From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

edit Heil to the Chief

I liked that pun (which I can now say given VFS drama is over).                               Puppy's talk page05:02 04 Feb

Oh, you intended that to be spelled that way? Sorry! Going by the Change History in the privileges log, Chief seems to suggest that you are one of the two winners of the process. Catch up with you tomorrow. Spıke Ѧ 05:09 4-Feb-13
  • 22:03 . . ChiefjusticeDS (talk | contribs) changed group membership for User:Simsilikesims from autopatrolled and rollback to autopatrolled, rollback and administrator ‎(VFS winner, unlucky!)
  • 22:02 . . ChiefjusticeDS (talk | contribs) changed group membership for User:SPIKE from rollback to rollback and administrator ‎(VFS winner, unlucky)
Not I.                               Puppy's talk page05:47 04 Feb
Yes, you--if you take my meaning. Spıke Ѧ 03:06 8-Feb-13

edit Uncyclopedia:VFH/UnScripts:My_Little_Womb_Newt:_Pregnancy_is_Sexy

I have a suspicion that the above nomination might not have been created with the best interests of the wiki in mind. --Mn-z 20:50, February 5, 2013 (UTC)

That puts it mildly. To the good, I hear that all the recent mischief on this website is a result of an absence of excitement on the impostor site. Spıke Ѧ 20:58 5-Feb-13

edit Why is the block button there?

In recent changes, I shouldn't be able to see that. ...--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 00:43, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

It is intermittent. It has been doing so for a long time. I can no longer even help debug it because I always see it now and that isn't a bug. Bizzeebeever believed it was a problem with MediaWiki ("#blamewikia"). Spıke Ѧ 03:04 8-Feb-13
Wow. gay.--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 03:25, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

edit Snowstorm of 2013 did you brave the storm? Any damage? Al 00:20 10-2-'13

Pretty well, thanks for asking. Snow well above the knee; car parked down by the street; got it out and went to the store and could do so again if I want wet pants again. Winds probably reached hurricane force overnight; I woke up and heard the wall of the house being sandblasted, but if any limbs are down, they are under the snow. I have a guy plowing me out--last, perhaps tomorrow--at a bargain price. No loss of electricity here, otherwise I would be nursing laptop batteries and not on-site much. I have an audio for the UnNews of Obama shooting "skeets," but uploading it from home is impossible. There are 400,000 without power in New England and apparently 3 feet in some places. Spıke Ѧ 00:30 10-Feb-13
Apropos of nothing, do you think you might give Mr. Natural a push? Spıke Ѧ 00:33 10-Feb-13

Good, at least the power stayed on. Now all you have to do is make some of those snow angels and drag out the sled. Mr. Natural, oh, joy. I checked recently to see if Crumb was still alive, haven't seen anything of his lately. He is, and his wife dragged him to France which he hates. A strange duck. But maybe the page has nothing to do with him, I'll give it a quickie but am signing off soon. I just gave Shirley Phelps-Roper a once over, and added the news that her two daughters quit the church and got out of there. Al few minutes later

Yes. I read in RecentChanges that GOD HATES FAGS but it doesn't say how He feels about Goats. Spıke Ѧ 00:58 10-Feb-13

p.s. I just took a quick look and can't do it now, too much to contemplate and change around to at least give it coherence. Later this week perhaps. --- Whoops, it's yours, I actually just took a very quick look thinking it was some IP's or something. Tomorrow, I'll truck with it tomorrow, am too unfocused now.

I just googled “Shirley Phelps-Roper”. After Wikipedia and a twitter account, we're the third result. People looking for her will visit here before going to WBC. That makes me happy.                               Puppy's talk page12:59 10 Feb

And what they will find when they come here will be a pink kitten and a warning notice not to go inside and read the article if they know what's good for them, which will break the fourth wall and ruin any benefit of them thinking we are anything like a wikipedian information source. Can we all band together and ask wikia to remove the warning notice? This is a prime example of why it should be removed, for the good of all humanity. GOD HATES CONTENT WARNING NOTICES, and is the scourge of noncensors everywhere. In the meantime, how about finally getting Puppy's content warning notice up in place of the kittens, but that doesn't solve the problem. I'm not going to tell you who this is, or even what time it is. hahahahahahahahahaha, you will never know who this was, WE ARE ANONYMOUS AND WE ARE LEGION AND GOD HATES ANONYMOUS AND GOD HATES TIMESTAMPS HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

On Bing Shirley Phelps-Roper isn't on the first three pages, but James Bevel shows up second. On Google Bevel is down the page. These engines must use very different criteria. Al 14:01 10-2 (and on Reading, England, I didn't realize you initiated the page, or else I wouldn't have moaned about it)

(After being outside getting plowed out) Yes, I know; before long, web searches for the entire Tea Party movement will come here first. You don't have to back off on the grounds that I wrote something; simply, if you want something done, don't describe it by writing "bleh" or such, even though precision is the legacy of Dead White Men and you are a soulful Negress from Mississippi with an unfortunate resemblance to Al Jolson. Spıke Ѧ 17:35 10-Feb-13
You're right - all search engines use different algorithms. I focus on google when looking at SEO as that has been the most popularly used engine. I assume it still is, but I've never bothered checking. That, and Bing drives me up the wall with the way it does video search. Although I should point out that according to Alexa only 40% of Wikia's traffic comes from search engines.                               Puppy's talk page06:23 10 Feb
Bing lost me with its map of a residential district on the north side of Chihuahua, Mexico, which bore no resemblance to reality. Bing, like the Fork, might have no business plan; its way forward is to rely on the fact that someone else has a business plan. Spıke Ѧ 18:46 10-Feb-13

edit Renaming Forum:A suggestion

I'd rather you didn't. Only because the naming of a forum is done by the forum creator, and as such it's effectively part of the initial comment. Similarly there's a forum about the wiki “moving” that I suggested was a misnomer. I'll ask them to rename it, but I'm not about to change it myself out of politeness. But back to Forum:a suggestion, the person who started that forum has an antipathy towards us already - let's not poke the bear. Or beaver. (Insert beaver poking joke here.)                               Puppy's talk page01:32 11 Feb

Understood. Separately, though, Mnbvcxz changed the subject with his self-styled "rant" about the utility of having multiple sites holding our content, which is a separate topic and deserves a separate page. (Yes, I know you are not he.) Spıke Ѧ 13:42 11-Feb-13
Meh. Given it's had minimal response, probably no point in creating a separate forum for it. Although odd that it's the same argument that I used for the validity of the mirror to the two main instigators of the fork. And they ignored that argument.                               Puppy's talk page02:06 11 Feb
Of course a website owner is going to argue against multiple locations. Once the community realizes that they don't need a given a website, effective "power" of the webhost vastly decreases. --Mn-z 14:58, February 11, 2013 (UTC)

edit Bronies

Thanks for putting up with me. As a well-meaning (but hopelessly inept) n00b, I realise I may be a bit demanding. But I would like to ask a few things, and I hope this is the way I'm supposed to do it:

1. Is it any possible way in which you could provide me with a template of my most recent edit? I had intended to continue working with this page this very afternoon, but by that point it had been reverted back, and it seemed a bit daunting to start over again. If you could also tell me how to access this template without disturbing the page as I work on it, I would also be grateful.

2. Is there any additional means of contacting the admins other than editing their talk page?

3. This isn't as much a question as a statement: I thank you for your patience, and I assure you that I am trying my utmost to be droll and not just dumb. The first time I tried my hand at Uncyclopedia, my formatting was so bad that people assumed I was a vandal (well, that, and that my user name containing the word "troll"). So thanks once more, and have a good one.

PS: Is it true that Uncyclopedia is moving to a new domain, or have I just been misled? --TrollzinSpace101 (talk) 16:54, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

This being a wiki, nothing of yours that is reverted is ever lost. By using the History page, you can retrieve any page at any point in the past. Use this with care, because editing a page from the past implicitly deletes every change made since that date.
I see that the most recent things that happened to Bronies is that an anonymous user I assumed was you blanked it, and a veteran Uncyclopedian restored it. So your work should still be at the page address.
You are free to email me. However, conversations that concern the wiki or articles should be public.
Yes, many of our Admins and editors have withdrawn to their own website. It is our web host's sensible policy that their resources ought not be used to divert traffic away from them, and I support it. Spıke Ѧ 17:10 13-Feb-13

edit Future-proofing dates in articles with {CURRENTYEAR}

Just thought of doing this. Every new year we end up with a bunch of articles that have out of date dates on them. For instance, an anon just brought my attention to Beady_Eye#Rivalry_With_The_High_Flying_Smurfs_.26_Olympics_Closing_Ceremony.27:_2012-2013, which didn't have the -2013 at the end. Anon added that, but I then changed it to {{CURRENTYEAR}} which will future proof it (to an extent). I'm also thinking of creating a template that allows for adding a certain timespan to the current date and time for similar issues. Given you post-edit stuff fairly regularly, and have an eye for this kind of detail, I thought I'd run the template idea past you first. (We may in fact already have a similar template, but I'm not aware of it.)

Although on the topic of time templates, I copy pasted {{Countdown}} from {{wp:Template:Countdown}} and intend to tune it up a little, but this may be useful to avoid votes running ad infinitum. The next step is to create a voting template - similar to VFH template - that incorporates this as part of it.                               Puppy's talk page02:44 15 Feb

This smacks of artificial intelligence, about which as I say the big drawback is not that it isn't artificial. If an author wants to make an era of his subject extend from 2012-Current, he could write it that way. Using wikimath could give him the option of writing an expression that, say, always rendered as the year number of last year, keeping an article current, and there's nothing wrong with that; but the only real way to keep an article current is to edit it from time to time. That lets you work in allusions to current events and fads too. I don't know that we already have such templates. But I'd expect that we have copies of the Wikipedia templates that let an Infobox display a subject's age and keep that current.
I saw your countdown on the vote on the Content Warning. That's a useful way to declare and enforce a rule, one which fights the urge to procrastinate. Spıke Ѧ 02:54 15-Feb-13
I would agree about extending articles into the future. I can't preemptively write next year's UnNews now. Writing about the near future requires that the article be updated. Dated material is OK in UnNews, since outdated news stories exist in the real world. However, an article shouldn't be describing John McCain's future victory in the 2008 presidential election. --Mn-z 11:42, February 16, 2013 (UTC)
You're both wrong. You're acting as though it's 2014!                               Puppy's talk page11:45 16 Feb
My comment was a generic one on the unwisdom of writing articles that try to update themselves. If someone wants to try, I've got no problem, nor if you want to write tools. (Just document them, and put the documentation somewhere where we can find it!)
Separately, I apologize for PotR's hour of effort, but I did delete the Undictionary entry on red Indians as still being nothing but racism without humor. I'll give our regrets to its creator. Spıke Ѧ 11:54 16-Feb-13
Don't stress about the effort. I liked two words out of that Undictionary entry, and tried to scrape something out of the rest of it. Destined to fail on that one.
As for M-z's comment - I'm looking more at articles that have the ugly "2010-present" or similar attached to it. It's just an ugly way of writing and looks un-encyclopaedic. This is a potential solution that doesn't involve updating it constantly. But I agree - for topical articles, which is what UnNews is, thee is no way of creating it for a future event, and they shouldn't be dated for beyond the present, or updated beyond when they were written (but can be revamped to improve the writing). For things like a crappy band article that are doing nothing new, this works. (When they do something new, then we can change it.)                               Puppy's talk page12:01 16 Feb
Down to quibbles now: "2010-present" looks plenty encyclopedic and better than an article that leaves the story at the year in which the article was written. Wikicode expressions are one solution. Spıke Ѧ 12:08 16-Feb-13
Separately to Puppy, I find that one of your two Redirects on QVFD is linked to all over talkspace, and the couple I looked at don't use templates. Spıke Ѧ 12:08 16-Feb-13
You must have checked the wrong page (because there are three pages with very similar names). Try Special:WhatLinksHere/Legal_Department/Summons. That only links to QVFD and pages that transclude QVFD.                               Puppy's talk page12:14 16 Feb
I stand corrected; Summons doesn't stand at all. Spıke Ѧ 12:18 16-Feb-13

edit Category:Forums created out of slight overreaction not created in 1927

This is a single-use joke category used on a forum article. The fork recently deleted their version of it. However, removing the category from the forum topic would bump the forum. As a more drastic step, what if the forum topic itself was deleted? It really isn't serving any function. --Mn-z 12:34, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

A typical navigation tool that pranks rather than helps the reader. "Don't crack wise." Put it on QVFD, please. Never mind, I've got it. Spıke Ѧ 12:41 16-Feb-13
However, that still generates a red link on a two year old forum. More importantly, it adds a "wanted category," which some maintenance editors dislike. Although, I personally prefer a red link to stupid navigation link to an existent stupid navigation link. --Mn-z 16:08, February 16, 2013 (UTC)
I am willing to accept that pages locked for two years might have red-links. I don't know how to fix it on the page without, as you say, bumping it in the list. Spıke Ѧ 17:11 16-Feb-13

edit User:DeeJaay Batoushai/Don Bosco

I found this on pee reivew, and it looks like schoolcruft. "Don Bosco" is some obscure Roman Catholic saint. From a quick wikipedia search, it looks like the various schools are unrelated Roman Catholic schools who happen to use the same patron saint. From the article, it looks like the school is pre-college, so it would not would not be allowed on this wiki. As a general rule, college articles are allowed, high school articles aren't. --Mn-z 17:59, February 16, 2013 (UTC)

Hold on, will investigate between basketball games--I think I talked to the author about this. I don't think it's prohibited by rule. (Find me the rule?) Spıke Ѧ 18:47 16-Feb-13
I don't think there is an actual rule, because the community likes to crack-wise with the policy pages. However, I do recall there being a convention against articles on high schools, as high schools lack notability. There may be an exception is the high school in question is notable enough to have a wikipedia page. --Mn-z 19:26, February 16, 2013 (UTC)
Notability (UN:CM) is the only reason we'd go against it unless there is vanity/cyberbullying. Even non-notable schools could be saved by great writing, which I don't claim this is. I remember now. What we have is a non-native English speaker, working on an article in his own userspace, and notably declining to mainspace it yet. He hasn't been around since Christmas, when he couldn't decode VFH voting and wrote an article on Shampoo, emphasis on Poo, that I told him didn't appeal to me. My opinion for now on the article is It ain't hurtin' no one where it is. Spıke Ѧ 19:42 16-Feb-13
The saint is not completely obscure. I don't remember a lot about him, but I seem to recall he was like the Baden Powell of Saints - he liked to foster young boys and turn them into men. I think the policy - as far as it stands - is we can have an article about a school as long as it's accessible and funny. High school articles are rarely accessible - almost always made up of in-jokes - and as a result rarely funny. They also tend to become an opportunity for cyberbullying, creating a “Mr Winkler is gay” style of humour.                               Puppy's talk page01:26 17 Feb
This Don Bosco is claimed to be a chain of schools in India. There is no cyberbullying of named individuals (except a quote from a specific rector, just in case the article were running low on inside jokes), so it ain't hurtin' no one where it is--and it isn't ready for mainspace.
In other news tonight, Aimsplode is trying to get himself banned by abusing QVFD, like we're going to huff Reverend Zim ulator's talk page to help Aimsplode continue covering his tracks. Spıke Ѧ 01:48 17-Feb-13
I recall the saint from a bunch of Catholic boys homes in Australia. I haven't read the article in question here, but if it's in user space and it's not UN:CB, I don't care. I noticed the Aimsplode movements. That gif you may as well delete - I am in the process of putting together a better one in its place.                               Puppy's talk page02:24 17 Feb
Sub the new one into that UnNews and I will. Spıke Ѧ 02:27 17-Feb-13
Done.                               Puppy's talk page04:30 17 Feb
And Done. Spıke Ѧ 12:58 17-Feb-13

What is with Aimsplode's QVFD of everything about anyway? --Mn-z 17:51, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

On a surface level, he may have understood that nothing is ever really deleted on a wiki, and may regret his former role as chairman of our local chapter of the Hitler Youth. It is bizarre that his attempts to change his identity and cover his tracks are punctuated by a candidacy for Admin. On a deeper level, he is attacking the website by trolling us and diverting us from useful work, as he was with his candidacy, and as MrN9000 is with his attempt to "heal the rift in Our Community." Spıke Ѧ 18:19 18-Feb-13
I don't think MrN9000 is trolling, so much as he was a different opinion of how the site/project/whatever should be ran. Or rather, he came to the discussion late, and where the rest of the fork userbase was mid January. --Mn-z 18:37, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
Sorry; his shift from manufactured hysteria over my banning of two Anons (above on this page) (which persisted overnight and cannot be attributed to alcohol) and his current silver-tongued appeal for family unification has exhausted my assumption of good faith. This is yet another attack on the website. It operates by diverting us from useful work. Spıke Ѧ 18:54 18-Feb-13

edit VFD maintenance

VFD seems to be full with several articles with relatively high numbers of delete votes. I am not sure what rules were are using now, but if you get some articles off there, we could add more articles to delete. --Mn-z 18:45, February 18, 2013 (UTC)

I'm on it. Spıke Ѧ 18:54 18-Feb-13
(Whew!) It's down 2, to 13 now, which means there are 7 available slots. Like finger sandwiches at a VIP reception, don't take 'em all. Spıke Ѧ 19:26 18-Feb-13
Strike your nomination of Terms of Use and it will free up another slot. Spıke Ѧ 19:32 18-Feb-13

edit Invalidate combined VFD vote on Unquotable articles

The VFD on the unquotable reskins is getting keep votes based on some users wanting to keep a couple of the reskins. I would suggest that since the community does not like voting on them as a block, that the VFD nomination be invalidated and re-nommed as individual articles. --Mn-z 14:10, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Good call. I'll do exactly that. Spıke Ѧ 14:12 20-Feb-13

edit Final Solution

I was going to move Apple the Great's article to Final Solution (proper capitalisation), but it already exists as a redirect to Holocaust. Can you huff the redirect and move the new one to its place, please? Thanks. --Snippy 03:29, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

Done, here and in the VFH entry. Don't know why it is a proper name, but that is how it is on Wikipedia. Spıke Ѧ 03:45 19-Feb-13

edit User:Abuse filter

Apparently, this bot, ran by the owner of the fork, is still active and banning ips for arcane, although possibly valid, reasons. (Yay for cracking-wise with the navigation tools!!!) While I don't know what it does, I don't think an unmaintained computer program should have the ability to ban users. Also, it is perma-banning IPs, and I was under the impression that IP addresses should not be perma-banned, as they change user from time to time. --Mn-z 16:18, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with all of the above, and also because the abuse filter typically reports "Reason: Someone did something." I recently raised the same issue with an Admin (I think shortly before I became one) and did not get an answer. Cannot find that query now, even with Google, shortly after finally finding the reference for your last completely-valid-but-hard-to-search-for point, the one concerning {{OWQ}}. Spıke Ѧ 16:34 19-Feb-13

The abuse filter is at Special:AbuseFilter "Something something" means that somebody tried to create a page with a slash, and spam pages often start with slashes. As an admin, I think you can disable it since no-one here knows how to operate it. --Mn-z 16:58, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for finding that. "Something something" does not mean that; it means nothing. For starters, I have eagerly changed the "Public description" to "Anon tried to create a page starting with slash". I think it suffices to inhibit the creation and not block the user, but I won't do that without wider input. (Sigh! Open a Forum?) Spıke Ѧ 17:10 19-Feb-13

Could you set all the abuse filter setting to public? I don't see a reason to keep them super secret. --Mn-z 17:16, February 19, 2013 (UTC)

I can see one: Greater knowledge of what exactly is being filtered is a tool for more effective attacks, for example by seeing a bug in the RE code that I am unlikely to see. But I am improving (includes: making more truthful) the description of each that I can understand. Spıke Ѧ 17:19 19-Feb-13
PS--Regarding the perma-ban of IPs, this is indeed not our usual policy, especially for infractions that are ambiguous as to malice (and an Abuse Filter cannot discern intent). I see on the page many redresses other than banning, but I do not see any bans other than a perma-ban. Spıke Ѧ 14:00 20-Feb-13

edit AF17 missed one

Didn't pick up on this edit. (The edit linked to, not the edit I'm making now.) I haven't looked at the filter so I have no idea why/why not.                               Puppy's talk page10:11 14 Mar 2013

MediaWiki did not see it as adding an external link (added_links null in [1]) so AF 17 did not fire. We could reinsert a "better" definition of external link, but what we have is elegant and catches virtually all of them. Spıke Ѧ 10:30 14-Mar-13

edit Aimsplode's Talk Page

It IS his talk page, normally old stuff gets archived, but that should be left up to the discretion of the user. I would be inclined to leave the talk page as he has it, the old stuff in his talk page can be found in the history anyways. At this point it seems pointless to block him since as he has stated he intends never to return. He HAS done this before though, and at least he isn't trying to redirect his talk page somewhere else this time. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 02:50, February 20, 2013 (UTC)

Apart from the over/under on how many consecutive days Aimsplode can tell us this is his last day here forever, I was taught (by MrN9000 himself) that users are generally not free to unsay what they have said (except by strikethrough) or force researchers to comb through the history. On a related note, Aimsplode has been wasting Admins' time filing junk QVFDs, covering things like Forums where he has expounded on his Hitler envy, that he must know we will not delete. There is also the fact that he reverted me, and with the snarky Change Summary: Revert "admin"....MY talk page. Not yours. Mine. Thank you. Sorry; if he is leaving forever, he does not need anything here to be "mine."
Indeed I do not intend to ban him or do anything else that would provoke a campaign of orchestrated misbehavior from the other side. But Aimsplode, with his unique history of writing no comedy but creating dozens of forums, trolling, and using this site (and even a straw campaign for Admin) for attention-getting, uniquely requires that we keep it easy to look up what he said when. Spıke Ѧ 03:17 20-Feb-13
Considering all things with Aimsplode over time - and that he is banned at the fork - I side with Spike here. Though he 'hasn't returned', Aimsplode is creating pointless work for us to fix which is disruptive and means we have to be alert to what he is upto. These I believe have been grounds before to ban a user. If he just stuck to his own page, then that would be fine but he isn't. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 07:31, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
Regarding this, as far as I am concerned Aimsplode can do pretty much what he wants to his own userspace, if he wants to blank both his user and talk pages to show how angry he is then he can do that. Adding pointless stuff to QVFD is the only irritating aspect of his behaviour, if this persists then a ban may be in order. At present I don't think one is necessary. --ChiefjusticeDS 07:58, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
I was of the impression that mainly "unsaying what has been said" is not allowed in ongoing discussions (as opposed to discussions that are already over) and not allowed in forums. Deleting past discussions on a talk page that are over seems to me kind of like making a talk page archive and then blanking that archive later - pointless, but mostly harmless. It is true we need to keep an eye on Aimsplode, I haven't been around enough to monitor what he put on QVFD lately. If he is QVFDing stuff in his userspace that is one thing, but if he is trying to QVFD stuff like forums or mainspace pages that he created that is quite another. The tax season is slowing down some so I may be on more often soon depending how many hours I get at work or not. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 06:25, February 21, 2013 (UTC)


Hi. For a short period the interwiki wp has been turned off. Can I get you to move this to IWP:HOTCAT before Tim (the lovely fellow at Wikia) turns that iw back on?                               Puppy's talk page12:32 21 Feb 2013

Done. Now what's with the new namespace? Spıke Ѧ 00:35 21-Feb-13
Also, does this one need Sysop-only protection for moves and edits, unlike the others now in IWP:? Spıke Ѧ 00:41 21-Feb-13
It's all good. It stems from a complaint that the pre-forkers had relating to Wikia introducing that iw prefix. The concern was we “lost” half a dozen articles. What we actually lost was half a dozen redirects and that article. As far as I'm concerned they are all VFD material, but putting them in this temporary faux namespace allows us to review and determine the efficacy/quality of these. If any of it does survive VFD style of checks, then we'll look at a better location.                               Puppy's talk page03:56 21 Feb 2013
At your leisure. Do you realize the "Hot Chicks" one is missing the colon? Spıke Ѧ 04:06 21-Feb-13
Yeah - I wanted to move it for the moment anyway just so that when I did a prefix index for "wp" it stayed out of the equation.                               Puppy's talk page09:25 21 Feb 2013

edit Unquotable:The Founding Fathers

This page shows what combining George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Ben Franklin's unquotables into one page would look like. All three of those pages are short, Thomas Jefferson's is particularly bad.

Also, on Unquotable:Aristotle, there is an exchange between Alexander the Great and Aristotle that is a parody of star wars text. While it is mildly amusing, I don't think it goes on a quotepage. --Mn-z 14:21, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

Responding to stubby pages by combining them is valid, and turning the former pages into #REDIRECTs is something you can do without a vote on VFD. However, we have Admin Simsilikesims expressing support for the namespace, so as a preliminary step you should discuss your strategy with her so as to avoid anyone's impression you're trying to work around her.
On Aristotle (wasn't Socrates the one who taught by interrogation? See also Dave Thomas), the dialogue indeed does not fit in Unquotable. It is almost an UnScript. Here again, though, it might be good to air it out with Simsie. Spıke Ѧ 15:05 21-Feb-13
Creating a better Unquotable from three less quality ones is different from a debate about the survival of a namespace. I can't see this being an issue.                               Puppy's talk page10:10 21 Feb 2013
The edit itself is unassailable. Doing it in the middle of a campaign to eliminate a namespace that an Admin has risen in defense of simply requires a little circumspection to hold the team together. Spıke Ѧ 22:24 21-Feb-13
One thing I would say though is that creating redirects from the existing three articles is essential. This maintains article history and as such attribution of original authors. If you haven't already I'd highlight where the existing content came from in an edit summary on the new page.                               Puppy's talk page10:38 21 Feb 2013
Drop "The" from the page title? Illustrate by Shooping Oscar Wilde onto Mount Rushmore? Spıke Ѧ 22:48 21-Feb-13
Syphilis is not hereditary , but it can pass from mother to child, aka congenital syphilis. --Mn-z 15:02, February 22, 2013 (UTC)
See also, "Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children." That's far from original. Also, I invite Puppy to the Chief's talk page, regarding abuse filters, and you're invited too. Spıke Ѧ 15:34 22-Feb-13

edit Forum:Names of Admins in various lists--making it a user option with @import

I'm having issues with the import. When I do a full copypasta to my CSS it seems to be fine, but when I try doing an import it dies. I'm not sure where the issue is, and I'm having network issues at present which is making my page loads very slow.                               Puppy's talk page12:44 24 Feb 2013

The only documentation I have here (for CSS1) says that you have to code:
 @import url(...)
That's my only guess. Spıke Ѧ 00:57 24-Feb-13

It should work with or without the url(…. I've tried both anyway, but still stumbling.                               Puppy's talk page12:59 24 Feb 2013

Ah - it appears that goes through MediaWiki parsing, which kills the value as a CSS. To get around it you need to import the raw CSS, which is Either that, or some fairy magic was involved. Either way, that import now works.                               Puppy's talk page01:15 24 Feb 2013

Though rather harder to explain to the newbie than a cut-and-paste! Spıke Ѧ 01:20 24-Feb-13

“Click here and press Save                              Puppy's talk page01:58 24 Feb 2013

Well, that is easy to explain. But does preload insert at the start, or pre-load the entire edit window (preventing this hack from coexisting with other contents of my Common.css)? Spıke Ѧ 02:19 24-Feb-13

preload fills in the entire edit window, but section=new ensures that it adds it at the end of any existing CSS, assuming there is any. Unfortunately {{#ifexist}} doesn't work properly with Special:Mypage.                               Puppy's talk page02:56 24 Feb 2013

You don't want section=new if it's still true that @import has to precede all other CSS. Or if you get a pair of == stuck in the middle of your CSS. "We are now confused on a much higher level than ever before." Spıke Ѧ 03:53 24-Feb-13

Yes. It does. Which means my nice idea won't work. Bollocks. Maybe just "Copy the following text: @import url("");. Now paste it at the start of your style sheet (located here)."                               Puppy's talk page04:55 24 Feb 2013

I've described this in UN:HAX. Spıke Ѧ 05:33 24-Feb-13

edit Uncy of the Month

Thank you for your nice words about me on the nom page. To thank you properly I've ripped my vote away from you, polished it up, and given it to somebody else. Remember those years when you won every Goldstein Award, and then somebody made the people vote to end it? And UnBooks author of the month, that was one of my favorite awards. Maybe when you are an admin you can bring them back. Aleister thanks again! 24-2-'13

Ah, yes! thank you for doing that. I had not thought of bringing more awards back, not even one for me to win every month. I had thought about the fact that we have only as many (hyper-)active users as awards, and are destined to have month after month of award-giving incest orgies until we get a solid second tier of contributors. Spıke Ѧ 21:42 24-Feb-13
Hopefully not, maybe more people will come back once they realize there are two ships at sea sailing under the same flag. Aye aye, a pirate ship we be. Al 22:03 24-2-'13
I'd hold back on re-introducing awards at the moment. Beyond NotM, the awards generally recognise long term writers, and those awards that the current user base are likely to get are the awards the current user base have already gotten. Given we give them as an encouragement - and I don't think any of the current user base need to be encouraged - they are slightly redundant. My thoughts - beyond NotM, I'd been waiting until March to see how the landscape lay. At this stage I'm thinking push them all back to “of the quarter” awards. We don't need mastabatory self-congratulation voting on a monthly basis. I already suffer from vote fatigue.                               Puppy's talk page11:15 24 Feb 2013
Vote fatique? You don't vote on VFH, where it counts for something. What are we going to do about VFH, we'll going to have to talk about that soon. And I see nothing wrong in monthly awards as deserving people like yourself are earning them by holding this place in perfect workiing condition. Just because there are less people does not make it any less important. Yeah, a pirate ship we be. Al 23:49 24-2-'13
The opportunity to publicize y'all's efforts and note that you are not just working for your own satisfaction but appreciated by others, is more important than actually giving or receiving the awards, which at this pace we will all soon have five of each of, by the time the others straggle back from pay-to-play Froggypedia and claim that all of our medals have asterisks attached to them. Spıke Ѧ 23:56 24-Feb-13
Pats on the back to all of ye, aye, a pirate ship we be. Froggypedia and Spikeopoedia, two halves of one island. Aye. Aleister minutes later
Also, Mordillo is not around to ban me for the day for "using" an awards page merely to say nice things about other contributors. Spıke Ѧ 00:03 25-Feb-13

edit I can't add any comment to the latest Village Dump Topic

I wanted to add a comment to the "who's staying' topic in the village dump....--Spqr Sir Claudius CUN VFH (carpe diem) 23:22, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry; I shut it down, citing mutual trolling in my entry in the Protection Log. I am anxious that folks here write funny articles rather than continue the inquiry into the details of the Fork's incorporation documents, which in any case won't change anyone's mind; the Forum was attracting trolling from the other side; and nobody cares who's staying. Sorry you didn't get the last word. Spıke Ѧ 23:30 28-Feb-13
That's okay- I opened a new forum on the Village Dump, if people want to comment they should- and hopefully you don't mind that too much. Just coming back after so long it pains me to see such division in which we now have two sites with less than 500 active users...I'm not going to the new site- I think that is absurd- I think they should come back here and stop all this fucking around, excuse my French.--Spqr Sir Claudius CUN VFH (carpe diem) 23:37, February 28, 2013 (UTC)
I do mind. I am sure you think you are a peacemaker comparable to none other here, but the old Forum was attracting taunting and jousting, and detracting from writing, and this one willl eventually do more of the same. They are not coming back from the new site; they own the new site, as they will never own Wikia. My opinion is that all the froth about Content Warnings and advertising is what you get when you work in a company with departments other than the creative department, but if that is how one feels, so be it. Separately, you should consider that the apathy that reduced us to under 500 is not all the result of the Fork but was the subject of much hand-wringing before the Fork came about. Still separately, next time do you think you could inquire about a decision before defying it? Spıke Ѧ 23:48 28-Feb-13

edit Category:Uncyclopedia history

You're probably already aware I just created this. You may want to add it to your watchlist, as nothing should be added to this category that doesn't meet a communal consensus for historical value. (Kinda like how we don't add Category:Featured unless it has been featured.) it doesn't reflect on WL, but it means you get emails if an article is added, depending on your email settings.                               Puppy's talk page12:15 01 Mar 2013

I could not imagine a better way to formalize a bad decision. Maybe what I wrote at VFD today is wrong: Maybe we are a museum. Spıke Ѧ 00:22 1-Mar-13
I concur with Spike. This wiki doesn't exist be a museum of itself. --Mn-z 16:01, March 1, 2013 (UTC)

It has happened in the past. It'll continue to happen. This is a purely a method of keeping track of this annoying category.
Actually, that gave me a thought. That abuse filter you added to pick up on external links - can we also add one for Category:Featured or <youtube> being added to a page? I'd rather not stop it, but a tag in WL/RC, along with a “Are you sure you want to do this edit?” style of warning would be a decent idea. (I think that the YouTube links acts similarly to an SEO bump - hence we regularly get then added to Spambox.)                               Puppy's talk page12:31 01 Mar 2013

No… the FA cat filter won't work as it's generally added via transposition - which I do want to do something else about. But the YouTube idea is still valid.                               Puppy's talk page12:33 01 Mar 2013

Technically, we can do all of those things.
We cannot make conditional the tag written to Special:RecentChanges. If you want a different tag, you're talking about using a different filter, though we have a few spares.
The test "Added a link to an external website" should include the <YOUTUBE> syntax, which essentially does the same thing. Spıke Ѧ 00:59 1-Mar-13
PS--AF17 now tests for UNIQc5e772c76af987c-YOUTUBE-00000007-QINU THIS as of 1:12 UTC (but will catch edits to a line that already had a YOUTUBE on it. Also recoded to not excuse edits that both add and delete external links. Spıke Ѧ 01:17 1-Mar-13

Also recoded to catch lines that have spaces, like < YOUTUBE Rescinded. Spıke Ѧ 02:02 1-Mar-13

PPS--AF17 is tweaked after a flurry of false hits today on a user under 4 days old trying to edit his own user page. Documented on the Chief's talk page. Using heuristics to prevent edits either to articles thought part of our heritage or to Featured Articles is dicier. Even FAs can be brought up-to-date, though they ought not be tugged in a completely new direction by a relatively new user; but we should continue guiding that using the Patrolled flag. Spıke Ѧ 01:16 2-Mar-13

edit While we're on the topic of old stuff

Can you move:

back into the forum name space? As articles they are VFD material. As Forums they belong in a different namespace.                               Puppy's talk page03:01 02 Mar 2013

Moving those back to the forumspace may bump them to the top of the forums. Also, these articles seem to have been re-created, since the forums were created in only one edit by MadMax. That, in turn, implies that the forums were deleted at one point. They are linked to from a navel staring article from 2006, an article by Meganew about 2006 navel staring, a list on a bot's userpage, and the above links. The pages probably could be deleted again without bothering anything. Again, this site does not exist to be museum of itself. --Mn-z 07:57, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree with your perspective, mainly because this site is not a museum of itself. But it's history is important in that it has built it to this point, and will help guide the site going forward. If you have a preferred location to keep our histories, then by all means place them there. For me, adding them to forum, user space or Uncyclopedia space is ideal - this is the kind of place we should keep our histories. Deleting our own histories means losing track of where we were and, as a result, what we've become - and therefore where we're headed. These forums were kept for a reason, but closed as forums for a reason.                               Puppy's talk page08:37 02 Mar 2013
This isn't so much a history of the site, as an archive of forum banter from 2006. Maybe these articles should be moved into someone's userspace, like Benson or Powershot dude. Or, perhaps they could exist as a subpage of Uncyclopedia vs Powershot, Flamewar of the Ages, which is itself borderline vanity, as is almost everything in Category:Records of Notable Flamewars, but I digress. Anyway, those shouldn't be in mainspace, but I don't think the forum is the best location either. --Mn-z 09:12, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
Er… they are subpages. Subpages still pop up on “Random page” though.                               Puppy's talk page12:10 02 Mar 2013
I thought subpages didn't show up when you hit the random page button. On a related note, the random page does hit UnNews, but the UnNews sidebar only links to random unNews. --Mn-z 12:12, March 3, 2013 (UTC)
Well, I have now unprotected them (see below) and anyone can take the three to VFD (hint, hint). Spıke Ѧ 12:23 3-Mar-13

No, I won't move them. Someone saw fit to write a mainspace article, based on pointless Forum banter in 2006 (I arrived in 2009), applying slight fictionalization to the names of actual Uncyclopedians, and copypaste actual Forums underneath as examples. If this decision is to be changed, it belongs to VFD, where I would vote Symbol delete vote Delete based on absence of general interest; it serves the desire of the writer for notoriety and does not serve the reader at all. I believe that that is why you want it out of mainspace. Spıke Ѧ 13:38 2-Mar-13

That, and the fact that edit protection means the links to user space stuff can't be removed from a main space article - albeit subpages of. The problem is that the article itself is pretty good, but the sheer navelism suggests it belongs in a namespace. These forums don't add any value to the article, IMO, but given they are subs of the original they either should be deleted piecemeal via VFD, or moved out of main space area. Although I still think I managed to poke fun at a forum dispute much better - which then created not only a feature but a new namespace.                               Puppy's talk page03:34 02 Mar 2013

The article doesn't have special protection. The subpages did; I'll correct that and you can send them to VFD, where it will be more persuasive to show where the same stuff still exists in the Forum, if these subpages are indeed copypastes by MadMax. Spıke Ѧ 15:48 2-Mar-13

My question is, should we take Uncyclopedia vs Powershot, Flamewar of the Ages to VFD? The article is about forum banter from 2006 between a guy who was here just to banter and a communal sockpuppet, who was also here just to banter. This isn't meaningful "site history" but rather an inside joke. A paragraph about Benson's actions on some real history page might make sense. --Mn-z 12:28, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

You might have to make that case to Simsie. I'll be voting Delete whether the question is the subpages or everything. Spıke Ѧ 12:36 3-Mar-13

edit Village Dump page is broken

However, the previous version of the page seems to be functioning normally. --Mn-z 19:31, March 3, 2013 (UTC)

I see that. It seems that what is broken in the current version is the DPL (which is a language for extracting stuff from Uncyclopedia master lists and turning it into code with which to build a page)--Puppy said he had independent confirmation that this is the case. However, all that changed from the previous version is that Lyrithya (in 2011) put a link inside a named SPAN. All this does is identify it for possible special style through ground rules such as Common.css, and no one has been poking around there in the last two weeks...except...gulp! But it doesn't and didn't have a special rule for these #talkforum links. Spıke Ѧ 20:08 3-Mar-13
And note that the main page is now unbroken. I wonder if this has something to do with changes not yet propagating to all the servers. (Or to working in a software development facility in Poland and switching over to a new software version late Friday afternoon a short time after the boss comes in with the beer.) Spıke Ѧ 20:11 3-Mar-13
BHOP is still broken. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 01:25, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
Yes it is--and in a distinctly DPL way. Sannse said something about having to refresh, presumably meaning something more than one's own cache. Or they could have broken it again, who knows? Spıke Ѧ 01:32 6-Mar-13

edit ToU issue on Zynga

Hey Spike. As you're here at the moment, or possibly just left... I'll leave this for you. There's an article at Zynga that goes somewhat over the line in the whole "threats of death and destruction wrought on employees of a company that's pissed someone off" department. It's not so much humor, more crazed ranting (although, obviously, the two can be hard to distinguish). So I'm going to remove that section (and one particularly pornographic image) - and maybe you could give the rest of the page a once over? I only scanned the rest, and have a severe humor deficit this morning, so no idea if it's a candidate for deletion. But I'll clear out the slightly scary ToU violation bit, and, as I said, the pron. Let me know if you have questions -- sannse@Wikia (talk) 18:13, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Apart from the fact that ex-employee rants aren't funny (nor are anything that strikes the reader as that), I'll look at it. Spıke Ѧ 18:38 5-Mar-13
PS--Oh, my. Company owes me $40. Let's all track down the customer-service rep, here's his name, and kill him. A laugh riot. Only, what you left is just as bad as what you took out, including the notorious c-word that you've ranted about previously. And I don't know enough about the joint to write anything funny. I'm going to VFD it and we would welcome your vote. Spıke Ѧ 18:43 5-Mar-13
I just did a quick rewrite but can't decide if it's funny or not. Check it out here. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 01:26, March 6, 2013 (UTC)
(I tried reviewing this, after I responded to you in the previous section, during the 3-minute break between volleyball sets, but that wasn't even enough time to realize you had not edited the mainspace article, which was still assaulting my eyes with the c-word in its first sentence.) I've found it now, and what you have is a vast improvement; it drops the butt-hurt customer angle, but that's fine, and it seems to be based on understanding of the website that I don't have. I did something comparable recently at Poptropica (emphasizing the website's financial exploitation of its young users). At Red Hot Pawn (with Puppy) (for the clique member at this chess-based website), and Inland Empire (for the sports fanatic), we had a similar problem of distinguishing a ridicule of an eccentric person, from the work of an eccentric person. Spıke Ѧ 03:23 6-Mar-13

edit Ouran High School Host Club

I have restored this article because it is not about an actual high school, or club within a real life high school, but about a Japanese anime (TV series) and manga series, and thus does not violate our vanity policies. I know this because I watched the anime myself. (Some of my younger friends are into animes and mangas). Just wanted to let you know. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 02:10, March 7, 2013 (UTC)

Yikes! glad someone here knows something! I have apologized directly to the author. Spıke Ѧ 02:18 7-Mar-13

edit From one flag burner to another

I like your Flag Burning Amendment rewrite, with all the flag burning going on. I don't think congress has tried to pass that one lately so it could fail by one vote - or maybe 45 by now - but they gave it a good try a few times and old man Bush got a lot of mileage out of it. Nice work, and if you finish it up and nom it for VFH I will burn it (after voting for it) Al 21:35 7-3-'13

Um, I had finished. But if you insist, I'll nominate it on VFH, so Romartus doesn't have to dredge up more articles from the past, and then you can either finish it or tell me what seems lacking. Spıke Ѧ 21:42 7-Mar-13
If I add a couple things I want no credit when it gets its needed four votes for VFH. Did you hear that TKF quit? He left a long good-bye message and hopped off. He'll be back though, hasn't he done this a few times? Al 21:48 that day


I've added a link to the actual news article that prompted me to write the article, formatted and everything. In defense of my use of capital letters in the headline, however, I can only offer that I worked at several real-life newspapers and that they all wrote headlines that way. -Tritefantastic (talk) 23:36, March 8, 2013 (UTC)

That's what I needed, a Source! Yes, some newspapers do headlines the way you did; we don't. Neither is correct, it just looks more realistic when everyone does it the same way. Thanks. Spıke Ѧ 23:46 8-Mar-13
It feeds back to wp:Wikipedia:Article titles. It's both style related and due to technical limitations. While we don't slavishly follow Wikipedia's manual of style, in the case of article titles it has a strong rationale behind it.                               Puppy's talk page04:34 09 Mar 2013

edit Content warning

I thought I'd said this in the past but I might as well say it now. I like content warnings when done the right way. One of the best examples of this is the content warning on South Park. It's a very quick warning and shows a distinct lack of respect for the fact that it needs a warning. That splash of irreverence actually drew me into the show. I also recall that the Naked Gun series had a few gems in their end credits along these lines, and even Michael Jackson's Thriller referred to "...resemblance to any persons living, dead, or undead..."

Would I run the site without one if possible - yes. If we're going to have one would I make it as much of an indication of the site as possible? Absolutely.

As for the issues you're having with viewing - the images off shouldn't make an impact (and if they do they'll make an impact here but not when the content warning actually is in place - that uses real background html.) But let me know what issues you're having. I've tested across a few browsers and resolutions, but I'm aware that there's a chance I missed something. If it's in your CSS that's killing it, then that's a non-issue. Your site CSS shouldn't kick in until the content warning is dismissed. (Effectively it'll be fine once you've logged in.)                               Puppy's talk page12:12 30 Jan

I don't expect to prevail; but as the question is raised in a new place, I gave my opinion again. The whimsical approach is way too much about what we think about ourselves and not about the decision the reader has to make. On the CSS, almost all of my CSS is in userContent on my PC and thus takes effect for anything Uncyclopedia displays. But again, even when I disable my CSS, without images the text is light-light-light-gray on white. And disabling images should disable all downloads of images, whether through [File:...] or as a background image. Spıke Ѧ 12:47 30-Jan-13
Isn't what we think about ourselves the same as what we want the reader to think about us? The choice is pink and kittens or scary lightning and Oscar Wilde. I myself loath and fear to come here, but here I am nonetheless. Almost time to eat, so I must be off to the races. Aleister 12:54
I will definitely pick navel-gazing over irrelevance (kittens), but I'd rather play it straight to a newcomer. Separately, I had a nice diced-ham-and-cheese vindaloo recently (sauce from a bottle, of course). Yesterday it was a loaf of bread dipped in pie filling. Spıke Ѧ 12:57 30-Jan-13
Code talk. Al, block your ears. The way I've put together the page is a bastardisation of background image, which means the option of background image OR dark blue colour doesn't quite work. If I could add the image into the CSS for the div then that would work. Having said that part of my hack meant that you should have most of the text on a dark blue background anyway. The fact that you don't bugs me. I'll give it another kick and see if it helps.                               Puppy's talk page01:17 30 Jan
Ah - my bad. I took out a background colour on my “behind” div while experimenting and forgot to reinstate it.                               Puppy's talk page01:22 30 Jan
That fix got 'er done. Aleister, meanwhile, has blocked not only his ears but his mouth, see above. Spıke Ѧ 13:27 30-Jan-13

Enjoy the silence.                               Puppy's talk page01:30 30 Jan

edit The vote on the proposed content warning

Sorry for the oversight. I intended to add it, forgot where it was located, and thought to myself “must go back and add it” and then got sidetracked. Completely my fault. I've bumped it up as it is a viable option, whereas the last vote item is definitely not.                               Puppy's talk page12:08 08 Feb

No offense taken. Only, when I added my own option, I styled it as an afterthought. It might look peculiar when not occurring last. Spıke Ѧ 03:04 8-Feb-13

edit Content warning experiment

Something that I'd like to test. Could you remove the line <span style="font-size: 60%;"><references /></span> from MediaWiki:Content-warning-body and add it to the base of MediaWiki:Content-warning-footnote? That should move the references to the base of the page. I'm not 100% sure though.                               Puppy's talk page11:32 09 Mar 2013

I had made a few space-saving edits at Content warning a couple of days ago but they haven't shown up on the entrance page itself. Please take a look at those edits if you haven't already to see if they are both worded well and would save a couple of lines of space in the warning (on my screen two paragraphs just hang off by one word, at least last time I looked). The clouds, my good sir, they are stationary, and I am dreaming of the days when they swam the sky like ducks. Aleister 13:08 9-3-'13
It's unlikely that footnotes defined in one document would be picked up in another document, even if the name of the second document includes the word "footnote". Its current text, "Thank you for visiting Uncyclopedia." suggests to me that it might not even display with the Content Warning, but perhaps later after you have declined to enter. Would you consider just eliminating the pretentious and unnecessary footnote--if you are physically running out of space on the page? Spıke Ѧ 13:19 9-Mar-13
I believe the way the content warning is structured is like a transclusion of various templates. The header is actually not a title but an <h2> header. That's then followed by content-warning-body, the entry buttons, and then content-warning-footer. In a normal article if you transcluded a template which includes the references, the references then appear where the transcluded template sits. The problem is that content warning is treated differently by MW than a standard article is. So while my theory is that it should work, I'm not going to be 100% until I test it. And the footnote was based on a suggestion from Romartus that I thought should be included. But it should potentially be included below the content-warning-footer text. And beyond that, I like the footnote. I think they are a more valid comedic tool than a quote in an article - hence many of my articles contain footnotes. Although UnNews:Australia says "You just don't understand our humour!" does deliberately go overboard.                               Puppy's talk page02:02 09 Mar 2013
(Having lost the vote on that once) Your experiment is now in effect. Spıke Ѧ 15:02 9-Mar-13

Screw it! Vote is on again at Forum:The Content Warning. In the meantime,

fixes those couple of issues with page height, doubled up header, and footnote location (by just removing the latter completely).                               Puppy's talk page01:22 10 Mar 2013

I have installed your Content-warning-body. I am not going to overwrite Common.css with your entire version, but will install specific changes as you specify (and explain). Spıke Ѧ 01:36 10-Mar-13
On further review, I see what you changed in your version of Common.css and replicated essentially the same changes to the live one. Spıke Ѧ 01:46 10-Mar-13
Sorry - I should have mentioned that I replicated the current version first. For the sake of eavesdroppers, this is what we're referring to.                               Puppy's talk page02:11 10 Mar 2013

edit I'm an idiot

In MediaWiki:Common.css could you change .ContentWarning h2 { to .ContentWarning.WikiaArticle h2 {?                               Puppy's talk page12:51 12 Mar 2013

Done, without addressing the subject issue. Spıke Ѧ 13:26 12-Mar-13

edit MediaWiki_talk:Common.css#From_Puppy_re_content_warning

Hopefully I'll get more of a chance to look at this when I'm not at work. Additional - the link to UN:AA won't work as clicking on it will take them to that page, but the content warning will still be visible. Me not logged in 04:19, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

edit Content warning

The new text is in place, but so is the flashing lightning storm. Not sure if you intended to leave that in place. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 14:29, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Puppy has provided detailed directions to undo this, but I thought I'd wait 48 hours for objections (see the Forum on "Post-edits"). However--especially as, with my rural Internet connection, my "first" Uncyclopedia page displayed nothing for ten seconds while the graphics were loading (long enough to itself induce readers to abandon)--perhaps I'd better not wait. Spıke Ѧ 14:37 27-Mar-13
I dug into the “orange text” thing. I think it's actually within the Monobook skin itself, and therefore can't be removed at the source. The edits to common.css bring it back to black.                               Puppy's talk page12:49 28 Mar 2013

edit Template:Re-Write

This appears to be a wannabe maintenance template. A "wannabe maintenance template" is a template that attempts to, or looks like, it flags an article for maintenance reason, but actually doesn't, due to incorrect categorization or instructions. Now, {{fix}} does most of the maintenance work. Anyway, this template probably should be redirected to {{fix}} or deleted. --Mn-z 13:42, March 11, 2013 (UTC)

This ugly template exists not to do anything except attract attention, invite edits (which as always is implicit), and hump "Der Unwher" [sic], another club inside Uncyclopedia that I think Puppy wanted to move to userspace. I see 4 uses in mainspace. If we redirect to {{Fix}}, I'm not sure anyone steps up to fix any of the four, nor whether anything happens to the four. Incidentally, the Abuse Filters detect the removal of an awful lot of templates that we never use any more; I listed these on the Chief's talk page. VFD if you like, or just clean up the four (and it would be an unambiguous clean-up) and QVFD. Spıke Ѧ 14:02 11-Mar-13
Its be taken to QVFD.
Regarding the abuse filter, several templates do redirect to {{fix}}. That might be what the abuse filter is catching. --Mn-z 14:22, March 11, 2013 (UTC)
I must assume it takes some time for the system to search every line of every edit for a user removing a template which, if it merely redirects to {{Fix}}, ought never to have been attached to an article. Spıke Ѧ 14:31 11-Mar-13
Personal tools