on Uncyclopedia who, failing to be funny, settle for maintaining the site. Why? I cannot say for certain, but I'll go by what User:Famine said: "Why? Because I love this place." I put it to you, Matt lobster, that you are leaving because you don't love this place enough. If that's the case, fine. We'll miss you more than you'll miss us. "How dare you?! I cried! I actually cried that I was leaving!" Yeah? So what?! If you really loved this place, you'd stay. It doesn't matter if you're not funny! It doesn't even matter if you do nothing but vote on articles! Love means putting forth the effort even when you know you are bound to fail! Giving up is never the best choice!

Go on, hate me. But there's only one way to prove me wrong. So log in, and make an edit. Prove me wrong.

Sincerely,

• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 03:14, Oct 25 2009

You're right of course and thanks for taking the time to write the message. I'll still be reading yours and others fine works from time to time. mAttlobster. (hello) 09:50, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote!

According to your ISP's records, you supported file sharing. The Recording Industry Association of AmericaTM has notified the authorities of your unacceptable political views. Lars Ulrich will shortly visit your residence in our name to kick your teeth out. In the meantime, thank you for voting.

--Andorin Kato 17:56, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

The date of UnNews:Man who claimed to have found God arrested for wasting police time

It looks like this has a really good chance of getting featured--cool, huh? But it bothers me a little seeing an article dated May 2007 being featured in Oct. 2009. As the article works just as well today as it did then, and a current date will make it, well, seem current, I plan to make the date more current. If you have a problem with this, let me know, or simply revert my edit. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  16:06, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

I made the date more current, and also took the liberty of proofreading your article. Now I'm going to vote for. Hope you don't mind! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  16:23, October 28, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it's a gonna be featured, Dude. Congrats! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:45, October 29, 2009 (UTC)

HA! I told you! • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Thursday, 22:34, Oct 29 2009