User talk:Zombiebaron/archive19

thanks again dude

Thanks again for helping with Image:MusicalAbbeyRoad.png. I'm gonna make sure you get credit when I use it in my mixtape album art. My new mixtape should be out sometime in the next few days. --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 20:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. -- The Zombiebaron 15:26, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Untitled Complaint

Why was the article Midland michiga deleted can you please put it back?!

I have not idea what you are talking about. Please speak slowly and calmly and start again. -- The Zombiebaron 03:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Loads of typos

Re: Jimmy and the Aliens and typos. The only one I saw was "he was this thing in the sky" in that there second image. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 17:25, Feb 24

Done. You sure there weren't any more? Several people on the VFH page seem to think there are typos... -- The Zombiebaron 17:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, just spotted - "they thought his was crazy" in the last pic. Can't believe I didn't spot it last time. BTW - your banstick must be quite worn down now after applying it so many times to that open proxy... Outstanding banning! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:58, Feb 25

Psh. I've still got hundreds more of open proxies to ban. Loads of fun, this manual labour. Also, thanks for the other spelly thingy. -- The Zombiebaron 14:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Zune deleted

There was no reason to delete the Zune article unless some Microsoft fanbois got pissed. Plus I was gonna put something about the zunePhone on it. SteveSims 22:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

The article was deleted as the result of a vote on VFD, and therefore, there was a reason to delete it. -- The Zombiebaron 23:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Indeed there was, But I thought I requested, incase of deletion, that I would be moved to my userpage. For the Zune is a shitbrick that needs a page albeit less listy and more coherent, which I am willing to attempt. So if you could move that piece of crap to my user page, that would be great. --Vosnul 12:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Vosnul/Zune. There you go. -- The Zombiebaron 16:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Cheers.--Vosnul 19:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Comprehending Satire Requires Familiarity With the Subject

Did you even read what I wrote about Wesley Willis before tagging it unfunny? There was hardly enough time. Frenk DelaCroix 00:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yessir. I'm what society calls "a fast reader". I've suffered all my life because of that. -- The Zombiebaron 00:54, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

If you say so. Anyway, I've deleted the tag. The shit is funny -- though maybe only for people who actually know who Wesley Willis was.Frenk DelaCroix 00:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

First off, never remove an ICU tag. This is your first and only warning. Second off, please read UN:CM and make sure that your article does not classify as vanity. Because, based on that last statement of yours, it is. -- The Zombiebaron 00:59, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

First off, the vanity policy is ignorable. Secondly, and obviously, OF COURSE I didn't know Wesley Willis personally, nor was I in any way associated with him. It's a spoof. A joke. A pretend. Do you actually know who he was? Have you listened to his music? Maybe you should consider that getting inside jokes and references to a musician's real life in a spoof require familiarity with that musician's life and creative output. Frenk DelaCroix 01:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. All these years I've been an admin at Uncyclopedia, and I thought the the vanity policy was an actual policy. You know, I acctaully thought that the "ignorable policy" template was a joke. You know "You can ignore this if you'd like. Then we'll ban you." sorta thing. But hey, I guess you must know more about Uncyclopedia and our policies then me. Also, "inside joke", or, in other words "jokes that appeal to a very small group of people", generally, do not have a large audience. Funny how that works, eh? Therefore, most people will not find those "joke" (if we're going to keep pretending your article has "jokes") funny, and will, instead, see a long unformatted block of text, that, when read, does not make most people laugh. And I'm most people. Sure, before even mentioning the word "vanity" I looked up Mr. Willis on Wikipedia. That doesn't mean the article is going to be kept. I repeat, do not remove the ICU tag. If you cannot improve it (and show me that you've improved it) in 7 days, it will be deleted. I will, however, recreate it in your userspace if it is deleted. So, chin up, chest out, get to work. -- The Zombiebaron 01:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Rawr! Must have hit pretty close to the mark to get you all riled up like that, make you stand on your years of experience. You are "most people?" Now I know what they mean about declining standards in high schools. Or is it a sign of the decline of western civilization? But anyway.

My article of course contains jokes. If you had never seen, say, "Star Wars," you wouldn't get any jokes or satire about it. (You seem very young, so it is conceivable you never saw "Star Wars." But I hope you'll still take the point.) Imagine a joke about, say, Jawas if you didn't know what Jawas were? Apply the same for the life and works of Wesley Willis, mutatis mutandis.

And you admit you didn't even know who Wesley Willis WAS before you judged my article not funny. Now you are simply defending the decision you made out of ignorance.

You don't understand references to Wesley Willis' songs because you never heard those songs. You don't understand jokes about his life because you know nothing about it. It's like a person who had never seen "Star Wars" rejecting all Jawa humor.Frenk DelaCroix 04:15, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

PS. The text is formatted just fine on my screen -- there is no "long block of unformatted text."

Oh, so we're starting out by claiming that I'm "all riled up", then moving on to claim that I "seem very young" and "never saw 'Star Wars'", are we? Look, I'm going to say this nice and painlessly, all special and simple for you, one last time. As a fully functioning member of North American society, who has not only seen Star Wars but does not find jokes about Jawas to be funny (ever), I have never heard of Wesley Willis, until today. Today, I have learned a great deal about Wesely Willis. Today, I have read a Wikipedia entry, and then gone off and found some music, which I did not like. Why, you're probably not asking yourself, would Zombiebaron do a thing like that? Well, let me tell you. Because, I am now completely convinced that the article, in its present form, makes no sense whatsoever the the vast majority of people on this Earth who have never, and probably will never, have heard of Wesley Willis. Now, I'm sure we could debate what vanity is and isn't, and I'm sure I could bring up the fact that I know quite a bit more about what vanity is and isn't from experince, but I don't think we will, lest you feel I'm using that experince to "stand on". Instead, I'm going to point out (again) that you have a chance to make the article more appealing to a wide audience, and that it will be deleted if you do not. If you put half as much commitment into writing the article as you have put into trying to convince me that I'm "riled up" and "very young", you should have no qualms with putting more effort in and making the brilliant you feel it is, shine through. In closing, I'd like to point out that on this subject, I feel that I represent "most people", while you represent "few people" (those who have heard of Wesley Willis). -- The Zombiebaron 05:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I never claimed you hadn't seen "Star Wars," I merely said it is conceivable. You certainly seemed riled up in your previous post, and, yes, you seem young. "Seem" is the operative word. Anyway.

You may well be right that I am in the minority, in that I am familiar with Wesley Willis and his music. (Of course being in a minority is not equal to being wrong. And Wesley Willis was signed on Alternative Tentacles Records, a well known if distinctly non-mainstream record label.)

But I question your assertion that an article about one admittedly obscure musician must somehow appeal to great masses of readers.

In fact, I think it is distinctly unlikely that anyone not familiar with Wesley Willis would stumble across the entry on him. Thus its probable audience is not a mass of average members of society who are unfamiliar with Wesley Willis' work (the "most people" you claim to represent). Rather it is fans of Wesley Willis who enjoy and know his music who are likely to read it. My article is designed to appeal to those fans. It is precisely as a fan that I wrote it, after searching for Wesley Willis in the Uncyclopedia and not finding him.

You don't like Wesley Willis' music and don't demonstrate a familiarity with his work. Fair enough. There's no accounting for taste. But I don't think you are in a position in which you can make informed decisions about an article concerning him. You might reasonably recuse yourself from this case. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Frenk DelaCroix (talk • contribs)

Then this has come down the that most difficult and oft-debated debated topics of "Who, exactly, is going to read the stuff I write, anyway?" has it? From my position, as the author of both several terrible (and now deleted) articles, along with a handful of article that I am proud, I would like to think that my articles (the handful of good ones, that is) are read by everyone. They are linked to on other articles. They can be found by Special:Random. I'd like to think that my article on Socratic Method appeals to everyone. Now, we both know that that would impossible. Not everything can appeal to everyone, and not everything will be read by everyone, and while we cannot, possible strive to make every article a Featured Article, we can at least strive to make everything as accesible as possible to a majority of people.

Now, coming back to the article at hand. I'm going to replace the {{ICU}} with a {{Ugly}}. This will give you 30 days to make the article conform the the established norms of encyclopedic formatting (for examples, you may wish to browse the featured articles). You'll need an image or two as part of this formatting. And links. I do agree that I may not be entirely suited to judge the humour of the article, but still feel that the article is not as good as you may feel it is. -- The Zombiebaron 06:07, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the adjustment. I will continue to work on the article. Frenk DelaCroix 06:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Well I'll be darn, I came in to enjoy this very long discussion, and it turned out that I deleted the article this morning. Whatdaya think ZB? Reinstate it? ~ 13:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Psh. Leave me out of it, Mordillo, I've recused myself of this case. -- The Zombiebaron 17:02, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

It's so obvious that you never saw star wars. ~ 17:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

You know just as well as I that they don't let people who've never seen Star Wars onto the internet. -- The Zombiebaron 19:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Encourage the n00b star!

Yay, you used my template!

This usr is Dislektic an frekwent custommer of the Teh Profredding Servuc. & pourd of it.

-- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 17:36, 21 Feb

• No problem. Hopefully I eventually finish all the articles I'm in the middle of writing, so that you fine proofreaders can proofread them. -- The Zombiebaron 19:55, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

/me hugs teh Zombiebaron... -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 20:17, 21 Feb

Just toilet you know

I will be away until the 28th... Urgent snowboarding appointment has cropped up, so I might be slacking on the poopsmith front. I have mentioned this to LJ. See you when I get back... MrN 03:33, Feb 20

Sure. Have fun. -- The Zombiebaron 03:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, Maybe...

Though I might "Wave" this one under your nose... Special:Contributions/Insignia Socky McSockins? Don't want to "NX" the process, but I'm not sure... Looks a bit fishy to me... MrN 16:48, Feb 19

I acctaully took a look at this guy's contribs last night. I'll probably request a CheckUser later today. -- The Zombiebaron 18:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

CheckUser turned up negative. I recommend vigilance, however. -- The Zombiebaron 03:37, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

See my talk page, I've been watching him for a while now. There is some resemblance between him and Uncognito which was a NXWave sock. Also, there are too many abnormalities with this guy. Like I said, take a look at my talk page. ~ 21:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Kip the Dip

An expiry time of infinite...? That's a bit harsh, no? Was he being purposely malicious or trolling? I can understand blocks for disruptive behaviour, and longer for repeating it, but... from what I can see at least, he was trying, basically, to contribute to the site. Perhaps he was doing it wrong... repeatedly... but still - is that really worthy of the dreaded permaban? May I humbly request it be shortened to a reasonable time, or at least that you allow him to appeal? Feebas factor 04:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you are, but rest assured that Kip the Dip and I have been in contant via email, and I feel confident that I have explained to him the reasons why he has been given an infinite ban. -- The Zombiebaron 15:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

More about VFD

Don't know if you had noticed, but I thought I might try to draw your attention to User:MrN9000/VFD List. I have been working through short pages, and have amassed rather a collection. Just wondered if you might care to comment as it might take quite a while to work all this lot through VFD... MrN 01:29, Feb 18

Yes I noticed. I wish you the best of luck in pushing all of those through VFD in the coming months and years :) -- The Zombiebaron 14:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Kip the Dip

<Kip> Zombiebaron isn't here?
<Dave2> GOATPIC
<TKFeck> Nope.

• Dave2 views a goatpic.
  

<TKFeck> I can take a message
<Kip> Okay, ask him what my new ban was over. I'm not whining or moaning, I just want to know what it is about. Tell me on my talk page, and you won't here from me until it expires. -- 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 00:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

• Pfft. Tell him its over the fact that, despite being warned about being a giant douchebag, and despite having been given several more chances than he deserves, he still continued to be a dick. I'd say the straw that broke the camel's back was nominating a Category for VFH. And not just any Category either... -- The Zombiebaron 20:54, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

• You may also want to tell him to email me... -- The Zombiebaron 20:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

VFD

Far be it for me, a simple user to question the doings of an admin. But I noticed that you kept a couple of articles on VFD when the vote was clearly for deleting them. Has democracy finally lost all meaning or is this another rule i've missed? (Bonner) (Talk) Feb 17, 19:35

Its not so much that you've missed a rule, but more that the VFDing community got together and decided taht too many passable articles are being deleted. VFD is not for deleting the articles that could, maybe, be better. Its for getting rid of the terrible terrible articles. Therefore, articles with more than one Keep vote, after 24 hours, without a clear majority of Delete votes, are being kept (Not everytime, mind you, as it is up to the admin doing the Keeping/Deleting). Its not a rule or anything. Its just a good idea (in my opinion). -- The Zombiebaron 20:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm I see, thanks for letting me know :) (Bonner) (Talk) Feb 17, 21:52

HDDDDD

Hi, could you add [[Category:Hitler]] to this article and on MediaWiki:Common.js, add Smethod.css for this article. Thanks!--Æ 16:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah, I can. And did. -- The Zombiebaron 16:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Class of 3000

Why'd you delete it? It was the funniest article I'd ever read.--76.84.186.222 21:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The page was deleted due to a vote on VFD. -- The Zombiebaron 00:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Let's never mention this again, eh?

--EMC ^[TALK] 20:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, the "Best Judge" prize. I'll be expecting my cheque in the mail. -- The Zombiebaron 15:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion List

As you have a deletion list which you said you'd consider deleting every article listed there, I started listing articles on there for potential deletion.--Æ 14:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather see a list of articles for potential inprovement. Looking through some of the articles listed there, a bit of formatting, a few images, and a tad of work might make them into nice little articles. I'm not against deletion where necessary, but lets not let this get out of hand. This is people's work here, and I don't think a lot of these go against the site's Deletion Policy. Can we not help people, as a community, to improve borderline articles into something better? -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Are there any articles in particular that you thought were okay? If so, I'd happily take them off my deletion list and add {{Rewrite}} instead. Still, some articles are just crap.--Æ 14:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Out of the articles that you've added I'd be tempted to delete Geordie LaForge and Homo erectus. Most of the rest has enough quality or at least potential to be turned into decent articles with little work. Of course the opinions of others may vary. :) -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

ZB, I'd like to discuss that whole concept of "deletion lists". I'm very much against individuals running personal "hit lists" that bypass VFD. I don't really see why we need those when the FFW and another vigilance week have been refused by the community over and over and again and VFD is working fine. Let's talk about it before you continue? Thanks. Brigadier Sir Mordillo GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI³ AnotM VFH +S 15:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• AE: I did not say that I would "consider deleting every article listed there". That is a misconception. Well it is named "DelList", it is more of a "Zombiebaron Will Pass Judgement On These Articles List". If that be {{ugly}}, {{expand}}, {{AAP}}, {{rewrite}}, VFD, or just deletion on sight. Originally, it was created as a space for Villahj_Ideeut to list all of the "hundreds" of self-referential pages that him and I were discussing in a private conversation. Soon after, Squiggle was complaining of the "hundreds" of crappy pages he was finding via Special:Random, and I afforded Squiggle space on the same DelList, where I pass my judgement on all the pages he listed. If you'd like to create a page to list all the pages you'd like deleted, User:Zombiebaron/DelList is not that place, it was merely a place that brought together two user's needs, and sought to solve them.
• Mordillo: The DelList, as I've just pointed out to AE, is not a "hit list", but was created, by Villahj_Ideeut (who was not signed in at the time...), and later used by Squiggle, to solve what was viewed by those of us involved at the time as a problem. I do not feel that there is any continueing use for such as list, as both problems seem to have been dealt with. If you'd still like to discuss this, and feel that my talkpage is not the place, you have my email. -- The Zombiebaron 17:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you know..

You are my idol! --84.231.37.171 13:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You are so talented! ZOMBIEBARON!<3<3 --84.231.37.171 14:30, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) -- The Zombiebaron 17:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

RE My Ban[1]

Well, I guess you will not be that surprised to find a message from me about this... First of all, I would like to say that as someone who has been around Uncyc for a while, and as someone who was voted by the Uncyc community to be a Sysop, I respect your opinion.

Obviously I also respect the importance of protecting the VFD page from people removing articles which have not been voted on, and obviously I did this by mistake. I was trying to archive Robosexual, but by error ended up cutting out The RE List [2] (which I nominated). I use quick edit, and sometimes it grabs the wrong section (I guess there is something wrong with my set-up). Obviously I should have noticed before saving, and did notice my mistake when I came to paste it into the archive page. Wondering what to do, I thought it best to put the The RE List nom back onto the VFD page.

I paste the The RE List back onto the VFD page in the place I had removed it from, and cut out Robosexual, which I then archived. Please note that my comment of "Dam Fool" was intended at myself for messing up. During this time you added Endless loop to VFD. For some reason (which I can not really explain) when I saved the page it removed your nom. I definitely did not manually edit it out, and my understanding is that had I been editing something other than the latest version it should have edit conflicted when I saved. I have no idea why it did not. When I noticed that your nom was gone, I looked through the history and was in the process of pasting it back in when you reverted my previous edit [3] and banned me for "Removing a nom on VFD that had only been voted on my one user. Me".

Your revert had the effect of removing a nom on VFD that had only been voted on by two users.

Your revert also left a copy of the Robosexual nom on the archive page and the VFD page at the same time.

As I was banned, I was not able to do anything about this, and it would appear that The RE List has now escaped VFD.

Could you explain what is going on here as I am particularly confused considering that I appear to have been banned for doing something which you did moments later. Thanks. MrN 12:26, Feb 9

• Do I have to explain it in 500 words or more? 'cause I don't think I can. To be perfectly honest, I just looked at the diff of your edit, saw you removing my nom and adding anouther nom, and decided "Hey, that's my nom!", clicked [rollback], banned you for a day, and moved on. In retrospect, I probably should have looked at, maybe, the diff before that, but, at the time, I did not. Overall, I'd say that both of us used equally poor judgement, and that each of us should review our methods so that such events as these do not happen again in the future. Also, you can always try to contact me on IRC or by email ("E-mail this user" button is in the toolbox), if you feel that any ban I have placed upon you is unjustified or poorly thoughtout. -- The Zombiebaron 18:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

That's cool. I thought I was going mad... I guess my comment of "Dam Fool" could have easily have been taken the wrong way under the circumstances... Hopefully you know me well enough to know that I'm not in the business of doing things like (deliberatively) removing noms, and I will try not to do it again by mistake... Thanks for the reply. :-) MrN 02:38, Feb 10

Like I said, these unfortunate cicumstances were the result of our mutual mistakes. It is human to err. I feel that we should both learn from our mistakes, and them smile and move on. Keep up the good work as a Poopsmith, by the way :) -- The Zombiebaron 02:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Regards to my Boyle's Vengeance

You've just deleted one of my new article on Boyle's Vengeance. Yes its new but its been revised a few times and its done. No doubt Boyle's Vengeance is pure parody to EA's attempt on expansion sets in various games. In addition, before that user:MrN9000 even agreed with me and was happy to remove the ICU. He said "It does look like it has the makings of a good article, but I still think it needs more work." In addition, I've contacted User:Madmax and he suggested that I should ask you on this issue. I believe you should be kind enough to revive this article and let me try to pimp it up and make it one of another's C&C parody. Thanks. – Preceding unsigned comment added by ASHPD (talk • contribs)

I think you misunderstood MadMax. When MadMax recreated you page in your userspace, he meant for you to make it better there, before contacting me and asking if you could move it to the mainspace. Basically, its the same tripe that I deleted still. Please acctaully try to make it better. Some things to keep in mind are: how long it takes to get to a punchline, formatting, images, and overall presentation. -- The Zombiebaron 04:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok after remodifying and pimpin' this article up, which took since just now all the way until now, I feel it is ready to be moved to the mainspace. I hope its acceptable and it'll be great that this article is part of the C&C uncyclopedia family again. I may need suggestions of improvements as well. Thanks.--ASHPD 10:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC) umm... you there?--ASHPD 00:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am here. The pages is still formatted terribly. Its very hard on the eyes. Please use the pages on Uncyclopedia:Best of as a guide for what looks good. -- The Zombiebaron 01:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Mind to explain on 'still formatted terribly'? I've done research and everything, change everything to make it good and funny. Even user:Madmax helped to do some cleanups on the page. I really really don't get it why you hate it so much and deemed this article condemned and refuse to merge this with the C&C uncyclopedia family.--ASHPD 02:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Let me say this clearly. It has too many images, that do not add anything to the article. It has too many boxes that add nothing. It has too much text that isn't funny. Overall, it does not look much like an encyclopedic article, and, therefore, it will either be placed on {{ICU}} or QVFD upon its creation, if not by me, than by anouther user. Please look at some randomly selected featured content for examples of good formatting and content. I also suggest the HTBFANJS and BGBU pages. -- The Zombiebaron 02:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletions list

LO AND BEHOLD: 100 MORE SUGGESTED DELETIONS.

Because of that I'm going to be exhausted by second period tomorrow, but it was well worth it. -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 08:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

You are more amazing than cream cheese. I'd give you some kind of award, but, seriously, I believe that the best award of all is just hearing Zombiebaron compare you to a dairy product. And there you have it. -- The Zombiebaron 15:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Uh, not to be a whiny baby

re: peter pantheism

Explain please. Is there not a myriad of articles much more stupid and much less funny? Not to mention less time and effort involved? – Preceding unsigned comment added by Coelispex (talk • contribs)

How very apt that you would bring up the "more stupid and much less funny article...[that had] less time and effort involved", as that issue is one currently being discussed by the community at large. I urge you to not only read HTBFANJS to help you with your future articles, and to nominate all articles that you find "more stupid and much less funny" for deletion. -- The Zombiebaron 03:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Dude I get it ok. HTBFANJS is fucking stupid. Humor is a matter of taste and OPINION, and if you want to argue that point I don't really care. Not everybody likes every article, and my point is, the article wasn't SHITTY, even if YOU didn't find it funny. My second article I wrote was featured, and is IMHO much less thoughtful/creative/insightful than Peter Pantheism. But as I said, you don't really have any criticism of my style other than "it's terrible." But whatever. If referencing religion, philosophy, science, etc and satirizing all three by saying the universe is essentially one big dick isn't funny, then thank you for proving it true by being such a dick about it, therefore proving it TRUE, and in that case, unsuitable for uncyclopenisdia. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Coelispex (talk • contribs)

Yes, I do agree that humour is a matter of opinion. You, however, seem to have written opinion in all caps, while ignoring mine. My opinion, as an Uncyclopedia user since September 2005 and an admin since January 2007 (In which time I have seen, literally, millions of crappy articles that have been deleted), is not an ill-informed one. I can say that not only did Peter Panteism (Which I read in full) not make me laugh once, but it also was one large, elaborate, penis joke. And when I say "elaborate", I do not mean that it was well built, like an elaborate building. No. I mean that it was tedious and took far too long getting to a point that wasn't worthy of the lengths to which it was enforced. That's my opinion. Feel free to have your own. On another note, I have recreated the article in your namespace, so that you might work on it until it is no longer tedious and unfunny. I encourage you to seek out the opinions of others as you work on it within your namespace. -- The Zombiebaron 03:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Why did you delete peter pantheism

why – Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.60.28.26 (talk • contribs)

Because it was terrible and not funny. -- The Zombiebaron 03:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Who the hell cares I'll just upload it from the word file I wrote it in in a few days when you're not looking and there is a more intelligent less callous individual deciding which pages to huff. If you're that obsessed with winning or deleting "terrible" articles, I can come up with a list that will make you understand banality. – Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.60.28.26 (talk • contribs)

Please list articles at User:Zombiebaron/DelList. I will seriously cosider deleting every article that you add. If you reupload Peter Pantheism again, you will be banned. You should also give VFD a shot for all these crappy article you know about. -- The Zombiebaron 03:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Feedback

I am wondering why you had feedback deleted I was checking on QVFD to see who placed it there and ask but it wasn't added there so I am wondering why it got deleted. I was keeping that page upto date and keeping up with the Feedback flow of that page. I know it couldn't been ICUed as it was well more than a week old. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 ^{( yell | FAQ | I did this )} 06:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I found that delete list of your's. I cannot tell if that IP that posted there was you or not. Anyway What do you think feedback should be about. I had considered making into a page with that very annoying feedback sound, or adding it to the page itself as an Audio version of that page. Anyway feedback was also one of my favorite pages and I felt a little upset when it died without going to VFD first. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 ^{( yell | FAQ | I did this )} 06:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Look. First off, that deletion list was created by User:Villahj_Ideeut (Who was not signed in at the time...), as the product of a private discussion that me and him had concerning articles whoes only joke is their name. Image:Feedback.jpg is still there, so I could create User:Sawblade5/Feedback, if you'd like. However, I don't feel that neitehr VFD, QVFD, nor ICU are the correct places for articles who just say "Hey, if you can read the title, you already know what the joke is, because it took me 2 minutes to write this." That's not, in my opinion, a good article. Perhaps, if you could invest sometime, come up with a funny concept for Feedback, possibly more than just a picture maybe, you could still include Image:Feedback.jpg somewhere on the page. -- The Zombiebaron 14:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you goahead and move it to my name space. Lets see what I can do to improve it. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 ^{( yell | FAQ | I did this )} 06:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Mygeeto

Why did you huff my fricking page? Would you guys please stop doing that? Let me finish it first. I am not doing anything wrong, or anything that warrants a huffing. I thought the purpose of Uncyclopedia was to no be serious and content free. – Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.160.78 (talk • contribs)

No, and yes. -- The Zombiebaron 19:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Then what did I do wrong? Would it be better if I completely lied about Mygeeto? HTBFANJS says it's better to be closer to the truth. – Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.160.78 (talk • contribs)

I have no idea what you're talking about. -- The Zombiebaron 19:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

So, you are huffing pages and you haven't even read How to be funny and not just stupid? Wow, that's messed up, man. – Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.160.78 (talk • contribs)

Okay, now you've lost me. I'm whating pages? Reading? Internet? Please explain. -- The Zombiebaron 20:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, nevermind then. I obviously can't talk to you. – Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.208.160.78 (talk • contribs)

Never mind is two words. Now who can't talk to who. Damn illiterates. Who the hell lets all these people onto the internet anyway? -- The Zombiebaron 20:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Just for info

There does not now appear to be mention of the Poopsmith's Lounge on the VFD page. MrN 03:54, Feb 2

Should it? We have just opened the flood gates, havn't we? I mean, things havn't really sped up at all or anything, but one can only assume that they will, rendering the Lounge useless. However, if you think we should keep mention of it, I can add something back in for this month (We'll need to rework the rules at the end of VHM, once we've decided how we like the 20-ATR) -- The Zombiebaron 04:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Well the Poopsmith's Lounge page is there, and it would be a shame not to advertise it? I'm not sure we have opened the flood gates, but we can see what happens (this time) I guess. MrN 04:28, Feb 2

I'm adding it as we speak (or as I speak. Type, really), so as not to bias this little experiment you all are doing. -- The Zombiebaron 04:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Need help undoing page moves

Hullo there. Sorry to bother, but it appears Micahthemonkey has made a general mess of things moving User:LordKaT around to two or three other pages. Now, I'd just revert the moves, but he also edited the pages with the redirects. Any chance you can huff the redirects and restore the history of the original page to its proper place? Last time I checked it was at User:Lord Kat, but I'm not sure. It's like trying to play that game with the guy and the cups shifting around. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 03:15 Feb 02, 2008

Oh god what a mess. I think I cleaned it all up though. -- The Zombiebaron 04:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks s'much. Page move vandals make me itch. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 05:17 Feb 02, 2008

UDHR

Can't see why you deleted my entry on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was intended to be funnily nonsense. Or maybe, you work for them... :) 90.133.73.15 23:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes. It is a vast conspiracy. You are only now starting to see the truth. Your next clue is "Blue Chocolate Chip Dawn". You'll know what to do. -- The Zombiebaron 23:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The first half of the question was serious: it was my first entry in the Uncyclopedia, and it got deleted. Why? Tnx. 90.133.73.15 23:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted as part of the vast global conspiracy to keep the truth about Human Right a secret. Like I said before, you're onto something, but I cannot be your Deepthroat. Sorry. -- The Zombiebaron 23:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I see. – Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.133.73.15 (talk • contribs)

Just wondering

How one goes about becoming a poopsmith? I know we have Ljlego who does a fine job, but I wondered if I might lodge an application for the post of additional poopsmith (second class perhaps)? I'm happy to do the moving of deleted articles to the archive pages...

Don't know what your thoughts are on this one, let me know? MrN 23:10, Feb 1

Alright. You're a poopsmith. If you slack off, we'll feed you to the...something something. Yeah. The Dreaded Something Something Of Doom! So watch out! -- The Zombiebaron 23:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Cool! Well, I feel all mucky about the whole thing! Can I start now? I fear the dreaded ban! That Something Something sounds rather nasty also... Would you make the changes to the VFD page so that the other bastards fine chaps don't ban me when I start removing stuff from VFD? MrN 23:23, Feb 1

You actaully hit submit at the same time that I hit preview. But yeah. You can start whenever you like. -- The Zombiebaron 23:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

H3lp!

I'm starting a completely random article (How 'bout a shave?) and I need someone to come up with some more randomness. THX! ----Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 21:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and merry error-mas!

• Despite what you may or may not have heard about me, I'm not the person you want to help you with articles. I write very very slowly. The article that I'm currently writing, I've been writing since April 2007. So yeah. You should probably go ask someone else. -- The Zombiebaron 22:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Updates on HDDDDD

L and Kip are so far the only dissenters. Skullthump nominated the article for VFD [4] under the logic that any awesome stub needs to be nom'd at VFH and VFD at the same time. Purely tactical move; it always happens anyway. A forum topic is expected to start soon. Anyway, I'll keep you posted on all the sultry details. -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 05:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, people need to be dragged along these days. You gotta remind 'em of all the steps. VFH. VFD. Village Dump. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 05:04 Jan 30, 2008

Ha ha ha ha. -- The Zombiebaron 14:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

VFH

Hi. There isn't an article queued for today, and since I see you're the admin currently online, could you queue an article? Thanks --Æ 18:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure, just a minute. -- The Zombiebaron 18:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)