HowTo talk:Maintain a vanity site on Wikipedia

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 09:23, November 22, 2006 by Pentium5dot1 (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Do you know, for some reason the admins tend not to like this article? Heh. --Gubby 00:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I liked it :). It is actually a pretty accurate description of many vanity pages I have deleted. Except for the "copy a real page and change the name", which isn't too common. Thue 22:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

edit From VFH

  • Against I get the strange feeling that somebody is maintaining a vanity page here, seeing as how the two other people to edit this article have had it reverted.--Jsonitsacsig jsonitsac talk to me crimes against humanity21:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC) Unsigned, really. And no timestamp. --⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ignSTFU F@H|UotM|+S 19:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. Possibly their edits were unfunny? --Gubby 20:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment Oh, so you're the judge of that? I guess that would make sense on your article. I guess I should just give up than. Good idea for a humor wiki, but make only the person who writes the articles determines what's in it.--Jsonitsacsig jsonitsac talk to me crimes against humanity21:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
        • Reply. Anyone has the right to edit an article. I watch that article. So if I see something that's unfunny then I edit it. If you disagree with me by all means start an edit war. (PS the "what if I don't have microsoft word" section wasn't mine. Oh noes!)--Gubby 14:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


I edited in the reply here seeing as you decided to move this here. --Gubby 09:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

edit Rosa

I couldn't give a shit about this Gubby. However, I'm all up ons this "Rosa Blanco" novel thing. I MUST FIND ROSA BLANCO NOVELS! --Nakedman 14:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

edit What do you think of this?

Copy and paste the text into Microsoft Word.
Press F7.
Click "change" repeatedly until the box goes away.
Return with a vengeance.
There is no step five.
There isn't a step six either.
And there's no step seven either. Why are you still reading this?

These last three steps have accumulated in accordance with murphy's law of uncyclopediac edits. I don't like them because they detract from the impact of the joke. Then again. as a standalone slapstick routine, they're funny(ish). As well as overused.

Thoughts?--Gubby

Don't like 'em. —rc (t) 20:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
One person doesn't constitute a consensus. I would like to pseudo-re-revert this, adding back in the (non-)steps five and six. Objections? Pentium5dot1 09:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

edit Gubby on wikipedia

mine lasted for about a minute and now theyve blocked any new pages called gubby from being made

Damn! Now what will happen when I become famous?--Gubby 16:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
perhaps you shouldnt make an account and article in uncyclopedia, if you wants to maintain a vanity site on wikipedia... GSPbeetle complains Vandalisms 08:15, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

edit Wikipedia 2

Someone really does have a "Wikipedia 2" joke set up [1]. I'll put this into the article now; feel free to raise objections. Pentium5dot1 02:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

edit Incorrectly numbered sections

The sections are named "Step 1," "Step 2," "Step 3," "Step 5," and "Step 6." Is this discontinuity in numbers intentional? I will be bold and fix this; raise objections here and I will undo the change. Pentium5dot1 09:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects