UnDebate:Does wikia suck cock?

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

edit Background information

Wikia is a large company owned by people like Jimbo Wales that specializes in watching over a vast number of wikis across the internet. They do this for profit. Evidently, to the surprise of most, it is also Uncyclopedia's host. We've had our agreements, us and Wikia, but some of those are resolved. The communication gap, as it now exists, is mainly fuelled by raw failure. Whenever a MediaWiki message fails to work properly, or a JavaScript fails to work in any way, or a good writer leaves, or you cry like a baby and take your toys and leave home, it can usually be pinned down to "It's Wikia's fault". Which brings us to the question, and the comic and satirical worlds await an answer, Does Wikia suck cock?

edit Could you define Wikia as a lovely working environment full of original ideas and lovable people?

edit Yes

Yes, but of course! Without Wikia, we as an Uncyclopedia community would cease to exist! And we all know how Uncyclopedia is bursting with original content and nice people! If you look by and large at the Wikia community you'll see extremely informative articles which bring to the reader exactly what they want. Information on their chosen topic via the internet! It's an electrical heaven wrapped in photons and speed, and Wikia is right there at the forefront, guiding the internet, taking it hand-in-hand on its journey.

And as for the people and editors, well lets just say the the admins are understanding, helpful and gentle folks. Those admins would marry your daughters at knifepoint, if you know what I mean, and you wouldn't put up a fuss. Most other active Wikians are here to help the project! We do please and impress, shining our cufflinks and giving Old Man Winter a whirl.

So yes I say Wikia is full of wonderful ideas and people. Case closed!

edit No

Ha, don't even try and make me laugh with your propaganda. We don't like censorship, nor is it a fit subject of discussion in the 21st century. And we have some of the best quality writers in the satire world. Excluding those that money can buy. Which is why Wikia sucks cock. Because, well, hahahahahaha, Wikia sucks cock. Not such a bad thing come to think of it.

edit Fine... Could you at least agree that the site has amazing scripting, formating and reliable servers?

edit Yes

Thumbs up2

I God yes, I love the scripting! It's totally user friendly, and even the most stupid of idiots, which both sites are overrun with to the exclusion of all others (it's actually a membership requirement) can code with it. In fact most of its scripts make otherwise daunting tasks take a matter of minutes, not to mention the color coding makes it easy to follow, unlike wikis not hosted by Wikia!

The formatting is excellent! I mean just look at this article. Glance at its structure for a few moments. It's beautiful, no? That's all done with code, with things you can type of a keyboard. Wikia invented this concept. The way the boxes of text just fit together, and color makes it pretty and all. Plus the logo is pretty damn sexy - Kleenex friendly, if kids are reading this.

Now, as for the servers, they don't lag like the ones of Encyclopedia Dramatica and Illogicopedia which in my eyes give it the two thumbs up!

edit No

Warsono2222397

Me simply saying that's a load of crap gives the holocaust a bad name.

Wikia has bat-fucking awful scripts. Formatting, what does that mean? They don't use it.

Servers. Well, ha, just take a look at a few images of naked women on Wikia, and all will be explained. Not to mention they're prone to crashing and getting holes in them. Both Wikia and the naked women.

edit The final argument: Does or does not Wikia suck big hairy penis?

edit Yes

If by twisting the question this way, you are forcing us to admit that Wikia does, in fact and virtue, suck big hairy penis from time to time. The warning-page notice was one of those times, big hairy one. Coding things I don't understand may have played into it. But you guys suck big hairy penis too! Oh, babies, whoo whoo, like a choo-choo, packing up the house divided (literally like a one-celled animal does, divides identical portions of itself in half, and nobody knows how they the-hell do that, although they put big words up to convince you they do) and stealing away in the middle of the night. What, so you can put pictures of big hairy cocks up as the daily feature? Feature a picture cartoon image of a guy butt-fucking Dr. Who? Give me a break and I'm glad my hands are clean and I know I'm not part of it.

edit No

You know why? Because the kind of peni they suck have yet to grow hair on them. Gay for little boys, without a doubt! Why else would they just want little kids to come to their site? They do not want pictures or cartoonal depictions of big hairy penises, especially featured penises (remember penis-man? Those were the days). So they deleted all of them, censored like dogs living in the 1950s. So if they don't want adults, and just want little kids reading their site? "Billy, have you ever seen a grown man naked?"

I rest my case!

edit The verdict

Well, in the minds of the ultimate judge, Zod, it is evident that both sides present a very strong debate on the topic of Wikia being or not being a massive pile of failure. But after much thought, I have decided to declare victory for the side saying Wikia does suck cocks! Big hairy cocks. Why? We've all seen it! A warning page? Dudes, what were you thinking? I hope that whoever thought that baby up has been fired, and then rehired at a lower position and a cost-of-living raise.

Personal tools
projects