Uncyclopedia talk:Top10 05

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

WE MOVED THE DISCUSSION BELOW TO THE DUMP

edit 2005

So, should articles that were featured in 2006 but written mostly in 2005 stay in the list or not?--Rataube 18:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes. We don't need to be too strict. We are here for the fun. It was fun to vote for uncyclopedian of the year 2004 when in fact uncy wasnt created until 2005. I say any article featured before the creation of this page can stay.--Rataube 18:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • No. In the interest of keeping this going, I think feature date is a good cut-off. If we are to have top ten of 2006, we need to make a distinction. --KATIE!! 18:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • No. Use the feature date as the cut-off. ~ T. (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Vote: The cutoff should be articles featured before the creation of this page. It is simplest and fairest that way. --- Quill Rev. Isra (talk) 23:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • No. We need a Top10/2005 list and a Top10/2006 list......and next year a Top10/2007.....that way it can be formatted as part of bigger section, AND in the case of 2006 be ongoing over the next year. -- Sir Mhaille  Icons-flag-gb (talk to me) 23:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Yesh I don't see a big problem with having a 14-month Best Of this year and only a 10-month Best Of for 2006, and it's easiest to organize this way. --—rc (t) 23:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes. Take a look at Mac OS V. Not that this is anything near top 10 stuff, but it makes a good example. It was created in 2005, placed on VFD, and I saved it in 2006 by totally redoing it. If it were better and were featured, shouldn't it qualify for top 10 for 2006? I think an article should qualify for top 10 if it were featured in that year, regardless of when it was written. --Keithhackworth MUN 13:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


edit *

What do the *s after certain article names signify? Are you just trying to mess with my head? I bet that's it.—Sir Mandaliet CUN PS VFH GN (talk) 13:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Probably that they were featured in 2006 and not 2005..... -- Sir Mhaille  Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)
Isra added them and they mean what Mhaille said.--Rataube 15:24, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

edit Voting several times

A question raised on IRC: can one use several votes for the same article? - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 18:34, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Nope, it was added to the rules about a week ago, and I tried to fix all occurances that I saw. If there are any others, feel free to fix them yourself. Tompkinssig   Smallturtle  t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 18:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


edit Templates

Has somebody made a "Top 10" template yet? We could have custom templates for each of the articles, using something along the lines of these for text: (I'm using some of the more famous articles)

(Follow the rest of the article's style.)

You have two cows. They voted this article for Top 10 in 2005. This made you very happy.

SERBIA_ROLLZ: w00t! we're top 10 German_Emp: n00b go away

This article

was voted top 10 of 20

05.
and so on and so forth. Good or bad idea? Swordmaster 21:22, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects