Uncyclopedia talk:Imperial Colonization/2

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Comments from before the Imperialist Revival (should be archived)


So where do I go to nominate what articles should be nominated for next week. --Nintendorulez 16:06, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)

In each individual colonization page. ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 19:46, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)


I got permission from RC to add it to the front page. So, it will get extra large text on Saturday pimping it (I would guess Saturday is the best day for it). Note: I removed the permanent 'new' link as it isn't so new now, but it still has large featured status at the bottom, and at the top on Saturday, so fair trade? Modify it if you like, but not too much (it currently seems to look good, you can change {{Dotw{{CURRENTDAYNAME}}}} to {{DotwSaturday}} and hit <nowiki>'''preview''' on the front page to see how it will look). ~~~~

It looks good to me. ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 13:33, 11 Nov 2005 (UTC)

We need an "Other" category

I really want to nominate Game Online. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 23:25, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Should we limit the number of nominees for colonization each week? I think so, mainly because people would keep adding nominees and won't vote on them. Also there can be too many nominees as well.--Jsonitsac 15:41, 29 Nov 2005 (UTC)

According to ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk), you can't vote against something — so technically there is no voting, right? Personally, of course, I think that's a bad rule... Luckily I'm essentially a vegetable, and don't care much about democracy one way or the other. --Johnny C. Raven 06:57, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

We Need an Animal Category

It seems to me that the amount of animal related articles on uncyclopedia is severely lacking. Chimps. Look at that! It's a mother-fetching red link, wtf. Does anyone else think this is pitiful? -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do) 16:38, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I second that. --Iritscen 14:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Five Off

In a fit of insomnia, I decided to contribute to each colonizations. I went from left to right, so there should be no reason except fatige that my right (ie Latter) contributions were shorter and more filled with spelling errors. Netx time I jump in, I will try right to left to see if it was the topic level or a decrease in humorophemus levels, ---k3vin 20:52, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Revitalizing the Project

Now that the colonizations project has been adrift for over a month, I'd like to solicit opinions on what could be changed to make them function better. My thought is that a weekly turnover on all articles is ambitious but unfeasible. Some articles are in need of more work than can be done in a week, and while I can't speak for Rangeley, I would have serious misgivings about slapping a "Colonized" badge on an article that still sucked, just because its turn was up.

  • Should articles change every week, regardless, or should the lineup morph a bit at a time as articles are swapped in/out?
  • Should sub-par articles receive the "Colonized" template, or just be released back to the wild?
  • Should the responsibility for updating colonizations fall to just anyone (doesn't seem to be working), a Colonization Team (with their name in lights on a page), Admins who are bored and have a minute...?

--T. (talk) 18:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

It takes about an hour to update all colonizations. Might seem unrealistic, but you have to remove all the tags from articles, place new ones, edit the individual pages, and all that jazz. Not fun to do with the limited results acheived.
I think if you were to lengthen the time, you might get better results. The page tags saying it was colonized wasnt my idea, though it was meant to get people to help in the process. It didnt work apperantly. You could scrap them entirely if you want, and stick with a catagory.
Other then that, not really sure. ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 05:14, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Todd and Rangeley, I haven't participated in any of these things, but could I make a suggestion anyway? I think this project really needs a name change. "Imperial Colonizations" has negative connotations for a lot of people, and it sounds too self-important... It would be better to emphasize the collaborative nature of the activity itself, rather than the ultimate goal. So I suggest you call it Naked Came the Potato. Many people probably won't get the reference until it's explained, but once they do, hopefully they'll get a chuckle out of it and be less intimidated by the idea in general. Regardless, though, it seems to me that these articles are meant to be a lot like multi-author serial novels (just a lot shorter) and from my own perspective, that would be a much more attractive moniker. (But like all Some user suggestions, feel free to ignore if I'm way off base.) --Some user 14:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Comments from after the Imperialist Revival (should not be archived... yet)

Colonization subpages

Should the "[Topic] Colonization of the Week"deleted, since they are now unused? ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 12:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC) Yea. ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 14:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey all...

I didn't really know where to put this(can't find the forum), so I'm putting it here. There is a pretty big problem with this. Concepts. Pages like McDonald's, which could go in a million different directions as an article, are actually going in a million different directions. This is bad. How about we decide on some concept before actually starting? That way, there'll be consistency or something. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 18:43, Jul 12

Oh twas only a suggestion. Well, there is a talk page for the article if anyone wants to make any major suggestions, and I thought that we normally manage OK on these things. I would hate it if we started voting over this. Just edit it as you see fit I say. She will be alllll right Led. ;) MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 18:49, Jul 12
Yeah, I was actually more referring to my edit, to be honest. :P - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 18:55, Jul 12


is this dead again? is anyone watching this page? SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 18:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Which page? MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 18:53, Sep 8
colonization in general. tricky dick has been the 'colonization of the week' for a month now. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 19:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, how wants to play with dicks? I set um up you... Yea, where is ZB? MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 19:15, Sep 8

While we're worrying about the deadness of colonisation, could someone improve Richard Nixon some more? I've done a bit, but there's only so much a Brit can do when they have limited knowledge of the subject matter. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  15:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Let's do Sex! No really. We should. That will get the juices flowing. Sex is what sells (apparently)... The problem with Colonization now is that someone moved the link to the bottom the the main page. Before it was at the top and getting loads of hits, we should move it back up. MrN Icons-flag-gb HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 22:10, Sep 10

I would also suggest sending messages to those who voted for the article in question, urging them into action. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  11:50, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I moved the Colonization box up, but Spang moved it down again. If you want it up there again, take it up with him on his talk page. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 18:47, Sep 11
Personal tools