Forum:WhereHave:All the features gone?

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 14:03, April 20, 2013 by ScottPat (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > WhereHave:All the features gone?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 545 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

...long time passing. It's obvious, when History of Great Britain only has three votes, that the VFH threshold of 10 votes may not be reached here for awhile. People have left this site to rot, and the good users who've stayed or at least not strayed too far, are holding it up very well. Yet new features may be drying up, and so what do we do about it? Bring the vote ceiling down to 8 or 7 (it may not even reach that)? Give the trio of Chief-Spike-Romartus the ability to choose features? (kind of like that idea, I trust all of them and have looked forward to getting votes from any of them on my pages). They could put the features they pick on a forum and let the community (msnbc, Puppy, me sometimes) try to talk them down. I'm warming up to that idea, at least to go along with a regular feature vote of, say 8. Whatchathink? Aleister 17:09 15-1-'13

I would say feature the highest scoring every two days, whatever that score is. --Mn-z 17:35, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
That could get ugly if the number got down to -1. Worth discussing though. Why every two days? We should try to maintain a feature a day imnho. Aleister
Featuring used to be every other day. I think was around 2008 or so. --Mn-z 18:23, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
I commented privately to Romartus that I saw the genius in History of Great Britain but had doubts about putting even the first two paragraphs of this epic on the main page. If we have to feature an article with a vote total of -1, we need a template announcing this is Our Least Bad Article. I mentioned previously that the site had gone to every-other-day even before the Fork, and we should keep refreshing the main page every other day rather than hold out for the magic number of +10. We ought not have a feature by fiat (dedazo in Mexico) but by applying a published rule. Spıke ¬ 18:27 15-Jan-13
Well Aleister...back last December I was looking for articles to improve, give them a haircut and be able to stand the cold light of day. I hope to do that again...we have another week of possible features before I look at the quasi featured articles unless something else springs up. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 18:32, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
One could try writing articles. Failing that, one could copy-paste import articles from the other Uncyclopedia, provided proper attribution is given. --Mn-z 18:34, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
Or, like, you can just go to the new site and we'll, like, have one whole community again. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 19:53, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
If the Summary page gets fished out, I am good for a couple more self-noms. No better time to shine than when there is no one left. Spıke ¬ 18:52 15-Jan-13
I agree totally with TKF, we should all be together. I also believe this site should be a showcase which alerts new people that the entire community is on the other one. It's too bad just a few people have banded together to maintain it. I wish wikia would just let us have the thing, why even argue and keep hold of it. Features - I like the quasi-feature idea, although how will we get the votes if few if any who've left this site return to help it along? That's why I suggested the three-person panel of Spike, Chief, and Romartus, I'd trust them with putting only featurable articles up as features and not go crazy like it would be if myself, msnbc, and Sir Peesalot were choosing the features. We may have to look at something like that eventually. (Wikia, let us have the site!!! The world would love you for it.) Aleister 20:34 Wikipedia's 12th Birthday
There's a whole pile of previous Featureds, and the vast majority of readers are unlikely to have seen them on the main page... so why not recycle? That should get the wiki though the dry period while the community rebuilds -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 21:10, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
There are something like 2,000 features, but this is not a rerun site. New features! And how is this rebuilding going to happen, unless Wikia sends over some writers. We will survive but it would be much better if you guys just emancipated us. On this something birthday of Martin Luther King Jr. we say "We shall overcome"!!! (in othe words, let your people go!) Aleister MLKing day '13
Rebuilding will happen the same way it has on other forked sites... over time, and with a good chance of success in the long term. But let's not derail this conversation </end of staff-hat>
<start of uncyclopedian-hat> So why not rerun? I'd say that "we don't do it that way" is a poor reason, we have the opportunity to do it differently and give people more than one chance to get on the main page - and readers more than one chance to see them. We could do something like "Archeological Dig of the Day", or "Ye Olde Featuree ofe thee Daye". I personally think that a not-seen-for-ages Feature is better than the same one more than one day in a row. And I promise this isn't just because I have featured articles lost in the archives... honest -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 21:37, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, and I'm also not saying we shouldn't try to get more Featureds at the same time... just that that's not the only thing we could do to keep the main page varied -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 21:40, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
Since Uncyclopedians are good creating more drama than articles, perhaps both sites will be rummaging through the archives to keep up their quotas. Or we can go outside into the garden and put Filial Piety on a continuous renomination loop. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:53, January 15, 2013 (UTC)
If you do that, then I will single handedly destroy every other Uncyclopedia in existence. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 08:18, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
There's been very little drama this year. Which is sweet. When was the last time there was a multi-user flame war? --ShabiDOO 08:31, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
The new year is only 16 days old Shabidoo. A couple of shots have been exchanged already but let's hope it stays that way. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:16, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Retroweek in January

Wouldn't be a bad idea to have 7 to 14 days of retro articles once again. I can organise it and promote some voting very quickly. Wouldn't be a bad idea to showcase some of the best of the best and give VFH some time to quickly bounce back to its robust self. Up for it?--ShabiDOO 00:36, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

If this is going to happen how about if each of the users who's stuck around here gets to pick one or two of their pages to refeature. I'd probably pick People Who Like to Fuck Naked and my opus, my only semi-masterpiece here, UnBooks:The Old Man and LV. Hey Shabidoo! Good to "see" you. Aleister 1:40 16-1-'13
I personally prefer nominations and votes as I think deciding who gets to pick an article could be messy. If it's done the way it was done last time, you'll likely get one featured anyways if you care about it that much.
I hate you and what you just said, and I want all my pages pulled from this site and destroyed with gum all over them, like in Spain when they rioted, and I'm writing now in the style of Johnny our new UnNews reporter, so destroy all my articles now so you'll never find them to feature ever again hahahahahaha. Johnny, UnNews reporter

Vote to have a retro week starting next Monday?

Score: 1
  • Three days of nominations and three days of voting is more than enough. --ShabiDOO 02:14, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
    • Why not, if it keeps Shabidoo active and visiting us in our lair, sure. Aleister Let our people go
  • Symbol for vote For. If you can organise that Shabidoo. On the other hand there is a vote for the Best 12 articles of 2012 so perhaps some of those could get another airing. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:13, January 16, 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol against vote Against. There is plenty of good stuff here that is totally undiscovered. Stop organizing votes and start writing funny articles, and there will be even more. Spıke ¬ 13:08 16-Jan-13
    I never get tired of your imperatives SPIKE.
  • Symbol against vote Against. the state of VFH isn't that bad yet. I think February is when we re-host the top features of the previous year, and we should have enough features until then. Correct me if we changed that. --Mn-z 14:20, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

How do we encourage people to vote more other than putting that banner up?

Spike is right, in the sense that there are tons of good articles to be featured. Anyone have creative or bold ideas to get peopple voting (without the tiresome banner?).--ShabiDOO 22:40, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Possibly by making it easier. A fancy button on the bottom of each article? "You got to the end! does that mean it should be featured? Click here to add your signature to "yes"". Note that I have no idea if this is practical/plausible, I'm just feeding it to the goldfish to see if they sink -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 19:29, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

HowAbout:Featuring the pages the new site features

I think we should feature the pages that the other site features, as long as we have them here and we don't have the votes to feature one of "ours". Even if we don't have them we can copy them to here if the pictures match. The community is voting there, but not very much more than here actually. But if they nom a page which is in this data base I see no reason why we can't just say that it's featured. The new site is separate from here, but I don't consider here separate from the new site. imnho Aleistetr let our people go

The Voting is fine...

...I think they should be more regularly featured. There are two articles on there with 7 votes already but they aren't being featured. Sir ScottPat Icons-flag-gb Scotland Flag 1 UnS CUN VFH (talk) 14:03, April 20, 2013 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects