User talk:Sir Cornbread/archive1

NOTM

Hi I voted against you in the n00b conquest, since your nominator The Pancake man votes against practically everyone except you.

That's annoying. You can tell him.

Aur mera khyal hai ke aap eek daliti nahin hai? Dorost? --Suresh 10:17, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I will let my nay-vote stay long enough to make the Pancake Man getting the message. --Suresh 11:44, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didnt no that that would ruin your chances. I want u 2 win, so I'll go remove those votes. No worries.--The Pancake Man 03:49, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back!

I was just baking some cornbread earlier today, and I thought of you (or your screen name, anyway) for some reason. And presto, here you are! Pretty weird... Anyway, good to see you're not, like, dead or something!  c • > • cunwapquc? 02:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

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

Now... what to do for you in return... let me think... ;)--<<>> 03:51, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

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

Deja Vu

Regarding the edits I made to Deja vu, I don't see your point. It's supposed to be a self-reference page, so to make it more like deja vu, the links should refer back to the page. See Recursion, as it is an example of this. Of course the content should be repeated, as thats what the article is about. All of the self-reference pages have similar themes. I wasn't slightly vandalizing, I was making the page a better example of deja vu. --Sir Cornbread 18:16, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Deja Vu is *not* recursion. Deja Vu is the eerie, inaccurate feeling that you're experiencing something that you've experienced before. It is not an article on redundancy or recursion; to represent Deja Vu, it has to at least attempt to seem like it's not the same thing repeated over and over. There has to be randomness and a variety of content in order to make Deja Vu seem to cause the inaccurate, eerie feeling that you're experiencing a thing that you've experienced before. Your edits countered this. -- Rei 20:04, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Deja Vu is *not* recursion. Deja Vu is the eerie, inaccurate feeling that you're experiencing something that you've experienced before. It is not an article on redundancy or recursion; to represent Deja Vu, it has to at least attempt to seem like it's not the same thing repeated over and over. There has to be randomness and a variety of content in order to make Deja Vu seem to cause the inaccurate, eerie feeling that you're experiencing a thing that you've experienced before. Your edits recountered this, and made me laugh, for some reason I can't quite put my finger on. --Sir Hardwick Fundlebuggy (Bleat) 18:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

For doody's sake, Cornbread-man!

Sir C, that article is not NRV material. It's absolutely perfect as-is - no amount of expansion or revising is going to improve it. I understand that some people will totally hate the durn thing, but humor is subjective, man! If you want to put it on VFD then go ahead, but the NRV tag is completely inappropriate.  c • > • cunwapquc? 22:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like it's going to be a draw on VFD. Sigh... Modusoperandi 03:25, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Just too many people who will fight for shit. --Sir Cornbread 00:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll fight for fried chicken, too, should the need ever arise!  c • > • cunwapquc? 00:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

:( Modusoperandi 19:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Blam

The IP's banned, he can't edit his own userpage, or any page at Uncyclopedia, for that matter. --Witty Guy bitch at me 00:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

He's Just temporarily banned, though, isnt he?? Sir C  Holla | CUN --00:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion

Thank you for finding those bad articles. However, the method of deletion isn't completely based on quality. Please read the deletion policy before you NRV article or nominate them for deletion. Some of the articles you NRV'd were last year. Those article should be nominated in VFD. You were also nominating article that should be NRV'd, including the ones that the admins NRV'd. You can find out when an article was made by looking at the edit history. --Sbluen 00:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

All of the articles you NRV'd were older than one month. Those articles shouldn't be NRV'd. If you want to find articles to NRV or QVFD, you should look in Special:Newpages. Please go back and remove the NRV tags or nominate these article in VFD:

• Demi Moore
• Pi: The Movie
• Jeff Goldblum
• Star Trek: Nemesis

--Sbluen 00:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ape-Shit Crazy

Was looking at both Ape-Shit Crazy and Bat Fuck Insane, and it occured to be that perhaps we should have a level of insanity template chart. We could have Ape-Shit Crazy, Bat Fuck Insane, Tom Cruise on Oprah, etc..... -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Steve Ballmer....   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually that sounds like a great idea...I like it. Sir C  Holla | CUN --21:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

NRV Rob Mills?

Hullo Sir Cornbread! I'm a n00b, and you NRV'd my seconderest ever article, Rob Mills. I prettified it a little bit now, can i remove the NRV tag? if not, is it because you don't find it funny?

i doubt anyone outside australia (apart from the few drunk australians at a london pub somewhere) would know who millsy is, might be that reason?

(i apologise in advance for sounding like a n00b.) --Dondonz 05:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Now that you fixed it up a bit, I removed the NRV, and added some minor things. Indeed, I've never heard of Rob Mills, but as long as it's not vanity, it's fine. Don't take this personally or anything, I just didnt get it and it was short, pictureless, and category-less, but now its better. Also, as you are a n00b, if you have any questions about the site, feel free to ask. Hope you're liking Uncyclopedia! Sir C  Holla | CUN --05:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks!--Dondonz 07:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

n00b

Thank you for the vote Sir!--Shandon

No problem, and good luck on winning! Sir C  Holla | CUN --20:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Cheers

Mrs. Fundlebuggy sends you a big pie and a warm welcome! Thanks for being nice to my son. Normally people just kick him in the shin and fill him with balloons. I know I do.

Oh mum, there you go, embarrasing me in front of all these people again, like the time when you went roller skating naked in Central Park.

Cheers for the WOTM nomination. --Sir Hardwick Fundlebuggy (Bleat) 11:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, and I love the template. Good stuff. Sir C  Holla | CUN --18:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Rap

I added some stuff from the top of my head. I'll be more than glad to contribute to it when I can think of more stuff. If you want to, you could use the Pee Review, although not many people seem to be checking the Pee Reviews. Do me a favor though: please help contribute to the crabs article. I wrote a majority of what's on there, and I feel like I have some sort of editing monopoly on it, so please add to it, considering you voted against in the VFH (it's been updated since your vote by the way, in case you wish to change your vote, which you do). --emc! ╬ 04:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sure man I'll add some stuff, and if I contribute to an article, I'll usually vote for it...Anyway thanks for adding to my article, I put it on Pee Review, but you're right, absolutely nobody checks it. I'll add some to crabs 4 u though. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] 05:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright I added some fairly minor stuff, and I changed my vote...I'll add some more tomorrow, cuz I'm too damn tired to think right now. Hope u like what I added, theres more to come. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] 06:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you add like, a word, to Paradise Lost then so that you can vote for it. No, but seriously, I don't mind your against vote (or your multiple against votes) which is, by the forces of wiki, your Sophia given right. But could you please gimme some sort of rationale for it? It kinda sucks to have a months worth of work (not to mention reading a nearly three hundred page poem) tossed off with an against without even so much as a simple explanation like, "This article hurt my brain," or "I think this article looked at me funny." As a writer yourself, I'm sure you can understand, right? -- Imrealized 14:04, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what u mean, I guess I'd feel the same way. For now, I changed my vote on the central article to abstain, until I learn more about the actual Paradise Lost. Then I'll decide. However, I'm still gonna vote against the episode guide, because if the main article is already nommed, I dont think that should be as well. I'll go read up on the real thing. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] 17:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Right on... I appreciate that. By all means keep the against on the subarticle (it's really a part of the main article, I just did it that way so the whole thing wouldn't be ungodly long — that way people can decide if they want to go further and read the episode guide). As far as understanding it, David Gerard provided a good 'ol link to Wikipedia on VFH which I've checked out and it has all the info in it. Just a warning, the Wikipedia article is also kinda long, so if you are gonna read up on it, you might want to set aside an afternoon. Well, it's not quite that long, but you get the idea. Thanks for the reconsideration. -- Imrealized 18:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure thing. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] 18:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It appears you have accomplished the impossible. You've taken a formerly VFD article and turned it into a successful VFH article. It seems to be doing pretty well in the VFH. Here's a cookie for your efforts, whether the article becomes featured or not. --emc! ╬ 22:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

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

UnBooks AOTM

Hi, thanks for your vote there also. I did see the nom, but am waiting to see how others react before (or perhaps not having to) put my own vote in. Haven't voted for myself for n00b of the month yet either. Maybe a helpful suggestion from you to other users to go that page & view/vote?--Shandon 20:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thats cool, how modest of u. For NOTM u probably dont have 2 vote, cuz u have that one gift wrapped and on its way, but the AOTM is pretty tight (perhaps because not 2 many people know about it yet, its pretty new). Anyway, I'm sure u will end up winning, but I know that when I was nommed for NOTM, I voted for myself :). -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] [GET THIS FEATURED!] 20:34, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

BTW if you have a moment, please let me know what you think of American Postman. It's got Hiiiiiighh Hopes! & I asked some user to take a peek at it earlier; his initial ideas are now implemented. But it needs more Funny Ha Ha funny (not Funny Like a Clown funny)...--Shandon 20:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Gosh that was weird...I posted this here & then saw your note above and thought I was answering on my own talk page. Real Twilight Zone moment. But...I can't...be there...because I am...surely here...

Yeah, sure, I'll go see what I can do...and regarding the twilight zone, since u are a n00b, I didnt know if u knew to respond on my talk page or yours, so I posted on both just to be safe. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] [GET THIS FEATURED!] 20:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Wow, some dark horse voted for the other guy and is making it close. I am considering writing an UnNews article "User:Shandon Commits Suicide: Voters Shocked and Confused"...and there's the proof this is The Importance of Being Earnest in my life. BTW I liked the Ghandi thing.--Shandon 06:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I still think u got it, there's only about 24 hours left to vote. Glad u liked the Ghandi article, it's actually the first UnNews article I've written. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 06:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Rap

RE American Postman, I am thinking of rewriting it using a different style. The hardboiled realistic review doesn't seem to easily lend iteself to, er, if I may coin a word, funniness. Dunno. My articles are generally well researched (often I worry this is missed by readers) so it is hard for me to do random humor, but I know that article needs some spark. Any suggestions for random postal humor beyond "Ow, this sidearm really chafes" and "I ran out of doggie biscuits an hour ago, ma'am"? Hmmm. Maybe a couple of quotes at the top are in order.

RE Rap--

Well I wonder, G…I think shorten Inventions, see?

Get to Snoop fast and don’t lose yourself in the past

But I’m lookin’ for my buds, Run-DMC

And I see a 50 Cent logic fallacy

(He’s got the gear t’be a rapper, every kid knows that

So how ya gonna git around he don’t know squat?

I’ll give you the 4-11

‘Cause I ‘m here to give a hoot:

Just say Getting Shot

Ain’t the same as Doin’ Shoot.)

But I really wanna know whetha we need First Rap Show?

‘Course it’s dough ya gotta have weed in the mix somewhere though.

Wiggas. Biggers. How you gonna do your figgas

When you’re trying ta tell the difference ‘tween the ganstas and the wiggers?

Now it’s all funny-good and the zing’s got the slap

‘Xcept I gots one last request: show me that Battle Rap!

Damn that was pretty good! In response, Hardwick added the Gustav Mahler part, but I actually really like it. Its a bit long, but I think its pretty damn hilarious. I guess I do need to clarify about wiggas, and I'll try to fit Run DMC in somewhere. Thanks, -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] [GET THIS FEATURED!] 22:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey man, that's what I get paid for. BTW I just rewrote American Postman...lemme know if it works thx--Shandon 23:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I like it MUCH better now. The last version had too much of a serious tone, and now it explains the game while still being funny. Great rewrite. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] [GET THIS FEATURED!] 23:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I like the energy this way. OK, so what has to be done for it to be good enough to be nommed for feature?--Shandon :

Hmmmm... Probably just needs to be expanded a little, sice many people automatically vote against anything even moderately short. The content is good, just make it a little longer. -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] [GET THIS FEATURED!] 23:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Rap, Part Deux

OK, so I couldn't help myself and I got another idea for a pic... lemme know what you think (or just revert my changes and then I guess I'll know what you think, huh?). Also I changed the caption on the wiggers pic because the whole opposite thing wasn't working for me, but if you disagree then feel free to change that back too. And I didn't want to just do this myself, but might I suggest letting loose that Ape-Shit Crazy template? Did you make that? I like it and all but it doesn't really work in this article and sorta detracts from the Black Jesus template. Then again, I'm kinda not a huge fan of templates, so take that suggestion with a grain of salt. Anyways, good job with the article — hope you get a featuring. -- Imrealized ...hmm? 22:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

What I think is that that pic is fuckin awesome! Thanks, its hilarious! The wiggers thing needed 2 be changed cuz of the new pic, so thats fine. As for the template, yeah I made it, so I'm kinda biased in favor of keeping it. Thanks for the vote, the article's doing great (+8)! -- Sir Cornbread The Great  [SHOUT] [MUN] ~RAP~ [GET IT FEATURED!] 03:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopedia Dramatica

Hey Sir Cornbread! I noticed the current Encyclopedia Dramatica article is about to be deleted. Well, I've started creating a new one on my user sandbox, (go here), and I'm wondering if you would mind adding onto it. Please leave the content on the current page until a full article is ready, and if you could, please ask others to contribute to it. I'd like to make a really fucking awesome article and I want it to be sort of like a project. Thanks! --emc! ╬ 00:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Potential Sig Problem

Hey, congratulations, man! I just saw that Rap made it to the Main Page! But does this mean we'll have to refer to you as "Sir Sir Cornbread," though? That could get awkward. Things could become especially problematic if you decided to market your own brand of cornbread, which would then have to be called "Sir Sir Cornbread Cornbread." People with severe diplopia might even sue, and we all know how messy that can get.  c • > • cunwapquc? 18:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Haha yeah, MoneySign pointed that out last night. I wish I'd known about The Order when I registered. Anyway, I don't plan on going into the cornbread industry any time soon, so it should be OK. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Worst still is if any work of User:Han gets featured. That Kennedy family have long memories...oh and congratulations Sir Cornbread. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Thats a good point. Scary. And Thanks. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

UnNews and zim_ulators

I guess you thought I was somebody of note because I do a lot of UnNews stuff, but to be honest, I just sort of started doing my stuff, ignoring other stuff, and stuff just happened the way it did. As for features, I have a "do it when you feel like it" philosophy, and I don't exercise much in the way of reason or thinking about it. I featured the two stories you mentioned, UnNews:Jesus Sues Mel Gibson For Plagiarism and UnNews:Gandhi Indicated In Doping Scandal, because the pics are good AND the articles are funny, without the need of plastique surgery, but it's just a spur of the moment decision. Maintain the current or a greater level of stupiditiy and humour, and it's sure I'll consider featuring them! I hope that sort of anwers your question, at least. Advice: don't piss on electric fences. Rev. Zim_ulator (Talk) I am the dirt under your rollers 22:45, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Less than an admin, more than a summer squash. I did "win" the Misinformation thingy, but that was pretty much because I'm insane. Being insane also explains that I'd be unaware I've won the Foolitzer... I don't believe I have. Cheers, and keep up the good work! Rev. Zim_ulator (Talk) I am the dirt under your rollers 00:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Aw shucks

Thanks for the NOTM nod. Now, to get back to work on that Wilderness badge.--Procopius 11:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Good luck! -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Illiterate

Hi, is this better? Can the NRV tag be removed? Thx--Shandon 17:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah go ahead. When I NRV'd it it was complete shit. You're good at fixing up those crappy articles. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

All done, thank you!--Shandon 00:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sir C, do you have any ideas about my PLS question on Mhaille's talk page? I am having trouble with modifying a zork template for my own use. Thanks--Shandon 22:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanx 4 vote

Hey, congratulations!!! For voting for DiZ as Author of the Month , DiZ has awarded you by killing a martyr in your name! Don't feel guilty, he didn't pay his taxes anyways. -- DiZ the Great

I thank you once more. When I rule the world, your death will be quick and painless. --Señor DiZtheGreat  CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 23:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've always wanted a martyr killed in my name. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 00:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Two things

Thing the first — congrats on the featured article; it was well deserved, indeed. Now Thing #2 — have you seen Sir Brad's Quick Reminder in the bottommost portion of this forum? Just wondering, because I just wandered into Image Request and was met by three or four trannies who said that you hadn't read it. I don't think you can use images by other people in the Poo Lit, but maybe you've heard something different? I just didn't want you to get disqualified or anything so you might wanna check up on that. Good luck in the contest. -- Imrealized ...hmm? 05:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I saw what Brad put, but both Mhaille and Hinoa think its OK. If its not, I'll just remove the images, because all the writing is mine. Thanks for trying to save me, but I think its aight. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 05:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Thanks on the congrats, and for your image on that article.

Portalforums

As I have stated to other members Portalforums s a work in progress. It is not yet doen. It's no like it's a hot poket you can put in the micerwave for 3 mins and then take over the world. It will be funny to more then 3 people in 6 days. Thanks

-TaintedCell-

Put that crap at ED. Nice try, but its not funny, its slandity, and it doesnt belong here. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 08:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like to contest it's demise.

TaintedCell

A.) You're too late. B.)See what I put on your talk page. C.)Learn how to sign shit. D.)Learn how to spell. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 08:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

A.) You could be nicer. B.) I'm new I just signed up today. C.) Why are you being hostil towards me? --TaintedCell 08:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

If you're new, thats no excuse to have no clue what you're doing. Take a look at HTBFANJS and BGBU. I think most people here would agree that I'm a nice person. Ask anyone else who has written on my talk page. Your article sucked. Just drop it and move on. Telling Spang about me probably won't help you're case. I'm doing what an admin would usually do in this situation, anyway. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 08:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

But you see, you are not an admin. Spang handled my situation in a calm and orderly way. The statements you made towards me angered me quite a bit. I am sorry if I offended you in any way and I will try to be more careful in future posts. --TaintedCell 08:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Be nicer

Yes the article should have been deleted, but there's no need to be hostile about it. By all means, treat vandals as you would you mortal enemies, but it's ususally clear when a new user is just learning the ropes of what is acceptable and what is not, and one of the latter should be helped rather than shot down. New users can't be expected to know everything, there's quite a lot of the site and it takes time to explore and get to know it. You should try to help them even if you think what they're doing is very wrong. Biting them will just discourage potentially good uncyclopedians. If you are as nice as you say you are, how hard can it be to be like that to everyone? I'm not going to make you kiss and make up, but it's something you should keep in mind for the future. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 08:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I usually welcome new users, see User talk:Dondonz for one example...And trust me, I fully believe n00bs like Shandon and Procopius are terrific uncyclopedians, and are great for the site. I just dont get the feeling that this guy is going to contribute to anything other than the article that was deleted. Thats usually how it goes for people who create that vanity stuff. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt this time, I guess. No worries. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 18:31, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It's ok. Though not policy here, WP:GF is a good thing to keep in mind. Except if they're really obvious vandals. No worries! • Spang • ☃ • talk • 21:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Grue's Clues

You made me extremely sad when you compared my article to ED material. I thought we were friends! --em|c|! ╬ 19:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats not the way I meant it. ED just uses memes, but your article is FAR better quality than anything there. I'm not saying in any way that the article is similar to the utter shit they have at ED, its just that I don't think five spinoffs on Euroipods should be featured, for example. Its nothing personal, I just always vote against stuff too similar to an article that has already been featured. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh I get it. In that case, I want the children. --em|c|! ╬ 19:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

PLS

Hi Sir C, just so you have an idea of what I'm working on with those template questions, this is it. Just the start page of course (this will be submitted under Best Rewrite).--Shandon 20:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I like it. Original idea, and the article that exists right now is utter shit. It looks like a great idea, and best of luck in the contest. I'm going for best article with Hermaphrodite, I'm probably going to submit it today, because I'm going out of town for the next five days. What do you think of it? -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 20:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I have been sneeking peeks at it as you've been working on it, and it's a major reason why I won't be submitting anything for Best Article ;-) Have fun wherever you're going...--Shandon 20:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 20:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Oscar Wilde quotes?

I splattered Russian reversals everywhere (by the way, you know that already). Is it ok to put Oscar Wilde quotes here, there and everywhere? --Mitch 1 2 12:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, unless they are pantwettingly funny I'd say no. There are hundreds of articles that have the most pointless quotes on them, unless you think it will add comedy value to the article I'd give it a miss. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

What Mhaille said. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Vincent Verhei Entry.

Although I don't necessarily disagree with the No Redeeming Value tag, I wanted to make a minor case for the Verhei entry to survive.

Quoting the NRV page: "The key is just that some significant and appropriate group of people needs to find a page funny."

Vincent Verhei writes a column for Figure Four Weekly, one of the most popular wrestling newsletters in America and Europe. He also hosts a radio show that airs twice a week on the F4Wonline.com subscriber site. Obviously, wrestling and the analysis of it have absolutely no redeeming value in a world plagued by terror and second hand smokers. When you think about it, wrestling fans aren’t even significant and are only appropriate for detention centers or fully loaded firing squads. So, I really haven’t made a case for anything other than the immediate deletion of my entry.

Actually, as long as you expand the article a little bit, it will survive. The NRV just gives you 7 days to improve the article, or it will be deleted. So fix it up a bit, and add some more content. Once you've done that, let me know, and I'll gladly remove the NRV. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 19:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Chicks on Speed

I was wondering why User:Spang removed the NRV, when he wasn't the one who put it there. Anyway, I think it does have redeeming value, but I agree that it still needs quite a bit of work. --Falcotron 20:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I think the "significant and appropriate group" in this case would be anyone who has heard the band and who also knows tweaker chicks--which is pretty much the entire electroclash scene. Also, there should be something funny about the fact that they're a popular band who've nonetheless been chased offstage with bottles (opening for the Chili Peppers) and carried offstage by security (while headlining the Oxygena Festival), but I still have to write something more than vague references. Do I have a week from the new NRV tag? --Falcotron 20:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you still have a week. I havent heard of the band actually, so I guess I didnt really get it anyway. Also, if you plan to add much more to it, tell me, and I will change the NRV to a construction template, which tells people that you are still working on the article. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 22:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I do plan on adding more, but I think it's already somewhat funny as it is. If you want to know more about the band, check the Wikipedia page. (As for actual chicks on actual speed, if you're lucky enough not to know any, the movie "Spun," where the pictures come from, is a good source.) But still, unless you're familiar with the band (can recognize their lyrics, history, etc.), it probably still won't be all that interesting. Maybe we need someone who knows the band to judge whether the page has any value or whether it's just me being funny only to myself. --Falcotron 23:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I know I said I'd stop posting here, but you apparently didn't see where Spang threatened to ban you if you re-NRVd the page. Please read the CoS section on User talk:Tompkins. --Falcotron 20:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

East Timor / Chicks on Speed

Hey Sir Knave, I mean Sir Knight. Thanks for moving the Timor template. I didn't know I had to hide it under my bed. By the way, I thought Chicks on Speed was great. The captions alone were funny enough for mine. -- Sir Armando Perentie KUN FP 01:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, with the template, because its personal, you want to have it in your own namespace or an admin might delete it. I was just helping you out. As for Chicks on Speed, it is far too short and stupid to remain in its current state. You didnt work on that article, did you? -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 04:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Um, no, I didn't work on Chicks on Speed. I just clicked through from this page. I really like it, though. I think it's funny and original -- it made me laugh out loud twice -- and I think making it too much longer could potentially spoil it. -- Sir Armando Perentie KUN FP 02:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I think its stupid and lacks content right now, so the NRV stays until it's improved. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 02:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

You obviously don't get the joke--which makes sense, since I think it's only going to be funny to people who know of the band. But the stupid is intentional. Mixing up the band Chicks on Speed with actual chicks on actual speed isn't that funny in itself (and there are 2^60 other pages on Uncyclopedia that already do that). The joke is the idiot mis-describing "Chicks on Speed" by ranting about tweaker chicks, and yet still ending up describing the band, referencing their history, and quoting their lyrics. OK, it may not be a great joke, but it's apparently made at least two readers (that I don't know) laugh, so it's not just me. So: I agree that it could be longer (although Armando's recommendation not to do that is giving me second thoughts), and I think I could write better stupid than I did with a bit of work, but if you're waiting for it to not be stupid, that's not going to happen. -Falcotron 03:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Sir Knight, as I was asking Falcotron over on his talk page, didn't someone once say that brevity is the soul of wit? I think to make it longer for the sake of length would spoil it. There are much shorter articles around that haven't been NRVed. Not to mention great gouts of absolute garbage. I think there are plenty of bigger/smaller/stupider fish to fry. For what it's worth, any of the million or so Australians who listen to Triple J would know chicks on Speed because they flogged that stupid "We Don't Play Guitars" song for weeks -- Sir Armando Perentie KUN FP 03:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but what did that Shakespeare guy know? He was three different people, and they were all gay. Plus, I heard was an anti-semite, just like Hitler.

More seriously, though, I agree: The more I think about it, the more I think making it longer would make it less funny. I will still try to rewrite some of the lines, but if you're not going to be happy unless it's both longer and less stupid, there's nothing I can do. --Falcotron 03:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, articles this short are more often then not NRV'd until they're expanded. I'm sure you can think of more things to add. I have no trouble doing it on all my articles (save a few I made as a noob). Just think about other things you could include. Also, the page is poorly formatted. Try using headlines, quotes (not canned), categories, etc. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 04:03, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the headings suggestion; that could make it funnier, as well as longer and better-formatted. But I'm not sure more quotes are a good idea. And as for writing more in general: it's not that I can't (I usually have the opposite problem), but that in this case, expanding the existing joke would make it less funny, and adding unrelated jokes (about baby chickens on drugs or something) would just be lame. --Falcotron 04:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, I added headings and categories and links, and another quote, and rewrote and reorganized a bit. How about now? --Falcotron 04:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry dude, I still say no. WAY too short. I'll get a second opinion, but you need to add more. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 05:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I take it Spang/Tomkins (who's an admin, right?) and Armando don't count as second opinions? --Falcotron 05:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, Tompkins was never involved whatsoever. Armando is very new here. Just drop it, this is going on FAR too long. Improve the article. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 05:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Look at the page history. On 02:03, 11 August 2006, User:Spang removed the NRV tag (and made a minor edit), presumably because the extensions I'd made up to that point seemed already sufficient. Is that not the same person as Tompkins? (User talk:Spang redirects to User talk:Tompkins, and User:Tompkins redirects to User:Spang, but maybe that's some Uncyclopedia in-joke or something?) --Falcotron 05:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah its definitely a joke. Spang and Tompkins are two completely different admins. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 05:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, well one of them removed your original NRV tag--and from an earlier (and shorter) version than the one you re-added it to. I'm a bit confused as to which one has which one's talk page and so on, but User:Spang is the one that shows up on the page history. And anyway, if they're both admins, presumably whichever one it was knew what they were doing. --Falcotron 06:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to barge in like this, but I was snooping through recent changes. I checked it out and I don't see any reason to leave this NRVed if Spang took it off. Not to step on any toes, but he is an admin and all, and the article has humour. But that's just my opinion. -- Imrealized ...hmm? 06:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I already told him about that after he asked on my talk page. --Sbluen 06:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I'm a merkin, so the article can't have any humour; the best we can do is humor, which averages about 47% less win (for evidence, sed -e 's/Gervais/Carell/' dev/funny). --Falcotron 08:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I guess I'll talk to Spang about it, or VFD it, or something. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 07:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't understand why I don't have permission to un-NRV the article. You suggested a second opinion (even though we already appear to have one from Spang), you asked User:Sbluen for one, and he clearly replied that the article should not have been re-NRVd in the first place, and then said essentially the same thing here. And even if the second NRV tag was appropriate, the article has been significantly improved since the second NRV tagging, which is exactly the criteria given for self-removing an NRV tag. If you want to VFD it, go ahead, but I don't see why NRVing it a third time was appropriate.

Also, please consider that, although you're not in the "significant and appropriate group of people" that's ever going to find this article funny, no matter what is done with it--but at least two random people who've posted here do find it funny, and at least one admin thought it had redeeming value. --Falcotron 08:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

NRVing Short Articles

Not that this is relevant to anything, but in the above discussion, you said, "Actually, articles this short are more often then not NRV'd until they're expanded" (referring to Chicks on Speed, which was just under 3K when added, slightly longer when you NRVd it, and significantly longer when you re-NRVd it).

So, I looked at the last 14 pages between 2-4K added before Chicks on Speed, and not one has been NRVd yet (after 10 days). Then I looked at 6 articles from a month earlier, and again 0/6 (after 41 days). That may not be a big enough sample. And even if it is, that doesn't mean it isn't a good policy. But it at least implies that articles this short are usually not NRVd.

Maybe someone should write a script to show recent pages under a certain size, so they can be more easily checked for value, and more stubs will get found. Anyway, I thought you might want to know. --Falcotron 06:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to burst your bubble here, but thats because most articles that size have already been NRV'd and deleted...-- Sir C  Holla | CUN 07:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Good point. But then I looked at the first 9 articles between 2-4K posted on 6 August--not long enough ago to have been deleted via NRV (but still long enough ago to have been noticed). Guess what? 1/9 NRVs. --Falcotron 08:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Binball

Please justify your NRV on the Binball article. Since I didn't write this, I'm a relatively neutral party, and I think it's comedic gold. Every sentence packs a punch. It has image and expansion potential too. Alksub 06:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, it may be slightly funny, but I'm guessing it was deleted on Wikipedia for the same reason it likely will be here. It's vanity. The people mentioned in the article of are absolutely no importance, the sport was made up by these unimportant people, and it even appears to be a factual sport that these students created. Therefore, it is vanity. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 07:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree that it's comedic gold, but this is obviously not a factual sport. Also, the WP article was clearly not deleted because it was a vanity article, but because it was a joke. The WP VFD page makes that clear--as does the fact that the article was moved to BJAODN. Whatever it is, it's not vanity. --Falcotron 09:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Dude, this is my talk page, and you're not involved in this discussion. It is vanity, as it refers to students of some school nobody gives a shit about. Stop posting on my talk page completely, you're just flooding it with stupidity. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 18:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Fine, I'll post about Binball on its talk page instead of yours. And if you stop NRVing the Chicks on Speed article and insulting it in unrelated discussions, I won't post on your talk page at all anymore. --Falcotron 19:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: BUHHDA

while I agree that the article requires expanding, I don't believe it deserves an NRV, unless you would like me to change a particular part of it? -- user:cffnm47

Too many people here think that the NRV means that your article is a surefire bet to be deleted. Not true. All the NRV means is that if you work on your article and improve it, it will survive. I saw a fews things wrong with your article. First, its too listy with not enough content. Second, it looks like you tried to use a few templates that don't exist. And lastly read HTBFANJS. If you improve it, I'll remove the NRV. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 18:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

thank you for replying, I'll try to improve it over the seven days

No problem. I think it has potential, just needs a little work. Its much better than the Chicks on Speed crap you see above. Also, remember to sign you posts with four tildes.(~) Just improve it a little, let me know, and I'll gladly remove the tag. -- Sir C  Holla | CUN 18:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)