User talk:Nerd42/archive1

You have new messages.

yay look at me I have a Talk page

Sorry too

Sorry about that. My spider sense misfired. I shall go through a talk page first before taking out my gun. --IMBJR 20:50, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

ok :) thanks! lets try to think of something even funnier for Chrono Trigger OK? Any ideas? Nerd42 23:04, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

stupid idea?

No, cool. --Oscar Wilde 17:33, 5 Oct 2005 (UTC)

lol Nerd42 03:47, 7 Oct 2005 (UTC)

redirects

Pleeeeeease stop carelessly making redirects. Many of them end up as double redirects which we have to fix later (or delete, if nothing links to them). --Splaka 22:39, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

sorry. I have been trying to ensure that uHowTo:Make up quotes is the only page on general making up of quoets and does not become irrelevent just because it has become part of uHowTo Nerd42 22:41, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Been working hard during the last few minutes and have now completely cleaned up the mess I made (I hope!) Thank you for pointing this out to me! Nerd42 22:58, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

more redirects

STOP moving pages. Just stop. Ask someone else to do it. this sort of mess is annoying. Double redirects = bad, and moving a page twice (and then the talk page) creates them. --Splaka 20:46, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

also fixed. i'm an idiot. made the same exact mistake twice. How the heck else can I get a page to come up in a search without redirects though? Nerd42 21:43, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Use [search] button instead of [go] --Splaka 21:53, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

oh yeah ... that's probably what most people do ... lol Nerd42 21:58, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Moving pages can really make a mess of things. I once deleted the entire history of the Community Portal (back when we used it instead of the Village Dump as the main discussion page) because I was confused by page movages. No joke. Of course, that's probably more because of my own stupidity than anything else... --—rc (t) 23:08, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

lolNerd42 23:39, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

You can't hear my sarcasm in textual representation.

It's true.

<Dawg> Who unbanished this Nerd42 guy, anyway?

Was meant as a joke. Sorry for the misunderstanding. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 23:57, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

LOL yeah I knew that. I wasn't mad at all. It just suddenly occured to me to stage a sudden dramatic disappearance like that ... how would you react? Twas too bad I wasn't there to find out, but alas that twas the price of the gag. Nerd42 22:26, 21 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Kiss-ass

I saw that. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 00:14, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Hey, seriously I think that one first quote sucked. I didn't make that one up. I just made the second one up so as to try and make the first one funny, but it didn't quite. I still think that limiting the number of quotes on a page to an arbitrary number is equivilant to the Thought Police being unleashed, but anyawys ... Nerd42 00:20, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

LOL. I generally mouse-over links before I click them, thus ruining the joke. I clicked the thought police first this time tho. Anyway, I don't want to set a hard limit to the number of a quotes on a page. Instead, how about this more fluid calculation: (where x=number of quotes on a page)

$\int _{0}^{1}x\,dx$

Will that more generous number of quotes work? Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:07, 22 Oct 2005 (UTC)

"uhh ... i'm all mathed out for today"

~ Nerd42 on How many quotes are enough?

...excelent....

~ Mr. Burns on Nerd's math.

"but at least my spelling hasn't gone yet, even if my punctuation has ... wayt n0w thatz gon 2!"

~ Nerd42 on Things that Seemed like Good Ideas at the Time

Jesus Pages

[21:24:47] <Nerd42> i gotta interesting issue to discuss ...
[21:24:53] <Nerd42> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Template:Conservative
[21:24:58] <Nerd42> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Template:Liberal
[21:25:17] <Nerd42> "We gots political templates now." - Oscar Wilde
[21:25:34] <Nerd42> i think 2political = notfunny
[21:26:11] <Nerd42> and we gots lotsa articles that are way too political
[21:26:11] <Nerd42> and anti-religious
[21:26:11] <Nerd42> take
[21:26:11] <Nerd42> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_Jesus
[21:26:11] <Nerd42> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Ultra_Jesus
[21:27:26] <Nerd42> the Jesus series
[21:27:26] <Nerd42> not really all that funny
[21:27:26] <Nerd42> ok its funny that the series exists
[21:27:26] <Nerd42> ie. Jesus coming in different flavors
[21:27:26] <Nerd42> but that really belongs in one big article
[21:27:26] <Nerd42> instead we got like 27 different jesuses and jesus gets alot more abuse than He deserves if you know what I mean
[21:28:51] <Nerd42> same goes for religious leaders
[21:28:51] <Nerd42> they're getting it alot worse than ... say ...
[21:28:51] <Nerd42> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/50_Cent
[21:28:51] <Nerd42> now making fun of 50 Cent is funny
[21:28:51] <Nerd42> make him sound really really intelligent
[21:28:51] <Nerd42> using long words and crap
[21:30:24] <Nerd42> have him comment on archeology or something, and people read several boring-sounding words in a row then see it's supposed to be 50 Cent
[21:30:24] <Nerd42> classic
[21:30:24] <Nerd42> anybody on here think something?
[21:32:24] <Nerd42> post it on my user page [[Talk:User:Nerd42]] i'm goin 2 bed

The more well-known something is the more it will be ridiculed, whether it "deserves" it or not. Which do you know better, Jesus or 50 Cent? Jesus gets so much attention because of the history attached to him. If no one knows who you are, you probably won't get an uncyclopedia article of your own. If virtually everyone knows who you are, you're undoubtedly going to get at least one. FascistFetus 1:50, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

---

(U didn't sign!)

...

(I'll respond anyway)

Yeah, I know that. However ...

• There are way too many Jesus pages.
• Ridiculing Jesus to such an extreme degree is more anti-religious than funny.

To put it bluntly, only people with a specific attitude towards religious folks laugh at that.--Nerd42 01:56, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

---

The first sentence of Original Jesus is "Jesus was a pretty cool dude from back in the day, and he is one of the greatest men ever to live." This doesn't seem very anti-religious. Reading the rest of the introductory paragraph it says he "just liked to get drunk and hang out with prostitutes and talk about getting it on with his father who also happened to be God." This is really the only ridicule that goes on in the introductory paragraph, everything else is a minor joke that doesn't count as ridicule, just adds personality. The other pages are how Jesii are pretty much the cause of everything. The main points of being against evil and such are still there. It's not really anti-religious, except for the fact he's placed in Fictional Characters.

As for the excess pages, some I could do without. Especially the ones that were added without any existant page to accompany the link. And I could do without Jeebus whethere there were a page or not. FascistFetus 2:12, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I hadn't read Original Jesus specifically ... sounds all right to me. I'll check it out. Please understand, I'm not saying any particular people, such as the admins, or whatever are being anti-religious on purpose. I am trying to say that a general attitude of anti-religious ssentiment is starting to crowd out the humor on many pages around here --Nerd42 02:26, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Political and religious humor

Religious humor and political mockery are very old traditions. Read Voltaire, Swift, Dickens, or Aristophanes.

Funny is funny—even if some agenda-laden people are unable to see it. --KP CUN 02:30, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

was that a piece of advice or an accusation? --Nerd42 02:32, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the Elmer Fudd picture in God-Fearing Republicans, I couldn't think of who to represent them and I drew a blank. Then all the stereotypes are met with Fudd, brilliant! Let us hope that those IWETHEY vandals don't try to make the article factual and dispute the factuality of the article. Orion Blastar 02:36, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

actually, I would know, because I'm a real God-Fearing Republican lol. And can still appreciate a funny joke - most of the time. Sometimes I just don't get it though. :/ --Nerd42 14:14, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia Vandals

Could you explain the reason for adding that template to this article? Teh funnie is lost on me. Are you indicating that this article is too factual, or that it somehow belongs at that parody site that is full of lies?

Well?

» Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 05:58, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I forget ... sorry --Nerd42 13:14, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

A final warning re: redirects and page movages

Another admin already mentioned the problems with redirects and moving pages, but you're still makin' 'em and movin' 'em. Having excessive amounts of redirects and pseudo-pages can be very troublesome, so for your own sake and for the sake of the wiki, I and other admins have decided on an ultimatum: if you must have a page moved or a redirect made, ask an admin to do it for you (and only when absolutely necessary). Do not make any more redirects and do not move any more pages. I know you're just trying to contribute, but this is not the way to do it. So please. Enough. Have a good day. --—rc (t) 06:07, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Confirmed. Move another page and you might get a ban. Ask us to instead. --Splaka 06:10, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Tripled. They're very annoying to fix and you produce far too many. Also, could you put more thought into them before asking. Thanks. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 06:19, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

er ... OK ... you know, it would be nice if the articles weren't case-sensitive ... what specifically brought this on anyway? Did I make a mess of something again? I only remember making one redirect page yesterday ... but then I don't remember much of what I did yesterday ... --Nerd42 13:23, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I hear you on this. The case-sensitivity also bothers me, however, I know it's a DB limitation that is required for speed. Use the most common capitalization or proper capitalization. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 22:00, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Not a mess specifically, but simply leaving behind redirects makes trouble. Some of the admins discussed it yesterday in IRC and decided it would be best to put a ban on them to save future pain. Just be careful with your page titles and you should be all right. --—rc (t) 17:52, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

applying to me specifically or to the site in general? (I ask this because i'm interested in helping other newbies) --Nerd42 18:01, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

You specifically because you've been asked to stop before and haven't. Of course, the same would apply to anyone who overdoes the redirects, but it's a case-by-case thing, not a blanket ban. --—rc (t) 18:07, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

i just get into trouble alot I guess. Wikis aren't really my thing. Neither is h2g2 really ... I want to program my own kind of site someday ... :D --Nerd42 19:04, 24 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

I don't think that you got the secret message. It's not so mundane. By the way, the Gangsta Lexicon article is a little bit dated. As a person who actually works with gang members as part of my job, I find the Gangsta Lexicon article funny---in a tragic and pathetic way.

I see that you want to link up Kingdom Hearts with the Disney Empire. You should read through the articles contained within the Disney series. There is a lot of back story. Try to stay consistent.

--KP CUN 17:13, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

OK I will! Yeah, it's supposed to be sort of that way, you know? I honestly have no idea what real Gangstas sound like nowadays, I just know the bits I overhear are so funny when taken out of context. Think of 50 Cent doing parlamentary procedure with Roget's Rules of Order and being all ... educated intelligent and organized. I sort of get this picture in my mind of some gangsta wearing a powdered wig ... That just cracks me up. I dunno what it is about it really ... feel free to update the Gangsta series :)

OK I'll try and keep reading through the Disney articles ... You know, I think all my articles aer gonna get deleted prolly ... that's a shame. :( --Nerd42 17:18, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

The Life and Death of a Template

Nerd, stop messing with The Life and Death of a Template, it is not an ongoing discussion page, it is mostly a record of events from a Wikipedia VfD. --Splaka 19:33, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

oh crap you're right sorry, I forgot ... it looks just like a discussion page you konw? could you all tag/template it or something so nobody else gets confused? --Nerd42 19:34, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Curse!

I've moved the discussion from the cursed article's talk page to another article which is meant to be an encyclopedic article about the curse. It's creepier that way. General Specific 22:30, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Dude! You are so right! Your image rocks!!! crap .... I was just screwing around in MS Paint when I accidentally discovered that I'd unlocked a secret ancient curse ... --Nerd42 22:31, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Uncurse?

OK dude, IF YOU READ THIS, go ahead adding in the cursed user template! im glad to have it in mine, although i beg to be uncursed, but know it will not happen.... --User:ONX

Sorry ... there's a bit of a problem with that...

• 1. I can't uncurse you. Like I said, it's irreversable.
• 2. I can't add the template to your user page. If I do an admin will just revert it. You have to. There are instructions here on how to do it.
• 3. Please remember to sign your comments (with four of the "~" things) so I can tell who you are more easily, ONX. --Nerd42 20:12, 27 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Logo font

I'm not sure what Wikipedia uses, but I think I used Bookman Old Style ("sharp" in Photoshop) for the Uncyc logo. I have a bad habit of not keeping the original PSDs for images, but I just tested it out and it definitely looks right. --—rc (t) 05:19, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I believe I have that font. :) --Nerd42 03:05, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Attack!

>Attack fool with glowing blue sword!

Real great discussing strategy!

Humourless 03:01, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> chop Humorless with lightsabre

yeah, ain't it? lol --Nerd42 03:03, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

>Counter with RED SWORD

Hah!

Humourless 03:09, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> throw banana cream pie at humorless

--Nerd42 03:14, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

>throw garbage at Nerd! 

Humourless 03:15, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> throw fake Oscar Wilde quote at Humorless

"Banana cream pie is the most deadly weapon ever to enter the mind of man. If you are hit by it, you are PWNED, sucka!"

~ Oscar Wilde

--Nerd42 03:18, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Oh no. Only babbling can beat that!

> You really ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ in addition to being a zorkian fool! Hah!

Not even you can beat that! Humourless 03:21, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> open phone
> call Antharian friends 
> tell friends to beat the crap out of Humorless
> hang up
> wait
> wait
> wait
> whistle

--Nerd42 03:24, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> Throw brick at Nerd's friends, from my secret tower of evil. Later, post comment on Kinney's blog! 

--Humourless 03:27, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> Attack before reaction. Throw brick at Nerd's computer! 

--Humourless 03:29, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

> Attack fanatically! Call serenity! Tell them I'll give them 100,000,000 to beat up nerd! Wait...Wait...there!

--Do I even need to tell you who wrote this?

> curse humorless

--Nerd42 15:49, 2 Nov 2005 (UTC)

hey you!

why aren't you in #game-revolution ?! kthx

i gots stuff goin on, ya know? i twas usin 2 much bandwidth. besides, I have now officially uploaded more than I downloaded from the chan ^_^ --Nerd42 17:27, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Zork Π ?

• Hello Nerd42,

Sorry about being cut off in IRC. The building I was using the computer in was closing at the time so I had to leave in a hurry. ;-) I liked your ideas about the Zork series. I'm suprised there's not a Uncyclopedia project to coordinate all the different interactive pages. I actually might have an old Zork book laying around unless there's one online somewhere. By the way is Zork Π included in the official series ? I can't find a main article or a category for it. MadMax 04:14, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Take a looksy at User:Nerd42/Zork then at the DUMP. --Nerd42 04:51, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Wow. Very impressive. :) It seems like a highly ambitious project although I'd certainly be interested in helping out if you need someone to do hours and hours of tedious work. ;-) The formatting works perfectly by the way. MadMax 05:19, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Also I reformatted the Template:Blah as it was overlapping with the several articles. I kept all the previous articles, merged Template:BlahTree, and other features while only changing the table formatting. Of course if it doesn't fit in with the series, by all means revert it. MadMax 05:27, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

MadMax if you agree with the reformat idea, please say so at the DUMP. Splarka said that before anyone tries to do anything like that with the Zork pages that we needed a show of public support --Nerd42 15:25, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Template:QuotesPages

Hey Nerd42, I've got a bit of a problem with Template:QuotesPages, namely wherever it shows up it dominates a page and in most cases, the page appears to be of substantially higher quality without it. I don't mean to be a jerk, and I like a bunch of the other stuff you've done but templates like that always irk me. So yeah, I thought I'd bring the matter up with you for discussion instead of unilaterally removing it from places it annoys me and triggering a revert war. --Sir gwax (talk) 03:41, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Er, uh, if an admin deletes it, you won't see me putting it back! :) Yes, um, I appreciate your wanting to discuss it. I created the template because I saw there were lists of links on several of the "Making up quotes" pages linking some of them to some of the others, and some of them to others but not to other ones directly related to them, and it was a big mess, especially if someone were to decide to write a new article making up quotes for another American founding father. They'd have to edit a bunch of different pages just to get all the other founding fathers to link to their page. So, I did some searches and compiled a list of all of the "Making up quotes" pages on the site and put them in a template, went through all the making up quotes pages and removed all their "See Also" and "Related Articles" links and replaced them with this template. If there's a better way of doing this, or if you have any better ideas, please enlighten me. --Nerd42 15:42, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I can understand the motivation behind so doing, especially considering how many similar templates exist; I'm just opposed to that sort of thing in almost all cases. I'm going to move my discussion of the matter over to the VFD page because it seems to be there (not my doing). --Sir gwax (talk) 17:31, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)