UnNews talk:Wikipedia celebrates 1,500,000 articles written by monkeys
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Err... This is hilarious! So all Wikipedians are monkeys, then? ;) (I'm on Wikipedia, under User:Kungming2). 18.104.22.168 22:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes! Feureau 14:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
edit grammar and fixes
Great article, but the grammar degenerates into incomprehensibility after a couple of paragraphs. I'll see if I can fix it up a bit. Esn 06:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Consarn it! Please don't confuse Steve Ballmer and Jimbo Wales. They are two completely different specimen of earthlings. One is of a gorilla series biological creature, the other is yet to be determined. If anything he'll be blowing bubbles out his blowhole. Also, don't be impugning other's nativity of English. I'm American and in America we spell American, you Greamer nazi's!! We wrait wikimedia as Wikimedia, vandalising as vandalizing, and underfunded without the dash! So don't be you are changing mine edit more again. This is wiki! We American dominate wiki. feureau do as like! WIKI WIKI WIKIIIIIIIII!!! *breaks monitors and smashes keyboards* END TRANSMISSION Feureau 05:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Seriously, though, I think you, and you needs to read Guide to being an uncyclopedian and How be funny and not just stupid. Why teh hell would uncyclopedia post a 5 dollar reward for Justin Agulair? This is uncyclopedia, not Wikipeida fer cryin oot lood!!! A good contribution taht funnifies the unNews is okay, like those by Zim ulator or translate this article to some other form of communication, like Szoferka did. Now that's a translation. Feureau 05:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't add in the thing about Justin Agulair. Calm down. Unless terrible grammar is funny, it shouldn't be used in an article and should be fixed wherever it is found.
- First things first. Do you know that your grammar is horrible ("most of the pages was reverted")?
- Now, if you say "yes" to that, why do I get the strange feeling that the paragraph is supposed to make sense?
- If you say "no"... well, it is. Do you need a breakdown of exactly what's wrong? Esn 05:10, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Dude, me-sa not saying that I gots great grammmmar, but you, sir, gots it bad too! You changed Vandalize into Vandalise, for example. Pointing that out, makes me look smarter than you! :) Now, any well funded student who goes to expensive school can describe in detail what's wrong with the word Vandalise. Alternatively, a cheap click to dictionary.com would reveal the same fact. I often write in long passages that often describes one thing against another in one single line, unlike some people that I know who often talks in short sentences and then blames everyone for their own stupidity act that they did that they then blame upon the creator of the subject, like those Google executives that got threatened with a lawsuit in Italy because some losers got bullied in a google video, but that shouldn't be of any intereset to anyone right now because I want to go back to teh beginning of this sentence to the part where I say that I often talk in long passages so I can continue to the next sentence.. You can try to RTFM or try to understand what I've just written instead of just pointing out stuff that you don't understand that some people could easily identify with distinct clarity. SO, in short, you, sir, are not the best user to ask for fixes because your grammar/spelling sucks. Besides, just because you don't understand a sentence or two doesn't mean that everyone else wouldn't understand it. Not everyone can pass the SAT. Proof? If you'd just cool down and look meticulously, you'll know that I was referring to you and not to you about that stupid justin vandalism. Anyway, the news is gonna get buried in the next few days, and nobody cares anymore. Why do you bother pursuing this? Feureau 07:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- "vandalise" is one proper spelling - "vandalize" is another. I'm pursuing this because correcting bad grammar in an article should not cause a user to get harassed by the original writer. Feel free to take any of the extra humour bits that I added out if you don't like them, but keep the grammar corrections, ok? Why can't you just admit that you made a few mistakes and correct them? Esn 11:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Dude, you're the one taking this to my talk page. Vandalize is proper spelling according to dictionary.com. I'll take Merriam-Webster's any day against wiktionary. I'm not gonna take your so-called "correction" because it's non-benificiary to the article. Anyway, another user has reviewed this  and did some chages. Let's just leave it at that. Feureau 13:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Taking something to an editor's userpage is kinda like sending them a private message instead of wasting public board space with personal disagreements. I was hoping that this could be settled quietly, but no; as soon as I posted my message on your userpage you spent a good 30 lines criticizing me in this talk page, as well as refusing to apply any of my criticisms which are clearly correct (it doesn't take an English professor to know that "most of the pages was reverted" contains bad grammar). According to both Merriam-Webster and Oxford, by the way, "vandalise" is an anaccepted spelling. It's just the British (and sometimes Canadian) variant. Esn 05:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll get flamed if I attempt to edit this article again, so I'll just point out a few things in this talk page (though I'll probably get flamed for posting this anyway).
- "most of the pages was reverted" should be "were reverted"
- "the consensus made by Wikipedian users aren't always the correct fact" should be "isn't always factual"
- "Giving an example, the officials shown on the super beautiful extra large screen donated from wikia earlier this year, an article entitled Uncyclopedia: Funny or Stupid in which was vandalized months ago leaving what they call "cryptic" text" - run-on sentence
- "Then, pointing out the consensus among Wikipedian on the article's talk page to leave the "contribution" intact." Who's pointing it out? Also, it should be "Wikipedians" (with an "s").
If another editor thinks these make sense, perhaps they can make the edits. Esn 11:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Dear another editor, please see Grammar nazi prior to editing and LET THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU! .... to huff chickens instead of kittens. Feureau 04:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)