Forum:Content Warning

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 06:14, November 20, 2012 by Modusoperandi (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Ministry of Love > Content Warning
Note: This topic has been unedited for 666 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I read an old talk page about this, but it left me none the wiser. Is there any chance of replacing the content warning page with a plain page with a short clear note? I have sent links to friends who have wrote back saying they 'can't see the message' simply because they associate that content warning screen with pop ups or dodgy websites.

How about a plain white screen with the following:

CONTENT WARNING

Uncyclopedia is a parody website whose articles may include strong language.

[OK] [Go back]


--~Leverage 15:11, November 9, 2012 (UTC)

Have you looked around here? This is a dodgy website. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 21:01, November 9, 2012 (UTC)
Arf! But seriously, if we want to attract new readers and writers... --~Leverage 15:24, November 10, 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I made all those points myself when our gracious hosts, Wikia, clobbered us with that CONTENT WARNING earlier this year. But no amount of reasoning with, cajoling, or insulting Wikia will change their minds -- trust me, we tried all three, and I especially used insults -- although they did change the wording of the CONTENT WARNING to something that one of our other users tossed off on a whim. (Which, I think, is their way of fucking with us even further.) We have one of our now-inactive admins to thank for the kittens and flowers. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usSat, Nov 10 '12 17:49 (UTC)
Instead of the How Do Content Warnings Work-picture I want a Japanese Girl... Please, anyone... Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 18:05, 10 November, 2012 (UTC)
The warning page issue was debated at length but was imposed. Really dodgy websites don't give you any warnings before letting you see inside. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 01:19, November 11, 2012 (UTC)
You sure? That's one of the first sites that popped up in a Google search for "Content warning". ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usSun, Nov 11 '12 5:01 (UTC)
@Romartus, Well what I mean is, if I click on a link on, say, FaceBook, even if it's a legitimate newspaper and they want me to sign up to something, or download some social app, it puts me off. If we put links of Onion articles on our social networking pages to promote the site, the link goes straight there. If Wikia doesn't let us do that here, we should at least make the warning page look as professional and 'familiar' as possible. @BB - when you talk about cajoling, do you mean you have asked specifically if they can replace the message with something simpler and cleaner? If we have to have a content warning, fine, but this particular one is offputting imho. I'd be happy to write to wikia myself, proposing something, if you think a fresh name might make them love everyone on the site :D --~Leverage 13:28, November 11, 2012 (UTC)
On the forum I linked above, I suggested "Warning: this site contains material intended for a mature audience only," but they felt that Simsilikesims' version, while obviously satirizing their stupidity, still retained the original message's hints of menace and disgust, so they went with it. Anyway, feel free to email them if you like; it can't hurt. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usSun, Nov 11 '12 13:58 (UTC)
Cool. WIll do. Which of the contact forums on that link will be most appropriate? --~Leverage 14:15, November 11, 2012 (UTC)
I would guess the one shaped like a trash can.





Ha ha, just kidding. Probably the one for feedback would be fine. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usSun, Nov 11 '12 14:33 (UTC)
Cool. Thanks. Done. I expect complete constructive change within 24 hours! --~Leverage 15:26, November 11, 2012 (UTC)
They responded:

Thanks for writing.

The Uncyclopedia content warning was originally much plainer. You can see an example of the original style at http://monstergirlquest.wikia.com

But the styling of the notice is something that can be changed by the Uncyclopedia admins, and they created and added the current look.

It might be possible for you to suggest an alternative to them in the Village Dump. They may not be receptive to the idea, but if you can come up with a funny alternative they might consider it.

My personal view is that a simpler look will work better, so hopefully the admins will give the idea a chance!

I hope it goes well,

Regards,

So this suggests one of our admins CAN change it. Any ideas who? I have no idea what the hierarchy is here. --~Leverage 08:03, November 13, 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, see, there they go, dodging the question. THEY are responsible for the text, and we can't (easily) change it. The styling was done by Lyrithya, you can poke her if you think that changing the style of the thing will make a difference. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usTue, Nov 13 '12 16:16 (UTC)
The styling was the question. So that's the one I answered. I admit I was tempted to answer "Paris, always Paris... with a peacock"... but I sorta get in trouble if I send out totally random answers to support questions. Weird, I know -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 19:21, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
Actually, now I pull up the ticket again, the text was mentioned too. But I'm pretty sure Lyrithya changed that as well as the styling... "yo mama" is not something that we generally use in our site messages (although now I'm tempted to try and get the word "you mama" into one of my replies today). It's possible that we added text written by an Uncyclopedian, but the person I'd need to ask about that isn't around right now - probably better to ask Lyrithya what she changed and how. -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 19:28, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
It's definitely not something we can change (easily). The text comes directly from the ContentWarning.js script, which executes an XHR and retrieves the text from this URL. So, yes, YOUSE GUYS (Wikia) are responsible for the text--as well as the image of Violent Jay violently questioning how content warnings work--not us. (Not to bite your head off, or anything.) ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usTue, Nov 13 '12 20:39 (UTC)
Well it's silly to argue about who is "responsible", when I suspect we are using different definitions of the word. Anyway, if you come up with new text, and it's something Wikia can live with (I'm not expecting "like")... I'll do what I can to get it changed quickly -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 21:57, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
Well OK then. What is wrong with Leverage's suggestion ("Uncyclopedia is a parody website whose articles may include strong language."), or my suggestion ("Warning: this site contains material intended for a mature audience only"), or, let's say, "Warning: you are about to enter Uncyclopedia, a website containing material intended for mature audiences only. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."? Seems apt. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usWed, Nov 14 '12 0:05 (UTC)
P.S.: responsible (3): chargeable with being the author, cause, or occasion of something (usually fol. by for): Termites were responsible for the damage. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usWed, Nov 14 '12 0:05 (UTC)
Figure out the version you want between you, then let me know, and we'll go from there.
And yeah, same definition, but my point was that Uncyc wrote the text and decided on the styling. The existence of the warning is all Wikia. But... whatever. -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 03:18, November 14, 2012 (UTC)
My opinion is while I think the clown screen is a very good thing from what was originally offered (and I talked to Wikia people about that back then) is that we need not to have it: people are gonna think they are going in to a shock site where "everything goes" while I struggled to find a nipple on a boob here (yes I searched for it) In a nutshell, the notice is totally ridiculous given what's out there on the net and the care admins give to contentious stuff. There is just no comparison. Snowflake mini Mattsnow 19:52, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
Well my feeling is, if we have to have one, let's have one that is as brief and as clean as possible. I looked at Lyrithya's talk page; she is away. --~Leverage 20:15, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
Mattsnow: This isn't really about the nipples - because those are being removed anyway. It's more about things like Rape, Cancer porn, Fuck Subtlety... and all the other articles we get complaints about. -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 21:57, November 13, 2012 (UTC)
Has Mr Wikia considered the possibility that the kind of people who complain about stuff like that are the kind of people he doesn't want around anyway? All they do is stink up the place and give it a bad reputation. That's our job! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 02:36, November 14, 2012 (UTC)

Reading over the concerns expressed on this page, perhaps y'all are onto something, so I will look into updating the content warning forthwith as soon as I finish all these other things I am currently in the middle of. Thank you for your patience. -— Lyrithya 20:02, November 14, 2012 (UTC)

Good stuff! --~Leverage 21:57, November 14, 2012 (UTC)

A Vote

Per Sannse, above: which CONTENT WARNING text do you think Uncyclopedia should be saddled with?

"CONTENT WARNING Uncyclopedia is a parody website whose articles may include strong language."

Score: 2
  • This one seems fine by me. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usThu, Nov 15 '12 13:55 (UTC)
  • The fewer words the better. --~Leverage 16:06, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

"CONTENT WARNING Warning: this site contains material intended for a mature audience only"

Score: 0
  • My original suggestion. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usThu, Nov 15 '12 13:55 (UTC)

[Something else]

Score: 0
  • If you vote for something else, be forewarned, it'll probably end up on the CONTENT WARNING. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usThu, Nov 15 '12 13:55 (UTC)

New content warning in effect

After discussion with other admins on IRC, I have implemented a new content warning that should better explain the current situation, and hopefully without making the site seem any more dodgy than it is; you may view it at your leisure if you can come up with a good way to view it at your leisure, perhaps a private tab or something? I dunno. -— Lyrithya 07:22, November 16, 2012 (UTC)

Still a little wordy and scary for me, but an improvement for sure! Thanks for your efforts, Lyrithya. --~Leverage 13:32, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
^ What Leverage said. --Snippy 06:49, November 17, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Lyrithya. I'm convinced that many users petered off because of that content warning. Every time I log on with a different computer and see the content warning it adds to the blown out nerves in my body and makes me connect with website with frustration and a little sadness. If there really must be a warning for the small amount of petty bickering people who shouldnt even visit parody sites: is there any way to title it other than "CONTENT WARNING"? The very word "warning" to me evokes fear and OH NO! Wereas disclaimer or notice is a lot less alarming.

DISCLAIMER: Just about anything goes.

or

NOTICE OF CONTENT: Articles may express exaggerated and unrestrained views. Content may include an expression of ideas and concepts which may appear frank and controversial. Some articles may include modest nudity, satirical slander and humour which plays on race, class and gender.

I think a notice like this will tell prudes that they ought not complain when the see what they have been warned about without showing a site notice that infers we are a porn site or shock site........just saying. In any case...changing the logo to "immature content" is a VERY good change. --ShabiDOO 05:15, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't the warning go before, you know, warning-worthy pages only? And am I too late to point out that the NSFW did what this did, but better (as it warned for warning-worthy pages only), and it didn't force people to click through (click throughs are, I'm told, death for sites). Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 06:14, November 20, 2012 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects