User talk:Zombiebaron/archive38

You winner

	Potatochopper of the Month July 2011

~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 07:15, August 1, 2011 (UTC)

Cartesian Duality

Any chance of removing the FFW tag from this? I think it's funny (though I did write it), just chance I passed through Uncyclopedia this week. Anyway, any particular reason that you tagged it? --129.234.252.65 11:08, August 2, 2011 (UTC)

The article is very short and random. If you would like to save it from FFW I urge you to sign up for an account, then tell me what that account is, so I can move it to your userspace. -- The Zombiebaron 17:55, August 2, 2011 (UTC)

It's not random, it's based on a pun: Carte d'or ice cream, and Cartesian (as in Renee Descartes). --129.234.252.66 11:17, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

Do you look at the stuff you burn?

Just wondering. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 18:44, 2 August 2011

Of course I do don't be silly. -- The Zombiebaron 18:59, August 2, 2011 (UTC)

You must have super zombie vision or something. Carry on the good work. ;) —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 19:09, 2 August 2011

He huffed one of my best articles (well not my, it was a collab with Kevillips). But still. -- Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 20:07, 4 August 2011

Are you requesting that I recreate your page in userspace, Lollipop? -- The Zombiebaron 20:12, August 4, 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Then I will move it back when the time is right, and the sky is dim. -- Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 20:52, 4 August 2011

Ok, here is your article. -- The Zombiebaron 21:04, August 4, 2011 (UTC)

WTF?

I am banned from #uncyclopedia and LYRITHYA SAYZ YOU DID IT!! WHY?! THIS IS TYRANNY!!!! ^{→ (Der_Führerbunker--Wehrmacht Factories)} 13:42, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

Well if you recall a few days ago you were being a huge nuisance on IRC. That was when you got banned. I will unban you if you promise to behave yourself, although using all-caps to ask me why you were banned does not bode well. -- The Zombiebaron 14:17, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

-Sigh- Fine, promise. Do I get a lollipop now? ^{→ (Der_Führerbunker--Wehrmacht Factories)} 15:22, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

You have been unbanned on IRC. -- The Zombiebaron 15:46, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

Yarr

There be a page that was huffed for being thy work in thee progress. Yarr...it makes the great captain Blackbeard feel embarrased. You may restore it to me userspace, or you shall walk the plank! Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum. -- Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 14:24, 6 August 2011

Your page is here now. -- The Zombiebaron 14:34, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! - 15:28, 6 August 2011

You're welcome. -- The Zombiebaron 15:45, August 6, 2011 (UTC)

FFW Tag

You had tagged a certain section of the Uncyclopedia Timeline, which I disputed. Therefore, I removed the tag, because you seemed to have permitted other users to remove tags you had put if they found said article funny. Now, you seem to have tagged the page again, saying that it's against the rules for users to remove tags without consulting the tagger. I honestly thought I was free to remove any tags you had put because you yourself had said "if it's funny, feel free to remove the tag" in your case. So, have you changed your mind about that or something? Should we take this to VFD? --Scofield & The Machine 09:05, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

I never said that everyone was allowed to remove my tags with consulting me. I feel that the page in question should have remained FFW tagged. If you disagree please feel free to bring this matter to VFD. -- The Zombiebaron 09:08, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

Fabulous!

While I totally agree with the template's vigilant deletion when looking at the most recent revision, I'm less sure when looking at an older revision. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 21:36, 7 August 2011

Still looks very useless to me. -- The Zombiebaron 21:43, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

Not every template needs to be navigational or maintenance-related, you know. Some are just for adding a little extra laugh to the article. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 21:58, 7 August 2011

Are you getting mad at me for deleting a shitty template? -- The Zombiebaron 00:46, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Mad? Why do people always assume I get mad? The way you make it sound is like any template that tells something about an article's topic is shitty. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 02:07, 8 August 2011

I'm not talking about "any template", I'm talking about just one template. -- The Zombiebaron 03:38, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Per your response

I have taken the article in question to VFD. --Scofield & The Machine 12:44, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Ok. -- The Zombiebaron 13:53, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Singapore Armed Forces

Why is the article nominated for Forest Fire Week and to be huffed. Nothing wrong so far; I have improve it. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Aielen (talk • contribs)

If you are currently working on improving the page I suggest you move it to your userspace. -- The Zombiebaron 16:06, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

How do I do so and why is the page flagged? – Preceding unsigned comment added by Aielen (talk • contribs)

Ok I have moved the page here for you. It was tagged because it is poorly formatted. -- The Zombiebaron 18:27, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand what's wrong with it. I'm new and only will update the cotent, not the format. So sad you have removed it from the main page. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Aielen (talk • contribs)

Ok. -- The Zombiebaron 20:32, August 13, 2011 (UTC)

Category:This is not a Category

Mr Zombiebaron, could you please resurrect that category please? Thank you. --ShabiDOO 16:25, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Why? -- The Zombiebaron 16:28, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Because that was one of the funny parts of the article "This is not an article". Thanks :) --ShabiDOO 11:05, August 10, 2011 (UTC)

Ok I recreated it. -- The Zombiebaron 19:26, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, Hi

Just curious why my article Dethcentrik was deleted. If I could know how to improve the article, and could I please be given it as a userspace page as so I may re-write it well? --WhoAmAreYou 22:47, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

The reason your article was deleted is because it isn't really very funny. Perhaps it is to somebody who is a fan of Dethcentrik, which the vast majority of the world are not. I have moved your page here so that you can work on it. -- The Zombiebaron 22:54, August 8, 2011 (UTC)

Hello Cube

I'd like to know why you burned the old Minecraft article it was really good and didn't deserve deletion. It was by far one of the best articles on uncyc and much better than the new one that surely |deserved burning more than the |Minecraft you burned so could you restore it to userspace so it can be saved. please.User:Billgates2

Ok I have moved the page here. -- The Zombiebaron 18:30, August 9, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Zombiebaron your a credit to all uncyclopedians who play Minecraft--Billgates2 00:06, August 10, 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- The Zombiebaron 19:28, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

The Big Crunch

Thank you very much for the vote. Because of Dark Matter you have nothing to fear. Cheers!

--Funnybony    14:17, Aug 11

I have told you before not to spam welcome templates on my talkpage. -- The Zombiebaron 19:24, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Mel Gibson

I saw you deleted this article. Mel Gibson presents a library of content for uncyc users. Does the article need to be redone?--AmericanBastard 18:07, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Yes. -- The Zombiebaron 19:27, August 11, 2011 (UTC)

Hey you,Yah you with the beret

If I was a admin,Would that be good or bad for uncyclopedia?-- 23:08, August 11, 2011/2552 (UTC)UNmarine777

Bad. -- The Zombiebaron 03:24, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

Unobtanium

Much thanks for your vote from Shabidoo and Funnybony. Cheers!--Funnybony    16:10, Aug 14

Banhammer

Trying to force another user off the site I see. mAttlobster. (hello) 17:49, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

No, just banning a user after telling them not to do something at least 5 or 6 times. -- The Zombiebaron 17:55, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

What harm does leaving a thank you message actually do? mAttlobster. (hello) 17:59, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

Thats what a good, friendly and costructive user gets from this site for thanking you for his vote. Wow, Funnybonny, you simply went too far this time. Two days is so excessive. Jesus. --ShabiDOO 18:01, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

As one of the contributors of the article, I removed the thank you. Would you consider removing the excessive 2 day ban now? --ShabiDOO 18:02, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

Please don't remove things from my talkpage. Thekillerfroggy has reduced Funnbonny's ban to 6 hours. -- The Zombiebaron 18:09, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

I will remember to never ever remove anything from your page, or ever thank you for anything on your page. My appoligies. Thank you Thekillerfroggy for reducing the ban. --ShabiDOO 18:13, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

THANK YOU Thank you for you contribution!!

 For. For.

thank you

THANKS

—rc (t) 19:01, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- The Zombiebaron 19:04, August 14, 2011 (UTC)

???

Can I ask you a quick question? —  (talk) (contributions)

Yes you can. -- The Zombiebaron 04:37, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Cool. —  (talk) (contributions)

The ajax batch delete

It fails on pages with apostrophes in the titles. At least for me, anyway. Have you had that problem too, by any chance? 1234 ~ 05:57, 15 August 2011

Yes. -- The Zombiebaron 09:53, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Dang. 1234 ~ 15:13, 15 August 2011

Also, I hate to seem like I'm pressuring on you, but the logs indicate that you have been using the batch deleter for maintenance such as the monthly templates and FFW, as opposed to looking at each articles individually - strings of individual deleted so very together, and leaving talkpages behind, something the autodelete gets rid of automatically. If this is indeed the case, could you please not do that, and look at them? I know it's slower, but I keep reassuring people about legitimate concerns regarding admins not looking at stuff before deleting it, telling them that we do look first, and if I've been lying to people, well... well, I don't want to be, and neither do I want to stop saying it, you know?

Of course, for all I know, I am wrong; maybe there's something else going on here, but if that is so, I am a little curious as to what it may be, and others may be reassured for seeing it as well. 1234 ~ 06:46, 19 August 2011

I have never used the batch delete for clearing out maintenance tags. The reason that I sometimes don't delete the talkpages is because my autodelete javascript sometimes doesn't delete talkpages. -- The Zombiebaron 18:04, August 20, 2011 (UTC)

Well, considering the apparent state of your computer, that's actually not terribly surprising... but what of the rates at which some of them were deleted, and so many at a time? Regardless of what scripts may or may not be used, we really should look at what we delete, preferably even read it, at least some of it (although I'll admit I just stuck some of the longer FFW ones on VFD and let other people deal with them instead of reading them myself, but... er, don't tell anyone that, okay?), and unfortunately I mean all of it, here. From the logs, it does appear you look at many of them, and I know there has been a lot of massive maintenance lately, but please, when dealing with distinct pages, even when so many, just be more consistent in spending some time looking in the future, please. I should probably do the same at times, as well, slow down, pay more attention, look... and that's all I ask. 1234 ~ 15:35, 21 August 2011

Ok. -- The Zombiebaron 16:03, August 21, 2011 (UTC)

Voting against on awards

While it might not be a bad idea in principle to set a rule about that, there is no precedence for it - check the archives if you don't believe me. Mind, folks voting against doesn't happen very often, and when they do it's usually vague or rude or pointless (the main exception being when users vote against themselves, which is actually quite common), but on the other hand, what for votes I've seen in the opposite direction, users voting for people only because they weren't someone else, if anything seems even more insulting, not to the one being voted against, but to the one with the 'for'. It says nothing about them, just that they happened to be there at the time, and thus they're as meaningless as circumstance. That was the impression I got when it happened to me, anyway, and that was what I didn't want to do to Shabidoo. He's a great guy, but if he's to win that, I'd rather it actually mean something. Lollipop, on the other hand, keeps being rather vocal about his desire to improve, so should we not encourage him to do so? If what I did was so terribly rude, why does nobody tell me, and tell me why or how? Why go around me without any line of communication at all and strike the entire thing, declaring a new rule in the process?

Seriously, I'm asking. Feel free to be as blunt as you'd like, but I'm starting to feel like folks are actively trying to avoid confronting me of late, instead just undoing anything I try to do, and frankly it's rather frustrating. 1234 ~ 00:24, 19 August 2011

Ok first off let me say that I'm sorry that I did not discuss with you before striking out your vote. At the time, however, I felt I had to move quickly because Frosty had just created a dump page about against votes on monthly awards, and I was trying to avoid as much drama as possible. Now let me address your concern: yes, there is precedent for this. Let me draw your attention to the case of Boothman, circa 2006. After making several against votes on monthly voting pages, he was added to UN:OFFICE. Monthly voting pages are meant to be a positive place for celebrating the best and brightest our community has to offer. Every month, every user gets the chance to vote for the user they like best. If you like a particular user more than another user, vote for the user you like. If you dislike a user, voting pages are not the place for that. -- The Zombiebaron 02:25, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, precedent regarding what this was, a single vote... may I draw your attention to the archives for the first half of this year? Or the previous year? I know you weren't around for much of that, but that's still how it was and just changing things without a vote or any evidence of a discussion anywhere and in fact acting as if they were always that way still doesn't really sit right. Would a forum really have been so bad, see if there indeed is community consensus regarding removing againsts, or was it how Frosty put it that made it bad? I certainly wouldn't know, having not seen it. Did my vote seem as if I were expressing dislike for Lollipop, then, or what? And why now? Why not when that Meat user voted against TKF last month and Chief decided the vote itself was too rude and struck that vote on those grounds, or perhaps when Colin raised a bit of a fuss over RAHB and Ethine voting against me for no apparent reason in January, or any one of various other votes before? 1234 ~ 06:30, 19 August 2011

Okay, if you really believe that your against vote is for the best, feel free to unstrike it out. However, I do not feel that there needs to be "discussion" on this topic because it is clearly such a rare occurrence. I was not aware of those other recent Against votes, and if I had been I would have reacted however I felt was appropriate at the time. "Open discussion" on this topic will likely lead to another one or two of those massive dumps that don't resolve anything. (By the way, here is the dump Frosty made.) -- The Zombiebaron 07:21, August 19, 2011 (UTC)

You did react as you felt appropriate at the time; it was simply a normal occurrence, and to be ignored. That I gave an actual reason probably made my vote rather abnormal, though. Don't underestimate Uncyclopedians, though; they may not have the foggiest inkling how to go about things and many of them have this tendency to stick their heads up their arses whenever someone they don't like says anything, but nor are they incapable of discussing things. Although considering Frosty seemed to be more questioning my vote than against votes in general, just what about what I said was so bad? 1234 ~ 15:44, 21 August 2011

Also, thank you. 1234 ~ 15:44, 21 August 2011

You're welcome. -- The Zombiebaron 16:05, August 21, 2011 (UTC)