User talk:Zombiebaron/archive17

Apology

I am not trying to contest the validity of my block, which has by now obviously expired. I just want to apologize for several things:

1. I am sorry I failed to check that this was a real user with contributions.
2. I am sorry I made false accusations of cyberbullying (which, admittedly, is nearly as bad as actual cyberbullying).
3. I am sorry I forgot, for the second time, that somebody else's userpages are never eligible for VFD.

The problem was that somebody originally nominated the page at QVFD, where it would probably also have been rejected, and so I hastily took excessively drastic action.

I promise that this will never happen again. Please don't hold this against me _{any more than is necessary}. Thank you very much.

P.S. For future reference, what should I do if I encounter this kind of QVFD nomination?

--Pentium5dot1 08:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, no worries. I understand that you did what you did with the best intentions at heart, and I only blocked you in order to get the message across with a little extra zing. I'm glad that you learned your lesson. In future, if someone lists anouther user's userpage on QVFD, nominate them for Ban Patrol. -- The Zombiebaron 23:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I warned the user responsible for the QVFD nomination. What other action is necessary? Pentium5dot1 00:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

This matter, as I see it, is over. Also, please never dole out ban warnings. -- The Zombiebaron 02:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, it was not originally written as a ban warning. I have re-redacted the message accordingly. _{Sorry for wasting your time...?}Pentium5dot1 03:57, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful. -- The Zombiebaron 04:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Silent Huff

Could you, someone with an account, begin deletion procedures for Silent Hill 5? It's remarkably horrible, reads almost like the original Wikipedia article, and has no potential for improvement until the game itself is out. --24.4.220.172 03:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. In future, please use VFD. Yes, even IPs can use VFD. -- The Zombiebaron 03:29, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought VFD was semi-protected... – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 03:44 Dec 14, 2007

Well yes, that's a valid point. -- The Zombiebaron 03:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Image Request

I have a hankering to archive off the completed image requests, any problem with me so doing? --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 10:34, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Done. Also, good job keeping up with all of those, eh? -- The Zombiebaron 17:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I was going to do it myself - I don't like creating work for others. Thanks ZB! Let's see, I've already given you a UU Star, how does cake work with the Undead digestion processes? --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 20:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Under User has blessed you with cake for being friendly and/or useful. Eat it quickly before he changes his mind. Warning: cake prepared in an environment which also processes nuts, and contains lactose, gluten, ground glass and arsenic, which gives it a lovely tang.

That's one strange looking cake... -- The Zombiebaron 22:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Ban Patrol

Fair point, well made. I was in the zone a bit, but needed to slope off, so wasn't going to keep track of that IP, and figured it's better to bung something on Ban Patrol that's not needed than not bung it up and have somthing slip through the cracks. Anyway, as you say, it seems to have stopped. Perhaps his medication kicked in... Tatty byes! --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 23:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I realize that you were only doing your best to help out, and I appreciate that. In the future, however, please keep what I said in mind. -- The Zombiebaron 00:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Untitled Message II

Please remove my name off the system please but don't ban my IP as I am planning to not be a user thanks

I cannot "remove" names off "the system". In fact, I doubt that anybody can. -- The Zombiebaron 19:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Untitled Message

Dear zombiebaron, I am just asking what was wrong with my end of the world article called "Last day" as it is funny and I didn't use any personal names. Why?

It was very short, you signed it, and it was nominated for QVFD, and I didn't find it funny. -- The Zombiebaron 19:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

KK Sorry I also did a copy of the page on another page as I thought a random user deleted it until I realised that you were an administrator so I deleted it too. My report was not funny but I am usually more funny than this. The page was just haste to add my own site. Don't worry the next one WILL be funny that it will crush your ribs! You've been warned!

Thanks for the warning. -- The Zombiebaron 19:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Informal sockpuppetry check

From IRC:

[3:50pm] Ggarfield: Hinoa, I could use a favor.  Zombiebaron has blocked JustusThane on the basis 
                    that he's my sock puppet, and now he's made at me because he wanted to proofread 
                    articles.
[3:50pm] Mordillo: LordKat, whatever it is you're on, I want some...!
[3:50pm] JustusThane left the chat room. (Remote closed the connection)
<stuff edited out>
[3:51pm] Hinoa: You mean, the guy who just left?

Which got me to thinking. I did a whois/whowas check on both of them. The IPs don't match--I'll PM you the results over IRC after I get home from work tonight (if you're still on then).

While I think it's still kind of a dickish move to have most of their early edits to NotM, I still don't think that Justus is a sockpuppet of Garfield. But since a.) it's your ban, b.) I'm a lazy ass and have to go to work, I'll let you work it out. —Hinoa talk.kun 21:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Alright, so here's my reasoning on why they are sockpuppets. I'd define a sockpuppet as "A user who's edits are designed only to benefit anouther user, or to push the agenda of anouther user, regardless of who creates either account". That includes, as I believe the case is here, JustusThane and Stfuyou, who, as Ggarfield has said, are his friends, who created accounts souly for the purpose of voting for Ggarfield on NotM, and for an article Ggarfield wrote that is currently on VFH. I'll also point out that I've explained all of this to Ggarfield on IRC, aswell as having said something along these lines on BP, and I have no idea why Ggarfield still doesn't seem to understand. However, I'd be willing to unblock either of the two of Ggarfield's friends if I was approached and told that they want to make actaul contributions to the site. -- The Zombiebaron 21:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

NotM

You striked out Stfuyou and JustusThane votes for being semi-sockpuppets of Ggarfield. MaddMax and Chicken Chaser are also semi-sockpuppets of Ggarfield but there votes weren't struck out. So, I ask that you strike out there votes as well because they are also semi-sockpuppets. Thank you--Æ 18:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

No. First off, when I asked Ggarfield if Chicken Chaser was known to him outside of Uncyclopedia in the way that JustusThane and Stfuyou are, he said no, and I'm inclinded to take his word for it. On the other hand, MaddMax, while a friend of Ggarfield's, is also a contributing member, and while his vote may or may not have been infulenced by his existing relationship with Ggarfield, that's not grounds for his vote to be striken. -- The Zombiebaron 21:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Finnius requests your attention for a PM in IRC please (very hush hush)

• I signed on as soon as I got this (about 5 mintues ago), and you weren't there. I guess I'll swing by later. -- The Zombiebaron 19:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Article restoration for personal purposes

If you don't mind, I'd like to take a look at the material in the article Belldandy, since I helped write it, and I'd like to use the material in said article in other pages, if you don't mind. You also don't mind if I move said page to my userspace, do you? Rickyrab 06:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

By Belldandy I think I mean the first version, the one you huffed, not the revival version, although I'd need to check both versions to make sure of that. Rickyrab 06:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

And the article Asherah too. Rickyrab 06:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Them's back. -- The Zombiebaron 09:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Article restoration

If it's not too much trouble, Zombiebaron, could you restore Griffin (the most recently deleted version)? I am planning an article called Compulsive Linking Disorder, and Griffin was a perfect example of it. I'll move it to my userspace and directly incorporate it into my article, so you won't have to re-delete it when I'm done. Much obliged, --Hans Johnson as in "keep ya hans off my" ^{(cover your eyes!)} 23:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

There you go. -- The Zombiebaron 23:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. --Hans Johnson as in "keep ya hans off my" ^{(cover your eyes!)} 23:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It's that time of year

Rabbi Techno presents you with One Imperial Gallon of Lamp Oil! Should see you through the next week or so without having to resort to any supernatural shenanigans. Happy Hanukkah!

Right back atyah. But without a template. -- The Zombiebaron 20:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

UNLIMITED POWER

Thank you muchly For allowing me access to UNLIMITED power I shall now fulfill my destiny October 25 17:37 Mordillo (Talk) blocked Mordillo (Talk) (Infinite) (Clear off!).

And may our world domination arrive sooner rather than later!

~ 16:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Now all we need is to build a giant jewish robot, that will follow all instructions to the letter. -- The Zombiebaron 20:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Dinosauron?

What was wrong with "Dinosauron"? Was it just not funny? I thought it was funny ... :( Did I break some rule that I should know about, but don't?

You may want to read HTBFANJS. -- The Zombiebaron 02:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Pod People article

What the heck? You deleted my Pod People article even though if you actually look at the review, it is really funny. --Dark Paladin X 22:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather not argue with you, so there you go, its restored. Have a nice day. -- The Zombiebaron 23:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for not making myself clear at VFD

Concerning Uncyclopedia:Pages for deletion/archive107#666: The situation was that after the page's original deletion, I created a redirect to the first section of the Uncyclopedia Timeline per the conventions used with certain other numeric titles not qualified by the word "number" (which are treated as years). This redirect was promptly deleted by Tom mayfair, apparently because he didn't have the same impression about how the timeline was used. I made an undeletion request which was successful, and since the VFD discussion was still technically active at that point, I made a few comments to explain the status. Finally, you re-deleted the redirect on the apparent grounds that the VFD discussion had been closed as delete. I am not sure whether you were aware of all the discussion concerning redirection, so I am requesting undeletion of the redirect. Pentium5dot1 18:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

You realize that you can recreate the redirect, right? -- The Zombiebaron 19:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Mind take a look?

Heya ZB, can you take a look at Ggarfield? The gentlemen is creating a whole range of templates placing them all over the place, acting as pseudo-maintenance, user awards etc...Some requests to use the more conform methods got ignored. Might you judge if I'm being too harsh or he is in fact creating an unnecessary clatter? Thanks. ~ 16:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I've banned him for a week. Those templates were terrible. I mean, most templates are pretty bad. But those ones were worse. -- The Zombiebaron 16:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

/me gulps. I know you hate templates, I didn't know you hated templates that bad...~ 16:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

/me pops in god DAYUM you hate templates   Le Cejak • <-> Dec 2, 16:20

/me smacks Cajek I told you to never EVER pop up behind me! ~ 16:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

/me squeeks pathetically but... but I... *SNIFFLE*   Le Cejak • <-> Dec 2, 16:34

/me has nothing to do with this discussion. I wanna play too! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 19:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Coo, ta!

Ta ever so! Under User's image factory thanks you for recognising their contribution to Uncyclopedia's potatochopping community. Pay peanuts, get... Under User's image factory!

Thanks for the vote in this stiffly-contested arena! --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 18:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you mean "Reel me in, Captain!". -- The Zombiebaron 01:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, there is a theory of linguistics which holds that the true meaning of a text is what the reader interprets it as, rather than what the writer intended. So sure, that's what I meant! I don't get it. Must be undead humour or something. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 10:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, well, well. Look who's the "writer" and who's the "reader" all of a sudden. -- The Zombiebaron 14:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey

IRC

Hold on, I just gotta finish the awards. -- The Zombiebaron 18:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Jimmie Johnson

Why did you huff my article about 2007 NASCAR Nextel Cup champion Jimmie Johnson? I just started working on it and it took me a while to write all of that. User:Slavemaster2 3:25 PM 28 November 2007

I restored the page. Please make it funny, or it will be deleted. -- The Zombiebaron 14:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Lisa Burke

Dude, did you delete my Lisa Burke article? Blackhawk 16:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. -- The Zombiebaron 16:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'd be honoured if you'd do the same for my Nina Hossain article? Blackhawk

Sure. -- The Zombiebaron 00:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You miss the point

The point wasn't that it wasn't doing well on VFP, the point wasn't your vote was against it (heck, I have voted against something more times than I can shake a stick at) but that I found the after comment "mean" for lack of better words. If you would have said "per..." or "... said it all" but the manner in which you stated it was hurtful. I know you didn't mean it that way, but it came across that way. Maybe the fact that that your vote against it was so certain that it was anticipated by another voter. Anyway, I am out of the image business; the fun of creating them for this site has gone out of it. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 18:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I can see how you would read my comment as "mean", and for that I am sorry. If you look through VFPs of the past, however, you will come across the fact that I have only on very few occasions voted for images where the main focus of the humour was/is based around text. In my opinion, VFP should be a place for imagery, not text. That's why I vote the way I do on VFP. It has nothing to do with who makes the image. In that vein, I am very sorry to hear you say that you will be giving up images. While we may not have seen eye to eye on all of your images (Wow, I can't believe that was over a year ago...), your skills as a potatochopstress will be missed. I do hope that you reconsider your decision. -- The Zombiebaron 22:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Your response is most graciously appreciated. And yes, we've tangled before - I have always respected you, but have feared your pointed tongue. You are the bigger person in all of this - thats the problem with getting things of your chest, it is "me" that looks like the boob. I just sometimes feel as if - everyone (including me) around here sometimes forgets that there is a human behind what we contribute. When there is no human interaction, you get to feel as if you are an island instead of one of the castaways. I need to go and sulk in my cave of solitude, some self imposed exile is always good for rehabbing the reputation. I need to be back to bubbly self in time for the judgeing in the forthcoming contest. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 01:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I love how you were able to string your chest and the word "boob" together so effortlessly. I, however, disagree. The real secret of why some people have been active at Uncyclopedia for so long is the people. Sure, there are all kinds of people who use Uncyclopedia, and each of us have different feeling for all of them, in most cases never having acctaully shaken the hand of a single one. If you're feeling like one of a hundred billion castaways lost at sea, that's gotta be a real drain on the old moral. If you have the technology, come on IRC sometime, and engage in silly banter about the life of a user you've never heard of. And if you don't have the technology, you may want to close your eyes and picture 56 men of varying age in a room together. It's basically the same thing. -- The Zombiebaron 02:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Dude

Nice work on Socratic Method, but why was this article so short? Is it because short-and-to-the-point is more pleasurable to read? Is it because short-and-to-the-point doesn't exhaust the reader's mind? Is it because you are short? Is it because some appendage of yours is short? Can you guess what appendage I'm talking about? Are you thoroughly irritated by this crap now? Lol.

Really though, good job. I laughed...and then I had a hemlock smoothie.--PericlesofAthens 06:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, and you're welcome. -- The Zombiebaron 14:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Inciclopedia

Can you comment about this article? Please.--K-Gamer_B29 | ^Discussion | Station Square 21:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm sorry. My contract doesn't cover that. -- The Zombiebaron 21:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, ok, Will you receive any dollar for your comment? I'm poor. xD--K-Gamer_B29 | ^Discussion | Station Square 23:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

That article is short, and contains very little jokes. -- The Zombiebaron 19:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

WTF?

I can't even talk to you on IRC, because Im banned there too.. What is your prooblem with me? Sorry, I LIKED you!!! -Zana 67.188.165.115 00:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's looking at you kid. -- The Zombiebaron 00:37, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Zana

Well I had Zana PMing me on IRC about me trying to get you to stop your "anti Zana campaign" I haven't a clue what all this is about and I gather that she wants an unban. She says she " just wants to write funny articles". I don't really know what the deal is really, so i'm just relaying what she said. The decision is up to you. (Bonner) (Talk) Nov 21, 17:29

Ha ha ha. Nope. Thanks for relying the message though. -- The Zombiebaron 14:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Ban

Can you give User:ChuckNorris1337 a timeout? Elassint Throw things at me 02:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we have a page for that. -- 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 02:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

That, and the fact that Tommy's already banned him. -- The Zombiebaron 02:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

Hey man, i totally get why you huffed the spainwatching page, but my editing of the Richard Hammond page disappeared within a few seconds of my saving it. It may not have been you deleting it and I'm new to this but I was pretty proud of that edit an'all.

Anyway, I'm not a registered user so I don't know how the hell you're meant to get back to me. But hell, if you did delete my edit and are feeling guilty about it you could always put it back..

safe 81.137.248.203 21:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Sammy D81.137.248.203 21:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Zombiebaron zombiebaron, zombiebaron zombiebaron zombiebaron zombiebaron? -- The Zombiebaron 21:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The reason for the deletion of your edit to Richard Hammond, Sammy D, is because of the fact that you deleted the previous article that was already there. That is my reason for reverting your edit of it. -Razorflame (contributions) Talk 21:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Semi-Protection of my Articles

Could I get semi-protection on my talk page, my user page, and all my articles please? Just make it so IP addresses can't edit them because they suck at editing. Please do this for me?

Thanks, Could I get semi-protection on my talk page, my user page, and all my articles please? Just make it so IP addresses can't edit them because they suck at editing. Please do this for me?

Thanks, -Razorflame (contributions) Talk 20:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the semi-protection Zombie :)-Razorflame (contributions) Talk 20:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Here are the articles that need semi-protection:

• UnNews:Kid's DS is Stolen
• UnNews:Cheney gets attacked by Quails
• UnNews:Bush had Sex and Didn't Realize it
• UnNews:Chile Caught Smuggling Chili Powder
• Most Haunted

-Razorflame (contributions) Talk 20:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I did your userpage and talkpage, but I'm afraid that I'm not going to semi-protect "all [your] articles", unless you can show me a repeated history of vandalization to "all [your] articles". -- The Zombiebaron 20:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing...thanks though :)-Razorflame (contributions) Talk 21:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC) And sorry for the edit confliction.

Ah, no problem buddy. -- The Zombiebaron 21:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The Cheat image

Made a rewrite of this article. Got a decent Pee Review, but one of the criticising points was the lack of decent images. Hence, I'm gonna bother you about it. You have a choice between a The Cheat-powered something (bicycle, car, cannon, etc.) or someone protesting The Cheat poachers cruelly using The Cheats to power things. Or both at the same time. Just get it done, eh? Ж Kalir _{where's my house?} 00:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I should have time in the near future. If its not done in a week, bug me on IRC. -- The Zombiebaron 01:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Both images, and in record time. -- The Zombiebaron 15:36, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Deleting My Talk Page

Hey, just wondering why you felt it necessary to huff my talk page? I understand deleting my article, it was shit, but why my talk? – Preceding unsigned comment added by ReviewDude (talk • contribs)

It turns out that your talkpage was marked with {{construction}}, and was, thus, deleted after seven days of not being edited. I have recreated it, reverted that silly welcome message, and removed the Category. In the future, please keep this incident in mind, and keep your pages off the maintenance list. -- The Zombiebaron 00:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, apologies for that. I don't remember adding that tag, however thanks for recreating!

Edit: It seems like that tag was added by another user, what does nettiquette say about deleting it? I know it's trivial, I just don't want someone getting all uptight about it ReviewDude 01:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Its your talkpage, do as you wish. -- The Zombiebaron 15:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)