Talk:ICarly

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

OK, MnB, I'm sorry but you'll have to explain that to me. How is that better than the last deleted piece? ~Jewriken.GIF 11:13, February 28, 2010 (UTC)

I honestly, and truthfully have absolutely never watched this show. I don't remember ever even seeing an advert for it, and I have no idea what it is. Still I have not really watched the TV for over a year now so... Still I'm just bragging that you guys all actually apparently know what this show is all about, whereas I just don't have a clue. Of that I am proud. :) */me bows* MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 11:40, Feb 28
It's an American tv show about two teenage girls who have their own webshow. As much as that suggests porn, it is not (unfortunately). —Paizuri MUN Talkpage My Contributions 11:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
The jokes on the page seem to be both the girl trying to protect her fave program from the evil uncyclopedians and the footnotes which then comment on her pleas and condemnations. They work, for me, very well in combination, thusly: ha ha hee hee, snort. A short explanationAleister AIClogo 12:35 28 2 2mX
What he said basically. Basically, a teen boy creates a mess of an attack article on an annoying Tween sitcom, a teen fangirl then replaces the article with a self-righteous vandal-rant, then the original author adds some smart-ass footnotes to the vandal-rant. Basically, something along the lines of Sania Mirza. It is a bit in-jokey, but probably better than anything else that will be written on the topic. --Mn-z 00:44, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
I actually like this page. It's very reminiscent of UN:W. ~Scriptsiggy.JPGTelephonesig Star Starsig Kidneysig 13:22, Mar 12, 2010
1, don't use gibberish (as per http://enwp.org/wp:eieio), and 2, don't cite essays that aren't applications of official policy as if they were official policy.--L33thaxx 00:10, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
You do know that this is uncyclopedia, not wikipedia, right? --Mn-z 00:27, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
In my defense, I didn't know that "Mark Matzko" was a totally fictional character until the author/vandal-ranter informed me of it. --Mn-z 00:37, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know who likes the current version of the page, but this is a huge waste. iCarly is perhaps the most aggressively obnoxious show still being made right now, and it shamelessly promotes itself by making all of the characters besides the total jerks love the webshow. Letting the version that puts its detractors on the defensive by being more self-rightous than funny stand is a giant miscalculation. Off the top of my head, I can think up several funnier approaches.74.111.126.12 02:31, May 2, 2010 (UTC)

seddie 4eva, deal wit it

Interwebs are owning you. I am in ur house.

Who the heck changed this page from the hilarious newt thing it was? someone needs a sense of humor obviously. --98.212.111.102 14:34, May 21, 2010 (UTC)Jake

edit Interwikis

Add the interwikis:
[[bar:ICarly]]
[[eo:ICarly]]
[[es:ICarly]]
[[pt:ICarly]] 201.89.151.114 02:40, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

Added, but the first one isn't working.--Mn-z 05:59, May 8, 2010 (UTC)
Strange, just work in Portuguese Uncyclopedia, this is the language code "bar" (Boarisch), but this wiki can be a business that is not Uncyclopedia. 189.73.163.154 20:39, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

Who's the prick who made this article painfully unfunny? From the sounds of it, while the "original" sounds kinda gross, it sounds hilarious too. I wanna read THAT article. This one is very lame, and really sounds more like a normal Wikipedia article with a sharp, pro-Carly bias.

Unless if your idea was to be ironic by making the show sound good when, in fact, its not.

Then I guess this counts.

But I doubt that was the intention?

The original is here. --Mn-z 18:20, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, well, its official: the original is amazing. WEIRD AND TWISTED AND WHOEVER WROTE IT IS A SICK FUCK, but amazing. How do we vote this/edit this back into the official article now? This is ridiculous.

AniMerrill, a.k.a. Ethan Merrill 00:45, May 17, 2010 (UTC)AniMerrill

Unfortunately, there is no process to offically undelete a deleted article. The best method I can think of is getting some consensus in favor of restoring the article. --Mn-z 02:32, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
I'm leaning toward restoring the old article, actually, since this one is so unpopular. Should we take this to the Villiage Dump? —Pelozurian (talk) 03:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
That is what I was thinking. --Mn-z 03:02, May 17, 2010 (UTC)
Alright then. Vamos, senores. —Pelozurian (talk) 03:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

edit Rewriting attempt

I'm trying to organize a community rewrite of iCarly Here --Mn-z 03:41, May 23, 2010 (UTC)

edit Redone

I restored this page to different version a while ago, so the above comments may longer be relevant. I also removed the "don't mess with this page" template. --Mn-z 01:37, September 10, 2010 (UTC)

Carly(Miranda Cosgrove) is a young lady who is really pretty, she lives in wisconson and in one episode carly admits that she likes Freddi(nathan Kress)and they soon become lovely couples

edit Where's Gibby?

Gibby should be in the list of characters for this show! MagicBus (talk) 00:05, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

edit Ych

I don't really find either iCarly article that funny, though I kind of like this one. The other one (User:Hyperbole/ICarly) is just...weird. Newts in uteruses? Seriously? The content warning thing at the top seems like another demeaning poke at the reader, as well.

This article here doesn't seem to present any side of the argument as having a whole lot of credibility. It reads to me as if it were making fun of all the points of view it expresses. It doesn't leave one with any real impression of whether the show is 'funny' or 'obnoxious', I'd say.

I'd help out with a rewrite, but firstly I have homework I should be doing right now, secondly I have never watched iCarly or any adverts or ads for it, and thirdly I would probably end up falling back on this kind of stuff if all else failed, and all else would undoubtedly fail for me because I have zips idea what to write.

Best of luck, rewriters! I hope what I said helps in some way. If you're interested in having an invasion of leeks and sheep, call me over. Otherwise I'm busy. Sorry. Llwy (scold|hover) 00:48, March 20, 2013 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects