Forum:Bring Dawn Back

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Bring Dawn Back
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2533 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

OK. I appreciate that you hate the redirect crap, and all that stuff, but here are the main problems.

  • Dawn is a good article. It just needs love. Which you people won't give, because you are prejudiced against "pokemon crap" [1].
  • There are many pages that link to this. Do a search for "Dawn" and virtually all of what comes up that is an actual link is a link to this page. NOT one of the other pages with "Dawn" in the title, but actually Dawn.
  • There are all kinds of images featuring Dawn, and a large number of jokes featuring Dawn, all over Uncyclopedia. In fact, she probably now qualifies as an *OFFICIAL* Uncyclopedia In-Joke. (And, of course, one of the guys who says "Delete Dawn" wants them pictures nuked too.[2])
  • The first time it was deleted, it had been redirected to "Hikari", which had been redirected to "Dddddd", which had been redirected BACK to hikari, all due to the move button at the top of the page. I added a disclaimer trying to prevent this at the top when I restored its old version. It was NOT deleted because it sucked (see the first citation for someone who says that). Rather the opposite. It is better quality than many pages in Uncyclopedia. [3]
  • It has improved over the course of its existence. It was in existence for several months before it was originally huffed (originally created sometime last April or May). In my book, anything that has existed for so long without being huffed should not be huffed, but merely restored to a previous version.
  • It is one of the pages on the Pokemon template. Actually, so is May, and you deleted that one too. It may have sucked, I don't know as I never saw it, but Dawn decidedly does not suck.
  • Oh, and the redirect? It only existed in the old huffed version (the one I noted was nuked because some morons thought the "move" button was sexually appealing, although not in those words) and in the more recently huffed version it does not, but rather the page is on "Dawn", both in location and subject.

So please, PLEASE bring back Dawn. Give it a chance. Hell, add the "This article needs love" template if you have to, just DO NOT KILL THIS EXCELLENT ARTICLE. --User:Banjo2e/SIGGY 12:51, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

References:

  1. Uncyclopedia:Pages_for_deletion/archive90#Dawn
  2. Special:Search?search=dawn.jpg
  3. Banjo-Kazooie

(By the way, the second one doesn't have all of the Dawn pics, just some of them. This is because several don't have "Dawn" in the title.)


See Also:

  • The Internet Archive Dawn pages. These are archive copies on another site, so that you can see what a good article this was even though it's been huffed, rendering it unviewable (except possibly to admins).

I merged the histories of the different versions (possibly a bad thing, dunno) and moved them to User:Banjo2e/Dawn in you userspace for you to work on the page until it's good enough to be moved back to the mainspace. That should be all 600 revisions of past versions of the Dawn article for you to choose the best bits from. If you want any images restored, ask, or just upload them again.

With over 600 past edits, that enough for me to know that there is at least demand for an article to be there, but the VFD vote suggests not that article. Or the people who voted delete maybe do just hate pokemon related articles. Either way, if you want the article to exist, you'll have to fix it up. Try and get other pokemon fans (preferably ones with a good sense of humour) to help out. So... get on that.

Use pee review before moving it back. If you don't get constructive criticism there, feel free to remove the review till you get someone who actually wants to help (there are people who give reviews consisting of "this article sucks, you should go and die", and think they're helping somehow -_-). Spang talk 05:06, 19 Sep 2007

Oh, and if someone moves an article to an inappropriate title, just go to the page it was moved to and use the move button there to move it back to its proper title. Spang talk 05:09, 19 Sep 2007

Actually, the move stuff wasn't the actual problem, but rather that the page had been moved so much it had been lost somewhere. And killed. Thanks for giving me the page, though. --User:Banjo2e/SIGGY 19:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

If the page gets a good score on Pee Review, then by all means put it in mainspace. However, I doubt that this page can be very good. First off, not all pokemon pages are inherently bad. It's just that quite nearly every page about pokemon has something about he/she likes gay sex, this person raped this pokemon, so and so is emo, and this girl is "HAAAAAWWWT". These jokes, while they may be funny when hanging out with friends or on other sites, are neither original nor amusing here. If you can truly make the page comply with HTBFANJS, I urge you to. By all means, Dawn seems to be a popular character, so a page on her would be more than welcome. However, before it can exist here, it needs to be funny, and not just stupid. P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 20:54, Sep 19
Sadly, I believe that Uncyclopedia is now following a policy of hating Pokemon. I want to show satire on this children's show because of all of these unnecessary editing and censorship of Pokemon (as well as most other anime. I wanted to keep the May article, but the Nazi decided to block further revival of the page. I did find your Dawn article funny, just there are certain I have to burn like the quotes and a few unnecessary crap. Also, Dawn is quite a new character compared to the other female protagonist, so it is best to write about let say around 2010 or so.--Dark Paladin X 21:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
It's not an official policy to hate pokeman; it's just good taste. I choose you, Hatingpokemander! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 23:50, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Also, Godwin's Law says this topic is over now. --Strange (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
But everyone knows that laws are just the man trying to keep you down. The man is such a Nazi, he's worse than Hitler. Spang talk 12:57, 20 Sep 2007
It must have been hard being a Nazi and trying to have a conversation. No wonder they needed to rally so often. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 03:53, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

I really must chime in here. Uncyclopedia is not following a policy of hating Pokémon (spell it right, dammit!). What we are doing is making a conscious effort toward quality control, and the fact is that most Pokémon-related articles (not to put too fine a point on it) are crap. Now, no one is saying that any of them lack the potential to be featured articles (just look at Oscar Wilde, once the crappiest page on the wiki, now a stalwart example of the best we have to offer), but what they are saying is that it's going to take a helluva lot more than gay sex jokes, or rape jokes, or namedropping, or any other combination of these lethal three.

OK, we get it. Pokémon has an extreme sexual undertone. However, I must point out that often the most obvious joke is the one that is least good. Sure, an occasional joke about the usual suspects mentioned above may have a place in some articles, but only if their distribution is beyond sparse. I'm sorry if we seem to have dissuaded you from writing about Pokémon, but if it's going to be done, it's got to be done with a lot of effort. That means not making the first line "Dawn is a sex object raped by Ash and Beedrill during the Elite Four fight while Brock gleefully watched from the sideline." No line should vaguely resemble this.

I'm all for avant garde, different narrative articles. God knows I've written some questionable material in my time here. However, a little attempt at either taste or satire goes a very long way. Keep this in mind when you're bringing Dawn back.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 01:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Comment. I have never seen a noob capable of using the word "gleeful" in a sentence. </comment> Sig_pic.PNG Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 02:01, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I agree very muchly with Ljlego. If a page is very bad, it will be deleted. If it is very good, it is often featured. Otherwise, it is left alone. The same applies to any article on the site, whether it applies to Pokemon or anything else. P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:43, Sep 20

A New Dawn

I was actually working on this version before it got huffed and was replaced with the Pokemon version. -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)

I see. It doesn't suck... yet... ЖGBDsig.PNG WHEEEEE! 01:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

According to my calculations, we should see a new dawn by 06:41. --Strange (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 21:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Case Example of Assumptions based on Pokemon Articles

About the anti-pokemon attitudes (spelt wrong because I am lazy), look at this failed nomination. My article is not close to being ready, so I knew it would fail quickly. I'm still rewriting it, requesting an image, and have to pee review it at least once more. But Kalir seems to have made a generalization about pokemon articles. His 'examples' appeared not once in any edits of it, although some pictures are questionable.


Finding Christian Symbology in Pokemon (history, logs)

Article: Finding Christian Symbology in Pokemon

Score: -3.5 Jews converted

Nomination: 84.70.204.126 12:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
For Votes: .5

Nom anf for, It is an great satire of the way people read into things like Shakepseare way too much. Got a brilliant Pee Reveiw --84.70.204.126 12:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Against Votes: 4
  1. Agin It's a plagiarism of the normal Pokemon article. And as long as it contains such base and unfunny tripe as "Ash raeps pikachu lol" and "omg dawn is sooooo hawt i would tap that with a hammer" I'll dislike it. ЖGBDsig.PNG WHEEEEE! 23:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  2. Weak Against - Actually, I found that this was surprisingly funny in a couple places. Still, though, as Kalir above me said, your page relies, in a few spots, on jokes like Hitler, boy-pokemon sex, and that annoying video. The video, btw, was funnier forwards than backwards, a testament to the hilarity of that song. Still, it has potential, and I think it actually could get featured with a bit more added. P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:29, Sep 16, 2007
  3. Good, but not ready for VFH just yet. --Narf, the Wonder Puppy/I support Global Warming and I'm 100% proud of it! 05:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
  4. Against. It's one of the less objectionable Pokemon articles, and even contains some funny. But it's some way from feature quality, I reckon. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 15:29, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Comments

I thought it would be unoriginal and boring when I read the title, but I was pleantly suprised--84.70.204.126 12:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I hold nothing against you, Kalir, but it just seemed like you assumed that sex and plagerism was the content. And sorry the pictures have such sexual undertones. They are all I have to work with. Fresh Stain Serq Fet of Pokemon (At your service) 04:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Well, to be true, much of the article is pretty amusing, but the basic format-shape of it appeared (at least to me) to be ripped straight off of the original Pokémon. Also, given some of the articles on the subject I've seen around here, I automatically started looking for the mainstays of the average Pokémon article (Dawn = hot, Ash rapes Pikachu, rabid fan/antifan mentality) which could've put me off of the actual content. No, there's no "ash raeps pikachu" here, but you see that one image (OHNO5.jpg) with that subtext under it enough and eventually you don't bother reading it. I like Pokémon, actually (at least the games, why else would I have made the user boxes?) but if there's going to be articles on the subject, you, the editors of Uncyclopedia, need to kick up the satire a notch. So basically, what Famine said, just applied to Pokémon articles, and I'm not an admin feared wiki-wide. ЖGBDsig.PNG WHEEEEE! 15:58, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm still trying to figure out the best way to make it look well formatted, so sorry that part looks bad. You're right, the picture sucks, and I'm working on finding better ones. Sorry to have singled you out like that, and I totally understand your assumptions. This is probably the only pokemon page currently without Dawn=hot, Ash rapes Pikachu, or photoshopped Poképorn, so I can see any problems with being unable to differenciate from the others. Thanks for understanding what I was saying! Fresh Stain Serq Fet of Pokemon (At your service) 23:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanx for the input

I am workin' on the article right now. If you are a Pokemon expert (and/or a Megaman expert, I'm going off of the "Dawn Is A Reploid" theme) then feel free to add your input on User:Banjo2e/Dawn.

I appreciate all your advice, suggestions, and other crap.

But not your hate stuff.

Especially you, Modusoperandi. You aren't helping.

--User:Banjo2e/SIGGY 19:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Modus isn't here to help, just to help increase entropy. According to my science teacher, that helps keep the universe going. Or maybe the universe keeps producing more entropy, and he's just directing it to make sure it doesn't result in, say, the sun exploding. Either way, I'm sure he's doing someone, somewhere a favor.--<<Bradmonogram.png>> 23:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
MO is quite capable of helping. However, when you come to the forums to whine about your deleted article instead of doing so on the deleting admin's talk page, it riles the patience of users. I hope your article comes to fruition, but don't be hatin'.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 23:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Especially don't be hating our Modus. He's as friendly as an imaginary friend, except less imaginary. (I think.) --Strange (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 23:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Also, I taste like spice mustard. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 01:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Dude. It was deleted several times within the space of a week. That makes contacting individual admins pointless. --User:Banjo2e/SIGGY 15:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright, my two cents: granted, my opinion probably doesn't mean much to you, and you certainly shouldn't take my words as fact, but I do have a fair amount of knowledge about quality. From the looks of it, your Dawn rewrite (I have no idea how far you have gotten into rewriting it, but that page you linked to) is sorely lacking in the "good" department. I don't mean much offense, but a little is necessary to get you on your feet. The article right now is far too scattershot, with nary a coherent thread. You'd probably be better off abandoning the "hotness" aspect of it, as it's coming off as very fanboyish. Now, regardless of whether you are a fan of teh Pokémon or not, it's generally a good idea, when trying for success, to keep NPOV. This is a Wikipedia term meaning Neutral Point of View. Certainly, you can add in such throwaway lines as "Dawn, widely considered by devoted fans to be the hottest character on Pokémon since Jigglypuff...." etcetera. But just make sure the whole article doesn't read as "She's damn hot. I mean really hot." This gets tiresome. Good luck.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 00:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects