From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

edit Redesign of VFD

edit Template:VFDn

{{VFDn}} shows talk, history, search for previous nominations (once I set that up), and can check if the article is a feature, or in the Category:In-jokes - although the last item is not a reason to sway vote as far as I'm concerned. Working on a way to do a semi-auto add of {{Oldvfd}} to talk page (still an idea in progress), but I may leave that last item to {{VFDc}}. I'm trying to set it so an edit of one letter to template closes the nomination and gives you the links most relevant to poopsmithing.

Anything else that would be suitable that you can think of? I'd like to get this as smooth for adding, voting, and closing nominations as possible, while giving the access to due diligence, so any suggestions are very welcome.                               Puppy's talk page10:20 02 Oct 2013

I take it that {{VFDn}} would be the new section head for ballots at VFD. It's helpful, though my tests have not found a page where "Search previous VFD nominations" works.
I have not stopped wanting to change other things about VFD; notably, to display the case (Delete) before the rebuttal (Keep). However, last time, Sycamore insisted that I take it to the Forum, where the result was ridicule that the change was too trivial and I was wasting everyone's time: "It is so trivial that you must not do it." So this would require a return trip to the Forum, which would bog down your changes.
Also, it would be painless to have a background of pastel green for the Keep votes and pastel red for the Deletes, and I have become enamored of rounded corners, just because they are smooth and we never used to be able to code it. Spıke ¬ 11:38 2-Oct-13
Never been able to get rounded corners to work smoothly cross browser. The backgrounds and the reversal of order is fairly straight forward, but it means creating a fresh template for votes, which I'll play with over the course if the next few days. My intention is to get it as complete as possible, so we don't need to do too many tweaks.                               Puppy's talk page12:09 02 Oct 2013
On reversal-of-order, again: Please don't. It might bog your uncontroversial work down in the revival of old controversy. Spıke ¬ 12:16 2-Oct-13
It's a valid point. We'll see how it goes.                               Puppy's talk page12:23 02 Oct 2013

Hey. I don't have access to the deletion page, so could you just confirm that the delete link here autopopulates the deletion reason? (There is another way to do this so it uses the drop down box, but I can't remember for the life of me what it is.) If you want to adjust the phrasing of the deletion reason then feel free, but it may need a little url encoding if you do.                               Puppy's talk page11:51 07 Oct 2013

It does indeed. However, instead of what I do--putting the link to VFD in the "Reason for deletion" field via pulldown menu, which leaves the "Other/additional reason" field free for possible comment, it puts the link in the latter field. That's good enough, as I am free to append comments to it. Spıke ¬ 12:01 7-Oct-13

So, a nomination will look kinda like this:


{{VFDt|time= etc.

To close it, it's two letters that need to be changed:


{{VFDg|time= etc.

I've removed the padlock image as it was doing odd things to the TOC, which may be just due to the issues we're currently getting. Oddly the old version of {{VFDc}} was doing the same thing. The newer version adds in a link to add {{oldvfd}} (after checking if it has been added in the last 1-2 months), a link to create a new section in the archive (based upon year-month nomenclature), and probably something else I don't remember.

{{VFDg}} simply greys out the boxes. (g is for grey.)

You may want to update the admin instructions so that this is clear to anyone 'smithing.                               Puppy's talk page12:22 27 Oct 2013

Yes, your reforms will obsolete a several of the instructions. I will take responsibility for correcting them once I have been through the process a couple times. Also, once we know everything works smoothly, we might ultimately want to replace the existing templates rather than rally around a new set with completely different names and work to educate people. Spıke ¬ 00:32 27-Oct-13

edit Orphaned images

Just so I can clarify your process - you open the article, and from there open individual images to ensure they are single use images prior to deletion? If they are you then delete these images individually. Is that right?

If so, would a template that shows the names of all images “linked to” or “displayed in” a particular article, and under each a list showing what other pages use these images, and if the image is shown as {{notorphan}} (sp?) be of use? If I also include a delete link on these saying “deleted as used only on xyz” or something along those lines?                               Puppy's talk page09:09 27 Oct 2013

Oh - I'm thinking of reducing the clutter by reducing the links to single letter, with a tooltip to what it actually is. I've erred on the side of clarity at this stage until we all get used to the way it works, and until I work out my remaining kinks.                               Puppy's talk page09:13 27 Oct 2013
Such a template would be enormously useful! Separately, I notice two things in the rewritten VFD procedures:
  • The threat of "1 day. No exceptions" is gone; intentionally? I appreciated having this clarity, in ScottPat's recent ban, versus the implied job of weighing willful violation against his useful work.
  • The rules plus instructions to Admins are unclear whether failure to tag the article makes the Admin reset the clock (my usual approach) versus invalidate the nomination (the historical reality, but mostly a slap-down to users. Your thoughts? Spıke ¬ 21:40 27-Oct-13
  • 1 day, no exceptions probably belongs more on Uncyclopedia:Ban Policy than directly here, where I thought it was mentioned. (It isn't, but that was why I left that timeframe out of here - bad assumption.) Rewriting that rule to "Do not increase the number of active nominations on VFD to over twenty, this will lead to a banning." and adding this to the list at Uncyclopedia:Ban Policy would make more sense to me, but we could just as easily add back in the original wording, but I'd still suggest adding it to policy.
  • I've always felt that this was the call of the admin in question. I've seen it go both ways, depending on the user who nominated (which was useful for dealing with VFD flooders who remained just within the 20 articles.)
Back to the template:
  • I've created a draft template at {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/image thingy}}, which I'll get you to check out before I template space it, as you may be able to add suggestions.
  • The draft calls on User:PuppyOnTheRadio/image thingy3 where I've added five images - one notorphan, one unusued, one transcluded by full url of the image, and two others widely used.
  • I have a real-life example at User:PuppyOnTheRadio/image thingy4, which has the text of {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/image thingy|2 Wizards 1 Cup}} as the entirety of the page.
  • What I can add to it is a delete link with a pro-forma summary (similar to the delete link that started this). I can also exclude File:Bloink1 solid.png, as that's transcluded as part of the VFD template.
  • Note that this does not catch images transcluded by full url.
One last thing, which this template reminded me of. I created User:PuppyOnTheRadio/image ages ago, which uses a similar dpl to this. This goes through all the images that we have on uncyc (one page of 500 at a time) and highlights if an image is used, used only in user/user talk pages, or unused. Because of the way {{notorphan}} works, those images tagged with this template show up as used. This was designed as a quick way to determine if an image was truly unused. I created this as a way of prioritising importing images into the mirror, but it still sits there as a useful way of determining if images are worth keeping or deleting. I can easily update that page so it shows a thumbnail/gallery size of the image as well.
If we are going to delete unused images, this may also be a useful tool. Of course, we still have Special:UnusedFiles, but that doesn't reflect if the image is used on user space only.                               Puppy's talk page04:53 28 Oct 2013
I'm an attention seeker and I am feeling unattentioned!                               Puppy's talk page10:04 29 Oct 2013

edit New page evaluation tool

Any thoughts? User:PuppyOnTheRadio (not signed in) 05:57, November 5, 2013 (UTC)

That just makes everything too darned easy! Useful also to the poopsmith and random user who can't actually delete the items. Such a useful compendium, in fact, that I wouldn't mind a button in the sidebar called "Relations" for every Uncyclopedia page. Label the tables; "Links" should read "What links here" for consistency. Why are you not signed in? I read something about a national strike, are you scabbing it under an assumed IP, my good liberal? Spıke ¬ 11:27 5-Nov-13
It was a public holiday here today. The first Tuesday in November all Australians stop working to worship the ritualistic whipping of horses, and women are obliged to wear a bit of lacy stuff on their heads and say they are fascinating. I was obliged to go to work however and realise exactly how damned dull my workplace is when I have nothing fruitful to do. I also discovered just how annoying MSIE can be, and decided that for half a dozen edits I would jump to Firefox, where I hadn't logged in.
The problem is that this page isn't a true page, as such, and is actually a trick using editintro. I'm considering removing the “delete” link on {{VFDn}} and replacing it with a link that generates a page like this. To be on the safe side though it might be an idea to set up an auto filter that won't allow pages to be created with the title of Do not save this page/what ever, or even This page does not exist/whatever, given that page is already a taboo for other purposes.
As for sidebar link - there is a feasible way to do this rather than my current collection of hacks, but not something I'd really considered.                               Puppy's talk page12:00 05 Nov 2013
Goodness, Australia must be crazier than we are--though today is Election Day in a few places even though it is an odd-numbered year. The Delete link is not useful to me but your new display would be. A sidebar link could be written with {{BASEPAGE}} to have the same effect.
I can protect page names with an Abuse Filter but don't see why it's necessary.
Hooray for Firefox! Hooray for your job becoming boring again after a mid-year in "management" and away from Uncyclopedia! Spıke ¬ 12:37 5-Nov-13
Didn't think of {{BASEPAGE}}. I tend think think more {{SUBPAGE}} when doing this stuff. Either way it generates the text by creating a page that isn't a really a page, but it does keep the save/preview all down the bottom there, and my concern is someone not knowing what they are doing creating meaningless pages. Of course, we have that happen all the time, but you get my meaning.                               Puppy's talk page12:56 05 Nov 2013
Oh, I get it. Indeed I don't know a way of splashing a report onto a screen except by creating a page. Spıke ¬ 13:01 5-Nov-13

edit Installing new VFD templates in sidebar button

Okay. If you

  • change MediaWiki:Gadget-autotags.js to link to a js page in the MediaWiki section, rather than in the user section,
  • take the js from here and move it to the page you just created,
  • change the text…
sectionText = '==[[' + +']]==\n{{Votervfd|
delete=\n#' + vfd.comment + ' ~~~\n|comments=\n}}\n\n' + sectionText;

…to something like…

sectionText = '=={{VFDn|' + +'}}==\n{{VFDt|
time=~~~~~\n|delnumber=1\n|delete=\n#' + vfd.comment + ' ~~~\n|
keepnumber=0\n|keep=\n|comments=\n}}\n\n' + sectionText;

…a fairy will get its wings!                               Puppy's talk page01:51 05 Nov 2013

Cripes! this is like listening to full-speed Spanish: I understand half the words but have to strain to figure out what we're doing. Moving the page from userspace is a damned fine idea, and I trust we have broken at most the single button on the sidebar. I depend on you to verify the change, as I long ago removed my sidebar. Spıke ¬ 14:24 5-Nov-13
Oh - this is more along the lines of the drop down tag for VFD that caused Anton's stuff up the other day. Sidebar is a step or two further away. Needs a little more testing for my satisfaction.                               Puppy's talk page02:35 05 Nov 2013
Hmmm… something screwy. I might play with what we have there (even though my js is crap) and see what I did wrong. Should be better than what it is though.                               Puppy's talk page07:50 06 Nov 2013

edit US Government shuts down

I'd have thought that this would make a good UnNews story. The whole things caused quite a stir over here. I don't really know enough information about how the US Government runs to write a decent UnNews on it but I just thought that as you are the king of UnNews writing and you know a fair bit about US Politics that you might want a crack at it. Seems stupid how not acheiving a budget statement causes so much distress. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:28, October 2, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I wrote UnNewses about the previous round of brinksmanship/fingerpointing/Kabuki-dances. The bottom line is that nothing important will fail to occur, but Obama will tough it out and wait for Republican after Republican to claim, increasingly publicly, that "we can't win." In my state, we are grooming the next generation of Conciliation Monkeys even now.
As far as UnNews goes, the story on the top of the stack provides a novel take on the shutdown, and I did a narration of it. Spıke ¬ 17:36 2-Oct-13
Oh one has already been written...whoops. Didn't see it. Thanks.
Our intake in my corner of the island is also "blame the republicans." The main reason being that Obama is one of the most liberal Presidents seen in a while so us Brits take a liking to him. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:43, October 2, 2013 (UTC)
ScottPat, perhaps what you want is at UnNews:US government shuts down with unprecedented triteness (Gnome-speakernotes listen). Spıke ¬ 20:58 3-Oct-13

edit Forum:A reskin for the US government shutdown

Could I bring you to the attention of this forum. What do you think of the idea? Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 06:52, October 5, 2013 (UTC)

I think that there has been some mis-communication with Sansee. Instead of a spoof Government shut down message, I know see the original content warning back to haunt us. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:35, October 8, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, we did mis-communicate, as I thought she would install the file I specified. I'm glad someone is reporting something! I have found Puppy's instructions following the last round of Content Warning debate and followed them to copypaste MainPageTemp and delete the Content Warning Footer. The haunted-house background should already be disabled. Please tell me how it looks. Spıke ¬ 20:46 8-Oct-13
I think I need to log off to view. Be back in a sec! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:53, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
Please comment at the relevant Forum so more people will see it. Spıke ¬ 20:53 8-Oct-13
I'm afraid I cannot see it and yet you can. This is probably because it has a timer or something and I haven't waited enough before logging on to see a warning. I'll have to wait till tomoroow to see full effect therefore. Thanks for everything, this can go down in history now! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:15, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
If you delete your Uncyclopedia cookie, you'll probably see it immediately. Spıke ¬ 21:26 8-Oct-13
I don't know how to I'm afraid. I'll leave it till tomorrow. Thanks Spike, it was good of you to make the spoof main page. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:46, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
It is tomorrow now, for me and I was met by neither a content warning nor a spoof government message. Strange. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 05:15, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
Delete the cookie. Like the Content Warning, any Uncyclopedia user will only see our little gag once, and will not even see it once if they ever saw the actual Content Warning. On Firefox, under Tools/Options/Privacy, click "Show Cookies." 10:26 9-Oct-13
Also, note the almost complete lack of vandalism and bad edits overnight. All the unfunny Anons of the world have bought it, hook, line, and sinker, the level of credulity Wikia cited when they slapped the original Content Warning on (initially because someone might mistake our writing for truth and it would be Wikia's fault). Leave it on for good??? Spıke ¬ 10:39 9-Oct-13
Yessir! I am not using firefox but Internet Explorer. I do have firefox so perhaps I should switch to that. I used to see Content Warning all the time when that was around but this spoof page still alludes me. Thanks for UnSignpost article! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 15:54, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
The control for cookies is somewhere comparable in IE. PS--eludes. Spıke ¬ 16:05 9-Oct-13
Went on firefox and saw it. Wonderful, absolutely wonderful! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:50, October 9, 2013 (UTC)

edit Newman66

edit Meet the new Newman66 in the future!

In the future, I will make new articles, which are funny ones ranging from science stuff to video game articles. I may also request or make bots for Wikia and Uncyclopedia. Make sure to stay tuned, and don't forget that I'm better than ever! Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 01:05, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

edit Newman's block

Wow! For what did you block him? For suggesting me and ScottPat as candidates for admins to Chief Justice? But that was his opinion and it was perfectly legitimate, even though he did not know how to express it (forum/VFS). Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 06:09, October 8, 2013 (UTC)

I have unblocked Newman for now but I will put him on official parole. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 07:19, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your concern, Anton. But my decision does not require your review, as the Summary indicates I would immediately ask another Admin to review it. (In fact, I asked two.) And, as before, I do not need to explain it to you, as I have explained it directly to him.
It seems as though he went on the wire last night and tried to focus attention on innocent individual actions. No, it is not a problem to express an opinion to the Chief Justice; it is not a problem not to know about the VFS procedure (though Denza makes clear that he did Newman the favor of advocating for a new VFS vote because Denza wants oppage himself); it is not a problem to press the Save button. It is a problem when a new user, with a pattern of raping slightly new users, holds himself out to yet another relatively new user as a person through whom favors can be obtained from an Admin — even favors that the user didn't ask for and wouldn't notice the granting of. If you have heard these complaints and are interceding personally to get credit for obtaining justice, you are doing the same thing. Spıke ¬ 17:41 8-Oct-13
Let not assume the worst from Anton. I agree that this block was a good call...but Anton has every right to ask you about a block and he shouldnt be considered opportunistic for doing so. What paranoia. Remember how Aleister, Lyrithya and I questioned your excessively long block by Zombie before you became admin? It wasnt about getting credit for anything but caring about the best interests of the site and users. --ShabiDOO 18:07, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
Spike, you have told me several times that I maybe considered this site as an opportunity to create or break alliances. And I have told you that I did not. I have no allies here, only friends, if people want to be friends with me. And you are wrong, if you think that I want to promote myself, when I ask for justice (not ChiefJustice, but the abstract meaning of the word), it is only because I want justice, and not because I want credit.
Separately, thank you for responding to me and clarifying the matter even more, once again! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:32, October 8, 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Shabidoo, thanks for your post and Spike, I am not saying that your actions are wrong or not legitimate; I just want to make sure nobody gets banned for too long, if he does not deserve it.

edit Rewrite on Gumby

I have already removed two inappropriate bias quotes on the article Gumby, which I am going to give even more improvement on this article, which is one of the older prized articles on Uncyclopedia. The same kind of things I am going to do and already did somewhat to the article Indus River, which I made a forum team for, and I am also going to work with more professional users to improve Gumby and Indus River. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 14:48, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

I was editing your page as you were editing mine. I agree with your edits, only not with citing the Terms of Use in the Change Summary, but everything's cool. Regarding your Forum, you already moved it to BHOP, which was my only problem with it. In the United States, by the way, no one knows what the Indus River is, nor especially uses it to refer to the India/Pakistan region, so this is not an absolutely essential topic for Uncyclopedia to cover, though it may line up with what you are studying just now; good luck on the Forum. Spıke ¬ 14:55 20-Oct-13
I live on the banks of the Indus River, and my family has lived thusly for a thousand years. We farm, and milk goats, and make the kind of living that river folk are prone to do. It's essential in my life, and in the life of my ancestors, but is not essential to uncyclopedia? We cry and tear our clothes, and at tonight's feast I will discuss this and we shall vote after the lamb and River Croc are consumed. Aleister 20-10

edit Denza

edit Denza for Admin?

(Original title: "A query of complete neutrality that will not have any relation to events in the VFS") Alright, were I to get nominated by, whoever, would you, or some other sysop/admin remove it, or let it stand as a fair nomination? --The Sieger of Dungeons Lord Denza Aetherwing Inventory 17:06, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

And were I to somehow get opped, would I be able to keep it? --The Sieger of Dungeons Lord Denza Aetherwing Inventory 17:06, October 7, 2013 (UTC)
Denza, if you want to be an admin, just say so. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:15, October 7, 2013 (UTC)

Hey! I may seem like I want oppage, but I don't really want it. Don't put words in my mouth without backing. I may have said GIVE ME ADIM PLZ I R XEXZY!!11!, but that is obviously a joke. --The Sieger of Dungeons Lord Denza Aetherwing Inventory 22:24, October 15, 2013 (UTC)

edit UN:CHAT

Add another # infront of #uncyclopedia and the links, and we have our own chatroom, separate from #uncyclopedia. irc:// Its the future of... the past... --The Sieger of Dungeons Lord Denza Aetherwing Inventory 17:21, October 8, 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Don't people have to register their names..?--LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:04, October 9, 2013 (UTC)
Not really, unless I go insane and set mode +r. Btw, don't try to register it, its already registered to me. :D --The Sieger of Dungeons Lord Denza Aetherwing Inventory 14:46, October 9, 2013 (UTC) (+F flag bitchez; adminses will still get OPs tho.)
So, to summarise, you've created a chat room that nobody here asked for, without looking to get community consent, and given yourself higher authorisation access without any voting to grant that authority, and are now claiming ownership of it, and setting your own rules in regards to how it all works. Which begs the question - in what way is this going to increase the quality or quantity of our content here, or support the community as a whole?                               Puppy's talk page07:26 09 Oct 2013
Yes, I think that is a fair summary. Not for nothing do we call him Captain Self-promotion. At least it doesn't include Pay-to-Play. Spıke ¬ 19:39 9-Oct-13
If the real IRC channel does not belong to us but to the fork, then we need another one. Denza's idea is cool, but I agree that one person cannot control the whole system. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:57, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, I won't hold the power once people are here. I was going to actually hold a forum to create #uncyc-wikia as a channel, but due to the actions by members of the fork, I decided to make one with haste, as they would have tried to sabotage it if they got wind of it. I will retain the +F flag, but I am allirght with deopping myself, and giving the actual adminses power. Also, I think that active rollbackers should be given Voice flags (+Vv) to denote them as people to deal with minor bouts of vandalism or such. I'm sorry I didn't hold a discussion beforehand, and if I must, I can take down the channel, it was just that I can't trust the fork anymore. On another note, I plan to make a recent-changes bot, akin to Uncyc-rc in #uncyclopedia-rc-en, but for the wikia site, if we decide to keep our channel. --The Sieger of Dungeons Lord Denza Aetherwing Inventory 16:55, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

edit Banning Denza

I dunno man, I think you were kinda harsh on him. Even if he didn't revert your move by mistake, which would be higly unlikely given that he's pretty much an established user by now (or is he), I believe it's the first time he's done it, isn't it? Maybe give him a serious warning or a 3-4 days ban, if it's that much of a problem, but I think two weeks, is a little over the top? Then again, you are the admin and you probably have a better judgement. I'm just suggesting you might want to re-consider the lengh of his ban. Peace --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 16:28, October 17, 2013 (UTC)

I always enjoy explaining penalties on users to other users, even in the unlikely case that it was not a result of the banned user committing ban evasion by lobbying on other web sites. Denza's Forum:A Forum for the presentation and debate of new ideas‎ did not present nor debate any new idea, though it raised the possibility that he would make new initiatives like his personal IRC channel in our name or his recent campaign to hold a new Admin vote (for him). It instructed other Uncyclopedians on how to contribute. In other words, it was a Forum set up for no purpose other than for Denza to have something to run; in still other words, it was vanity. (It followed a re-creation of a deleted article in mainspace which, likewise, had utterly no content and had to be deleted.) Rather than immediately delete the Forum, I remembered Simsilikesims's solution the last time we had a vanity Forum: Move it to BHOP, which is the location for Forums that do not pertain to the business of the website (which, remember, is comedy).
When he undid this move, I deleted the forum and banned him. The duration of the ban was the next notch up from the effective duration of his previous ban, in the menu of intervals presented to me on the Ban menu. It occurs to me that selecting 1 year would have resulted in exactly the same immediate reaction, and more time before he returns and resumes acting out and begging everyone to drop everything and look at him. But in that case, Simsie would have had to listen to yet more of Denza's life story. Spıke ¬ 17:39 17-Oct-13
Denza wants to run something and at the same time he wants to help the community. Now, instead of criticising him, why don't we allow him to actually run a project? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:38, October 17, 2013 (UTC)
UN:WYCD. Plenty to do, and it's a way to create respect that he's after before trying to create something new in order to control it. There's also the option of working on USP. He's been presented with these options, and asked to focus on this.                               Puppy's talk page09:06 17 Oct 2013
We have so little precious free time on our hands I don't want to waste it reading pointless forums and long paragraphs about how Denza is the dude. He's not ready to run anything. There's lots of admin, categorizing, proof reading, tagging, patrolling, updating featured article lists, chopping images, pee reviews etc. to do. --ShabiDOO 01:06, October 18, 2013 (UTC)
In fact, he did run something; he cajoled us into giving him rollback, spent several weeks doing good patrol work, then — in my opinion, right after asking me for an honest evaluation and me giving it, which fell short of a permanent declaration that he was the dude — the Usefulness Offensive ended and he went back to being an ornery kid writing about being an ornery kid. Spıke ¬ 01:22 18-Oct-13

Hey there guys. This is what Denza answered me on his talkpage after I criticized him for begging to be unbanned on the other Uncyclopedia only when he was banned from this one....After that, I advice you to reconsider the lenght of his ban again... Only this time, I suggest you increase it. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 13:19, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

PS--Mimo, being banned means that Denza does not get to influence things on this website during his ban. Please don't help him evade the ban, no matter what effect you would like to achieve by doing so. Spıke ¬ 13:25 18-Oct-13

I was just letting you know about his opinion on the ban. It was relevant to the discussion and I thought you people should, or might want to, know about it. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 13:33, October 18, 2013 (UTC)

edit A message on behalf of the defendant

Due to stress, a pileup of schoolwork, and displeasure with this site ('s administration, the defendant will be taking a indefinite break from this site ( 02:44, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

In the above message, I deleted some additional demands, criticism, and attempts at applying a guilt trip. Being banned from the site means you do not participate in the site, even to portray yourself as a player in a court of law where you have some rights, or get a final shot to try to manipulate others. Spıke ¬ 09:58 23-Oct-13
I agree with the sockpuppet or troll or whatever he is here; even though your changing of other people's posts may be considered as a prevention of drama, I personally would like 'a careful record of what said' and instead have to always check history and all the individual edits, to understand the conflict. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:26, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

edit Frosty permabans DungeonSiegeAddict510

Just a notice to say I have updated his ban to indefinite after words stated above and dickish words directed at Puppy on the fork. I'd strongly suggest you keep an eye on his pages because on the fork prior to me locking his userspace and banning proxies/shared ips he was using a spiral of drama and time wasting resulted. Probably best if someone more active here than I am did the same. I'm going to be blocking any more socks he uses on both sites as soon as I see them. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) Icons-flag-au 04:20, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

I just tested. Blocked users here are unable to edit their own talk pages.
As an aside, can someone lift the ban on, block ID #69802? (Stupid, stupid puppy.)                               Puppy's talk page09:03 23 Oct 2013
This ban is now lifted, though I had to relearn what Simsie taught me about BlockList, which you are just now learning.
Thanks, Frosty, for the continuing vigilance. I was convinced that, at the end of two weeks, he would exhibit more misconduct that would require a follow-on ban, and each ban induces him to howl at his Darthpedia buddies and for them to attack the site as part of the Denza crusade. Therefore I support getting over with it for good, and not continuing to hold out his hopes that there will be another chapter--which reads the same as the first. Romartus has noticed the ban and seems to be fine with it too. Spıke ¬ 09:58 23-Oct-13

edit "Darthipedia buddies"

While I'm sure you could care less, it would be vastly appreciated if you'd stop pointing fingers at Darthipedia (or "Darthpedia", as you put it, as the I is silent) every little time Denza acts out on this wiki. Not only is Denza permanently banned from Darthipedia for the very same reasons he's banned here, Darthipedia hasn't been active for several months with the exception of a barely-used IRC channel that he almost never joins, so saying that we're his "buddies" is equally ridiculous as saying you're his lover. Additionally, I'd suggest at least skimming through Darthipedia's official stance on trolling. Spoiler: There Is No Denza Cabal attacking you or this wiki and paranoia is a sign of deeper issues. Thank you for your time. Darth Muscare (talk) 10:54, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry to have tarred you all with the same brush. However, two of your number did and do listen to Denza's rants and act out here in his cause. And they are just as snide as you are too. Rather than accuse me of prejudice, I would suggest that you better control your lot so as not to give rise to prejudice. Spıke ¬ 11:08 23-Oct-13
It is pointless to blame the entire community for what two individuals did. If I, for instance, will go and vandalize Wikipedia, they won't blame Uncyclopedia for not being able to control me.
Furthermore, 'Denza's buddies' only expressed their opinion about Denza's ban. By the way, I have the same one, except for I do not want any deoppement. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:25, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

edit Denzadenzadenza

I cannot deny that DungeonSiegeAddict was sometimes rude and uncivil, but you cannot deny that his idea ##uncyclopedia was thrown away very impolitely, even though he had best motivations. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:25, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

I can deny. His behaviour did not indicate any community spirit. The chat room was initially put forward as an alternative to the chat room he had just been banned from, and he placed himself in a position where he couldn't be banned. This was after he had been banned from the fork site, along with other chat channels and wikis. When presented with the option of releasing control of it, he said he couldn't - despite it actually being a fairly easy task to do so. He did not gather community support for the idea until after he had established the chat channel. And then he put himself forward (supposedly as a joke) as a draw card for this new channel. If he was looking to support the wiki it would have been easy to do this - and put forward this idea - in a way that made him an equal part, rather than a controlling factor.
The idea itself I have no fondness for, but the fact his entire actions surrounding it were completely self motivated just made it less appealing. I approached him initially with politeness, and then humour to try and defuse his drama, and then blunt statements, and each attempt to communicate with him was met with no response. Every polite approach I made to him was ignored - simply because I didn't agree with him. Rudeness was the final step to try and get him to look critically at the way he was acting - and the only response to that was another dramatic outburst.
At no stage did he appear to be a willing, positive contributor to this or any other wiki, and multiple times he appeared to be creating dramatic scenes any way he could. In short, the dictionary definition of a troll.                               Puppy's talk page01:47 23 Oct 2013
Concerning your last comments, that kind of opinion was the primary topic of this.
I have to admit that you were polite, but your first comment "So to sum up, you've created a channel that no one here asked for..." would offend me, if I were at Denza's place. In addition to this, may I ask you: "Have you t least visited the channel?" I did and did find it 'Denza-controlled' or anything of that kind. What I noticed was a bot that was trying to op Denza, whilst Denza tried to deop himself and finally 'won the battle' (I think). Many of Denza's critics preferred to ignore and still judge it.
So to sum up we chased away and banned the user who could have been a great contributor, if someone would have helped him. Please, don't talk about how you told him everything he had to know about being 'useful'; there is a great deal more than this and I talked about our attitude towards users here but it did not even have the slightest possible effect. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:52, October 23, 2013 (UTC)
Actually, that was one of my later comments to Denza, where I started to get frustrated with his refusal to respond. And why would I have visited a channel that I was completely against the creation of? Denza has shown - over and over - that he is unstable and unwilling to listen. That doesn't make for a good contributor.
As for your forum - I did write a response to that forum much more substantial than what is there, but due to network issues it dropped off. I'll respond to that over there a little later.                               Puppy's talk page09:16 23 Oct 2013
Well, I hope this response will re-appear. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:06, October 24, 2013 (UTC)
And it's unbelievable that he had all those sockpuppets and meatpuppets on the fork. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 21:28, October 24, 2013 (UTC)
And did you know that you can add apples to oranges in a coherent formula? --ShabiDOO 01:03, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

edit Mimo volunteers as Poopsmith

see Uncyclopedia talk:Poopsmith's Lounge

edit And QVFD

I've already asked this on Uncyclopedia talk:Poopsmith's Lounge but since I got no answer I assumed you didn't see it so I'm asking you my question again here. Should I archive QVFD (after all the articles there have been patrolled by an administrator of course) or is it not my responsibility to do so? --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 15:47, October 17, 2013 (UTC)

As the attending Admin is supposed to use {{BPC}} to note that he took care of the little bastards, Admins tend to poopsmith it themselves. The Chief Justice complained recently that I was neglecting this, but sometimes I like to leave it long so there is an example of the right way to nominate a {{Redirect}} because no one reads the instructions. If you would like to clean it up from time to time, that wouldn't be a problem.
Did you see my new material at VFDA (new shortcut!) regarding creating new VFD archive files? You might wait on this because next week Puppy's new VFD system will be voted on, and it might be nice if the start of a new archive is at the start of the new VFD system. Spıke ¬ 15:54 17-Oct-13

I did actually and found it very helpful. You might want to add info about poopsmithing QVFD, like the things you just told me, to avoid similar confusion for future poopsmiths.

P.S. It's alright. I wasn't in a hurry to create a new VFD archive anyway! (Like anyone's ever been in that kind of hurry)
P.S. (2) In a few more hours, I will finally be able to move my first article from VFD to archive 276! Yay! --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 16:17, October 17, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, positive byte count equals negative byte count...diffs look correct...By George, I think he's got it! Spıke ¬ 19:27 17-Oct-13

OR I removed parts from VFD to make it look like I tried to archive a closed nomination and then added random, meaningless text to the VFD archive to make it look like the archiving procedure was succesfully over. Of course, all that would be just an attempt on making you notice me, your long-lost son, who, in order to gain his father's love again, will change his way of life as a vandal and will, eventually, find his inner Uncyclopedian. It's either that or what you said. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 20:29, October 17, 2013 (UTC)

No, like I said, I looked at the diffs too. "Trust but verify." (Reagan) Spıke ¬ 20:35 17-Oct-13

edit Sidelined by injury

I fractured two of my fingers and typing with the left hand is kinda hard so I won't be able to poopsmith for a couple of days. You told me to give you a heads up if something like this were to happen, especially when VFD is almost filled with articles like it is now, so here it is. Anyway, see you in two or three days! Bye! --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 20:24, October 24, 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the notice. Spıke ¬ 20:28 24-Oct-13
Mimo "fractured" two of his fingers. hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Aleister down to the nub

edit Delay before poopsmithing

I noticed that you didn't follow the 12-24 hours rule on archiving closed nominations so may I suggest decreasing the waiting hours to, let's say, 5 or 6? You're not the only one who was too bored to wait for the 12 hours to pass to get to work (first it was me and then Simsie) so I think it'd be pretty practical to change this rule. P.S. The reason I didn't create a forum to discuss this is because it's relevant only to poopsmiths and ministering admins. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 14:32, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

I agree a broadcast isn't necessary. The reason I didn't wait is not "boredom" but that VFD has been pegging 20 ballots for a long time. Early poopsmithing adds clarity that there is space for new ballots and is at the discretion of the Poopsmith--as I wrote in VFDA. Meanwhile, how is the sore hand? Spıke ¬ 14:43 28-Oct-13

Oh right! I accidentaly clicked the wrong revision in the history and it caused me the confusion which led to this section. Sorry for all this. Also, my hand is alright now, thank you! --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 15:03, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

edit Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty

Did you even read the article? The whole thing (as well as all the other MGS articles) are self-referencing UnScripts. I'd just made that edit because I was dissatisfied with the original version's conclusion. You can bring the matter up with Guildy if you like, but for God's sake don't revert because you assumed bad faith. Lord Scofield Stark 09:47, October 11, 2013 (UTC)

Your point is well-taken. So is mine: When someone makes a massive edit to a Feature Article (likewise yesterday's vanity edit of Justin Bieber), I do not have the time to track down the author and ask him if he is happy with the change. You are probably in closer contact with Guildy than I am. If he comes here and okays it, it can stand. Telling me that I "assumed bad faith" is manipulative. What I assumed is that for Uncyclopedia articles to talk about the writing of Uncyclopedia articles is bad writing, though there may also be plenty of it elsewhere in the series. Spıke ¬ 10:17 11-Oct-13

edit Kiwi Slayer

WHY DOES UNCYCLOPEDIA EXIST? ALSO, I BLANKED OUT THAT WEIRD PAGE ON NEW ZEALAND AGAIN(NOT) The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs)

The above IP was blocked for his behavior in messing with Captain gull's userpage, plus blanking out part of this article. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 04:18, October 16, 2013 (UTC)

edit Treatment of user Makkkeeemeeemamamamamdddddooojojook

I think Makkkeeemeeemamamamamdddddooojojook is just Makkkeeemeeemamamamamdddddooojojook. Whatever. I did not mean that. I meant that he probably does not hate you and will become a great in-joker if he keeps on going the way he does now.

Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:11, October 19, 2013 (UTC)
I am confused. I see a vandal who is making spam pages with no humour content (not even an in-joke, as Anton claimed) whose articles are deleted at QVFD and yet Spike has not banned him and instead has written on Makkkeeemeeemamamamamdddddooojojook userpage, himself breaking a rule of Uncyclopedia and his own personal belief of not giving vandals the communication and attention they want. I do not mean to say that Spike's actions were wrong as there must be a valid reason. What is the reason? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:21, October 19, 2013 (UTC)
He wanted to receive a ninjastar. That's all. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:45, October 19, 2013 (UTC)
(1) I am at the ballpark. (2) I deleted his mainspace crap because it is mainspace and they were crap. (3) I did not delete his user page because it is his user page even though it is crap too. (4) I replied on his user page rather than his talk page because I don't think he had one, and I am not going to welcome him and create one just so that I can reply, as I still think it is likely that when he sobers up or experiences a power failure, he will never remember his user name or see fit to look it up. Spıke ¬ 20:18 19-Oct-13
He is my hero. His user name made me laugh and laugh, and I told him so on his talk page. I may start a fan club for him, as he rocks my world. Aleister 19-10
If you do, put it under BHOP, where similar fan clubs have been started in the past. BENSON! -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 20:30, October 19, 2013 (UTC)
101 ways to be nasty to a user...wether they deserve it or not. You get a lot of pleasure out of it. --ShabiDOO 23:17, October 19, 2013 (UTC)
Spike did you just ban Shabidoo because of his comment? o_O --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 23:40, October 19, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I did, and have now explained it on his talk page. Spıke ¬ 23:47 19-Oct-13

edit Feud with Shabidoo

It went too far. I agree and I appologise. SPIKE...we both have to tone down the language we use with other users sometimes. It goes too far at times and it gets toxic. --ShabiDOO 02:29, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, we move on. This morning there even seem to be few of the pirates who crawled through the hole in the hull yesterday. Spıke ¬ 10:11 21-Oct-13
Who are those SPIKE? Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 12:51, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
Correct me if I am wrong, but I think he is referring to the sockpuppets we banned. ---- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 13:01, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
Was a user check run? Were they actually sockpuppets of each other (or Denza as suggested)? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 13:03, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
Black Sikhhead confessed on being a sockpuppet. Jihadrian on the other hand didn't (As far as I know). AllahuAcky was also banned for being, obviously, a sockpuppet (first thing to do after he created his account was to demand a voting on deoping Spike) although I can't find him in the block log. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 13:50, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

edit YIKES

I just read the second de-op spike forum. So that there is NO doubt...I had nothing to do with it...and I would have voted AGAINST. The whole forum was way out of line and no user/admin should have to read something like that. We all need to smoke some virtual cannabis. Strong strong virtual cannabis. From British Columbia or Morrocco. Premious quality. The kind that makes you laugh your ass off at the slightest joke. In a 10 hour laughing fit that makes us soil our undergarments. Does anyone know where to get any? --ShabiDOO 18:38, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

No one is entitled to protection against harsh words in an open-borders place like this. That Forum was clearly agitation from outside. It is a difficult and important call telling good-faith users who are here to write comedy from instigators, and one can make errors in either direction. But a new user whose first edit is opening a Forum about our personnel, or reverting me with a Change Summary that parrots words I used in the past on someone, is surely a sockpuppet here to pursue a grudge and not to contribute. There is no principle of management under which such a user is entitled to call a vote. But it's problematic to have established users question my reaction to each new user when they don't have to make the call and don't bother looking at the context, acting as though there is no call to make, and in the process projecting disharmony that the outsiders take as an opening for follow-on trolling. It is not "paranoid" to observe that there are people who would enjoy making Uncyclopedia fail. Regarding undergarments, I suggest Walmart. Spıke ¬ 02:21 24-Oct-13

edit 1 vs. 100

I was considering this for VFD as it is poorly formatted and not that encyclopedic. I know nothing of the topic and the comedy about the gameshow is funny in some parts. A re-write oppurtunity for you perhaps? Just a suggestion. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:35, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

The existing article is awful, but I have never heard of the show. Go fish! Spıke ¬ 20:38 21-Oct-13
Sorry. Not in the mood for re-writing it now. Maybe another time if I remember. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:24, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
No, "go fish" means, "I am not suitable for service as a sucker; please search further and find someone you can convince to do it" — not necessarily do it yourself. Spıke ¬ 21:37 21-Oct-13
Sorry. Google translate told me it was "Go and research it." I blame the tool. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 22:01, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
What did you call me Spıke ¬ 22:04 21-Oct-13
Tool=Google Translate. YOU FOOL (Get it...Tool, rhymes...oh never mind!) Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 22:07, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
Reminder, you have now taken the very last tart from the VFD serving tray. One more and the rules are very clear, and these are written down. And so soon after a phantom "block" button appeared in buggy reports and made us all salivate! Spıke ¬ 22:20 21-Oct-13
Where is the VFD limit written down? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 22:26, October 21, 2013 (UTC)
On VFD. In red and pink. I would be obliged to ban you. (One day would be my pick, if I read the rules aright.) That would be a shame, as I like it when you're busy. So quit nominating and let us catch up! Spıke ¬ 22:29 21-Oct-13
Ahh I see I was looking at the bit in orange. Sorry about that. No more noms tonight then. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 22:34, October 21, 2013 (UTC)

edit Forum:UnSignpost Changes!

Sorry to bother you Spike but could you take a look at this please. Two new users are claiming (one is banned, both created recently) that we cannot create another namespace. While I would dismiss this as vandalism due to the odd circumstances and likely sock puppet he has brought up some evidence that seems legitimate, could you take a look at the evidence and make a decision please? Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 12:05, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

Puppy has given an explanation and we can move on. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 12:16, October 23, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, sorry about that Spike, Puppy's dealt with it! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 12:35, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

edit Damn silly of me!

I told you to huff wrong forum page Spike! Please could you delete Forum:UnSignpost Namespace and reinstate Forum:UnSignpost Changes!. Sorry, thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:06, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

Spike why did you delete Forum:UnSignpost Changes! in the first place? It contained the voting on making UnSignpost into a new namespace and should be preserved for historical purposes. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 17:17, October 23, 2013 (UTC)
It didn't originally. It was on Forum:UnSignpost Namespace originally then I moved it to Forum:UnSignpost Changes! to put all onto one forum so others can be deleted as mentioned on User talk:ScottPat! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:22, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

edit New namespace

As per the forum relating to it, we now have UnSignpost as a new namespace. Some USP related stuff is admin protected though, so moving it over to the relevant namespace will require an admin's touch. Tim has set this up to be non-content namespace (doesn't show in random searches, etc.)                               Puppy's talk page12:22 27 Oct 2013

Am happy to oblige; at the moment am a little distracted by the broadcast of the World Series. Spıke ¬ 00:32 27-Oct-13

edit 500 ft tall turd monster

Does the merit a VFD nomination? No one will ever type it in. I find turd jokes off-putting from my point of view but it isn't that bad in terms if comedy. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 08:07, October 24, 2013 (UTC)

I not only neglected this but took the 20th VFD slot just freed up by the Acting Poopsmith (moi) for the worst user of the deleted Category:Over 9000. I'll take a look now. Spıke ¬ 14:16 25-Oct-13
Thanks. Ohhhhh - does that mean there is an excuse for a 30/40/50/100 nom limit on VFD forum? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:19, October 25, 2013 (UTC)
The answer to the original question is that there are bigger fish to fry. This article is in the form of a scientific paper and is pretty well done although its subject is gross. In contrast, there are dozens of articles with graphic descriptions of the author's bowel movements (the Yuky Doody series).
I am hoping our Poopsmith will get out of his body-cast or acquire voice-recognition editing technology soon. The 20-ballot limit predates me, dates back to a time when there were many more voters, and is not crying for review, given, for example, how the stuff at the bottom of the page has languished. Spıke ¬ 14:24 25-Oct-13
Fair enough. I am still a bit confused as to what the Poopsmith page is as on it it says that if you are a regular VFD voter you can't use it. I had always presumed it was an overflow car park for VFD but maybe I am wrong. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:26, October 25, 2013 (UTC)
Please refer to its talk page, which is where Mimo applied for the job, with commentary by Puppy and me. Spıke ¬ 14:39 25-Oct-13

edit User:Xzd5bp/Ted Cruz

I read your comments and a Pee Review from another user regarding the article I submitted. They're both very helpful and I appreciate your insight. I'm not being sarcastic or spiteful! The critiques make sense and I agree with them. Unfortunately, I wrote it strictly for a specific audience of haters. So I guess it would be inappropriate to post it on this web site. Please feel free to dispose of the draft as you see fit.

I apologize for any inconvenience.

Best Wishes,


P.S. I'm new to the Wiki game so I apologize if I didn't respond in the correct user group or format. I'm x^5 years old. I have a peptic ulcer. I need a root canal and I have a wife hocking me for a new car.

As I replied at Simsie's talk page, your text is properly "disposed of" now, as it is in your userspace, where you will still be able to find it if a more general comedy gimmick occurs to you some day. If you are into current events, take a look at UnNews and see if you could contribute (and try to make it funny to people across the political spectrum!). Regarding the car, I recommend the Hyundai, although you will surely still need a root canal. Spıke ¬ 15:47 24-Oct-13

edit UN:SIG again

Would you, please, take a look at the changes I made to UN:SIG and say if this can be accepted or not? The changes are minor but they help to make the page less serious, whilst it still contains all the essentials. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:05, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

I addressed UN:SIG today at the new, initial section of Forum:A new VFS is in order, that I would prefer that humor be added through photos and captions. Some of the levity in your version, while it reassures us that we are still funny, might make it harder to read for the newbie who would be directed to read it. Spıke ¬ 16:16 23-Oct-13
Well, then we can add photos. But could you, please, tell me what parts may be hard to read for a newbie?
P.S. I myself was rather new to this website when I read UN:SIG and, although some of the parts were rather confusing, the part about the size of the sig was really clear, even with "your penis is too short joke", which was surprisingly relevant. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 09:17, October 24, 2013 (UTC)
And my levity does not reassure us that we are still funny but helps to read the entire page at once. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:43, October 24, 2013 (UTC)

edit From User talk:Anton199

Spike....I would like to respond to your comments on my talkpage because that particular section is full of drama-related comments, whilst neither Pup, nor me wanted to cause any drama.

First of all, I do try to take into consideration whether the user in question (often, a banned user) is new to this site, was not behaving well or is incapable of writing. And when I talk about them, I always try to explain why they should be unbanned.

Second, you misunderstood the "Diary of a disillusioned editor". If you were watching its creation (which you were not, but that's not anyone's fault), you would have seen that it was not even a diary at the beginning but a list of facts, presented with humour. Then, these facts were not news anymore, so I thought they would be a perfect diary. Then I added some thoughts of "a disillusioned editor", thinking that they would also be funny. Now, I am not that editor, I do not feel disillusioned and these are not my thoughts. This was an attempt to present the latest events with humour. If you thought I was manipulating the site through the UnSignpost, you could have told me before.

Third, I am sorry if I did something to you, but I really would like to get responses to things I am saying, because I have questions and you seem to think that you've already responded to them by your previous comments. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:08, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Spike I agree with what you said on Anton's talk page although just to point out that I responded to the Darthipedia person as I thought that you had gone and so did not want to give Uncyclopedia a bad impression if he wasn't going to stick around waiting for a reply. Therefore I hastily put together a message saying that Uncyclopedia does not want to attack Darthipedia as a filler till you came back. It wasn't meant to be official policy and I did not mind you overriding it. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:25, October 25, 2013 (UTC)
Gentlemen, I believe Mr. Romartus wanted us to shut down the drama, not merely move it to another page, and especially not to play out all other unfinished dramas. ScottPat, I meant to cite examples of people appearing to act as official representatives of Uncyclopedia, including one where I was at fault; not to demand satisfaction from you. Anton199, I am working to inject levity into UN:SIG through illustrations. That is all for now. Spıke ¬ 18:36 25-Oct-13
I don't want any conflicts or agruements. But would you, please, at least assure me that my words will be taken into consideration? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:42, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

edit WP:Template:Infobox officeholder

Hey SPIKE, would it be possible for you to transfer the Officeholder infobox from Wikipedia to here? I think it looks a lot better (design-wise) than the President infobox we have currently. --EpicWinner (talk) 00:32, October 26, 2013 (UTC)

I could do it, or you could do it. A problem is that we have different values from Wikipedia; theirs is completeness and ours is humor. In cases where we have made Wikipedia templates available, newbies obliged to fill out all the fields either use nonsense numbers and unfunny stuff or leave them blank and display the error messages. By comparison, a lot of the Uncyclopedia Infoboxes were edited a couple years ago to ensure that most of the fields would be optional. A better question might be: Can you improve the appearance of the current President Infobox? Either I or PuppyOnTheRadio might be able to do so. Do you think this is a better approach? What about our template do you think looks bad? Spıke ¬ 00:55 26-Oct-13
PS--Another reason it might be better to improve the existing template is that, if you start using a different one so your page looks better, other President pages don't pick it up and don't look the same. Spıke ¬ 00:57 26-Oct-13

edit Patrolling tool

Recent changes. Let me know if it's still not working.                               Puppy's talk page06:51 26 Oct 2013

This is an unpatrolled edit, created to see if Spike can get his beaver based tool working. Please do not patrol this edit (unless you're Spike).
There was nothing about RecentChanges that did not work for me, and I am able to mark one or many edits as Patrolled. "Watchgadget" on my Watchlist is the gadget that failed. I'll test this now. Spıke ¬ 08:06 26-Oct-13
Watchgadget is indeed working now, and the Java Error Console is quiet. Wha'djou do?! Spıke ¬ 08:08 26-Oct-13
Nothing. Just figured that the change to the js that altered the TOC may have also impacted on other things, so just thought I'd check a couple of gadgets to see if they had come back to life.                               Puppy's talk page08:19 26 Oct 2013
But Watchgadget broke long before the TOCs did. Perhaps Wikia are simply doing work! I'll give it a day and then ask to have my bug report closed and remove my notice from UN:HAX. By the way, the entire site seems to have just gone down for about 5 minutes. (I thought of you.) Spıke ¬ 08:28 26-Oct-13
I never go down that long.                               Puppy's talk page09:03 26 Oct 2013
At this writing, TOCs are broken again, and so is Watchgadget. Very interesting. Spıke ¬ 23:53 26-Oct-13
Tim's looking into the TOC issue, per his email to you. I wonder if it's something that is impacting on only some servers?                               Puppy's talk page11:59 26 Oct 2013
A hypothetical bug present on some of Wikia's assets and not others is clearly their problem and not ours! That theory could explain the intermittency of the bug, but so could a lot of other things, such as that they're working on it but made a mistake and backed out a fix. Spıke ¬ 00:06 27-Oct-13

edit A quick inquiry into inter-wiki linking

Are we allowed add a link to our user page that directs to another language's Uncyclopedia wiki (that is owned by wikia) as I was wondering whether I could but after all the recent comotion over links to the fork I thought I'd check with you first? It will not say I have moved or anything (as I haven't) simply will link to my user page on the other language Uncyclopedia wiki. Thanks Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:20, October 26, 2013 (UTC)

Yes; this is mentioned in UN:SIG. Spıke ¬ 19:31 26-Oct-13
Thanks. Got it! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:48, October 26, 2013 (UTC)

edit Santa Claus

2013 World Series Game 6

The IP you were reverting deleted a section of this. I was inclined to let it stand, as the section didn't add any real value to an already over full page, but figured I'd leave this for you.                               Puppy's talk page12:22 27 Oct 2013

Sigh! My last revert complained that his addition was UnNews-ish (as well as talking about the "happy nigga"). His new edit attacks a paragraph he may feel has the same flaw. I stayed my hand on this in case he is starting to think like an owner. If he goes from there back to a rant, Rollback will get 'em all. Spıke ¬ 00:32 27-Oct-13
Much the same thought process here. If it hasn't already been done I'll mark as patrolled.                               Puppy's talk page12:41 27 Oct 2013

edit Uncyclopedia:FFS

Spike, much to our disapproval, the result of the nomination was Keep, not Keep as a historical archive. Please, unlock the page. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 15:58, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

No, there were no Keep votes, and 5 votes either to delete it or to at least discontinue it as an active page. So it is locked and marked {{Historical}}. Spıke ¬ 20:35 29-Oct-13

Is that a new rule you just created or has it actually been used in another survived article before? If an article is kept, for whatever reason, it's simply kept. There's no need to complicate things. --Mimo&Maxus (Talk) 20:50, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

No, this is not spontaneous Spike tyranny. There are several more suitable dispositions than outright deletion — userspacing being the most common — and I did not act without a mandate. Spıke ¬ 20:52 29-Oct-13
Yeah - been done numerous times before. If there is no objection saying “we want this” but there is a compromise solution put forward (like “redirect to blah blah”) this gets done. This predates SPIKE's tyrannical reign.
  • {{Historical}} has been adjusted to do a “no editing” lock similar to old forums. This may mitigate the need to admin protect pages going forward. (I have no concern if this one is locked or not.)
  • I'm undecided as to wether we need to keep UN:FFS or FFS any further - we don't want to create unneeded red links, but they have no purpose going forward, so I guess it's completely up to you.
  • Also {{FFS}} and {{FFSblock}} could likewise be given an <includeonly>{{Historical}}</includeonly> as well.                               Puppy's talk page10:02 29 Oct 2013

edit TOC again

Has this now shrunk down to just four headers for everyone, or is it just that I'm using an old version of IE at work?                               Puppy's talk page10:57 29 Oct 2013

I have seen different things over the course of the day. But I have changed locations, and enabled/disabled JavaScript, so I can't really say what state the software is in. At no time have I seen only four items in a Table of Contents when there should have been more. Also: At the moment, Watchgadget doesn't work. Spıke ¬ 01:58 30-Oct-13
Seems to be back to as normal as we get.                               Puppy's talk page08:49 30 Oct 2013
Watchgadget is still not working. Separately, thanks for your clean-up of the old infrastructure of FFS. Spıke ¬ 12:20 30-Oct-13

edit Amilton de Cristo

Thank you await your respostapedido for creating page

hello am SPIKE "Amilton Christ" would you create me a page in the Wiki as I see it and very competent in his work and this my email: pr.amiltondecristo @ site: I await your response thank you

user:Amilton, 08:48, October 10, 2013 (UTC)

Hello. You have twice tried to upload this content, and I have twice deleted it, after discussions with two other Uncyclopedians. Your content has no humor that we can detect, your subject is not notable to other readers, and your content is indistinguishable from vanity, even more so now that your email and website shows you were trying to create an article in our encyclopedia about yourself. I have informed you of these problems, on your user talk page and in a box in the articles, and you did not respond. I banned both of your accounts. We are a humor wiki, not a personal disk farm or vanity blog. There are many other websites that would be happy to post your vanity in exchange for you viewing their advertisements. Spıke ¬ 12:44 31-Oct-13

edit Why?:Does it burn when I pee

The parts that Anon deleted were awful. I would re-delete then myself and maybe even nominate the article for VFD but this would be reverting you. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:49, October 31, 2013 (UTC)

You are right. The whole thing is awful. There is a difference between an Uncyclopedian section-blanking with explanation and Anon doing it without. However, this page was "featured" (within the Why?: project, a gray area) and it is assumed not to need fixing or huffing. Also, there are bigger fish to fry. I'll reduce Anon's ban to 2 days. Spıke ¬ 18:15 31-Oct-13
Sure. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:19, October 31, 2013 (UTC)

edit Ace Attorney

This article seems to be bloated randumbo to me, but given your last edit there, I'll hand it back to you.                               Puppy's talk page07:42 06 Nov 2013

edit Baseball-based nuclear weapons delivery system

Hello Maestro. If you have minutes or hours can you practice your magic on the article? I've put it into some kind of shape, but I know you love baseball as only an American can (one of the themes of the page) and would love to see what you can do to improve the page. Did you read the Babe Ruth book I linked to the line about him - he does seem to be the most underrated player in the game. Did you know he not only would have hit hundreds of more home runs if he had played in today's stadiums (would have hit 104 in 1921) but in every park he played in in the majors he had or has the record for the longest home run in that park! If he were still alive I'd buy him a beer, a hot dog, and a whore. And one of each for me too! Aleister 8-11

I don't want it. The page title is still the punch line. It is not a satire encyclopedia article; it is — now, more than ever — a fiction essay; now with higher-quality writing than before, but the point is not to showcase your writing skills, but to further the project, which is a compendium of cracked takes on real things. This didn't and doesn't fit.
And, to continue a past discussion, boldfaced photo captions is not "a style variation we have allowed since 2009"; it is a unique personal affectation that no one has objected to, except me, once, at the Forum. If you don't like the way captions display, I can give you CSS to put on your computer to change them. Compelling them to be displayed differently on everyone else's computer is tantamount to signing your articles. It's vanity. Spıke ¬ 12:48 8-Nov-13
I agree that it's not that good, I was just playing around with it and got carried away with the story. It's a stupid title anyway, and not much else to do with it. And many magazines and newspapers use bold captions, they accent the pictures and pop out the jokes, which otherwise blend into the woodwork because of the contrast of the colors in pictures. I'm not the only one who uses those, and they've been an option since '009, so I use them because they look better (to me at least). Nobody has questioned them before you, so did uncy have a policy at some point? And since you don't want to talk about Babe Ruth, I dunno. Aleister minutes later
It would fit in UnBooks. The only "policy" on boldfaced captions is that all the articles in an encyclopedia should have baseline similarity of style. Do we really need another rule for this? Again, there are ways for your personal rendition to be as pretty as you want. Here, they are all on blue paper and with no dots on the i's. Spıke ¬ 13:07 8-Nov-13

edit Stale VFD stuff

Some of those articles are over 14 days (336 hours) old, with hardly any movement. Maybe it's time to {{fix}} tag them if they are going nowhere and make room for newer nominations? If they still haven't improved over the time then we can look at nominating them again later on down the line, but (I feel) VFD needs to remain active to encourage deletion of cruft.                               Puppy's talk page08:31 08 Nov 2013

I've asked Simsie to help push Invisia and Tunisia over the edge. Romartus hasn't visited VFD in a little while either. A {{Fix}} of an article whose owner has left the building is merely a license for me to huff it in 30 days, though Frosty usually beats me to this task. Most of these articles have had no support expressed for them. I'll close out those that got significant support now. Spıke ¬ 21:06 8-Nov-13

edit Clean-up of help pages

Great job with HTBFANJS! I know that you know it, but I still want to say it. I now managed to read it till the end.

Separately - if you think that it is the right a idea, would you, please, unprotect the Beginner's Guide to Being an Uncyclopedian? I think I know how to make it more convincing and helpful. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:04, November 8, 2013 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you. Simsie post-edited. I'm not done yet; see her talk page. Spıke ¬ 21:06 8-Nov-13
The document you link to above is just the outline! You know how to make it a more convincing and helpful outline??? Spıke ¬ 21:10 8-Nov-13
You could always {{subst:Uncyclopedia:Beginner's Guide/Overview}} into your user space if you want to work on it, and then move it all over in one hit. That's the way I tend to work with protected titles.
Side note: Anton, is your tag button broken?                               Puppy's talk page09:27 08 Nov 2013
An outline should be helpful! No, but seriously, our Beginner's Guide is not really a guide but multiple illustrated redirects, but which is still protected. Making that outline convincing would be helpful, I think. And making it helpful would be convincing. Maybe making it a true guide would be of more use to the users (well, I really got influenced by HTBFANJS)?Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:32, November 8, 2013 (UTC)
And yes, my tag button is broken and it's been so for several days already. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:32, November 8, 2013 (UTC)
What's a tag button? Anton, go wild. Also, please make the page stop experimenting with inventing new font sizes. Spıke ¬ 21:37 8-Nov-13
Puppy, this wouldn't have anything to do with the change you asked me to make to the MediaWiki JavaScript exactly "several days" ago, would it? Spıke ¬ 21:39 8-Nov-13
I do not really care, as I liked using it to place pages to VFD and now I should not anyway, as it is out-of-date. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:45, November 8, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, the VFD button is exactly what Puppy asked me to "fix." I don't have a VFD button because I don't have a sidebar. I await corrected code, whenever. Spıke ¬ 23:21 8-Nov-13
There is an extremely remote, far left field, teensy tiny possibility that I completely ballsed it up. I think I requested you to change some of the code with line breaks where there shouldn't have been line breaks. (If not that, then I don't know what went wrong. Needs more fixing anyway, but just wanted to be sure.)                               Puppy's talk page09:50 08 Nov 2013
The BGBU is not yet rewritten and I will come back to it later. Thanks. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 22:11, November 8, 2013 (UTC)
I changed everything I found and diminished the amount of size tags. You are all welcome to do anything else you would like to do. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:07, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

Section 4 could be redundant. A little further up we go though write consistently, and the non-NPOV doesn't add to comedic style, or avoid stupid, so probably has no point here. (Would Does fit in at UN:NOT though.)                               Puppy's talk page04:59 09 Nov 2013

As Romartus's original point was that this needs to get easier to slog through, I'll take a look at this option later today. Spıke ¬ 11:13 9-Nov-13
The heading "We are not Wikipedia" did sound as though it should move to UN:NOT. But on further review, it is simply a throw-away heading. The paragraph it began actually related more closely to the other paragraph I threw in there than it did to its own (now-deleted) heading. Everything in Section 4 does relate to writing good comedy and probably should stay there. What is missing is our emerging doctrine about making an article start well (no quotecruft, no alias-cruft, give the reader a hint of the pleasures about to arrive, etc.). Spıke ¬ 23:32 9-Nov-13

edit 1990s

Hey SPIKE, could you possible help me in expanding the 1990s article? "90s kids" are perhaps the most despised, arrogant, and annoying people on the Internet (next to Sonicfans, Directioners, and weeaboos, of course), and I think this article is rife with opportunity to make fun of them.--EpicWinner (talk) 18:23, November 9, 2013 (UTC)

What I did was move all the funny stuff out of Category:1990s and create this article, in place of a redirect to the category.
  • Someone looking for a mainspace article generally doesn't want to see a category but some mainspace article, if only a disambiguation.
  • Someone looking at a category is using it seriously to search for stuff. Mainspace (and the other projects) is where we make people laugh.
Now that the funny stuff has gone where it should live, am not sure I can help you with the content. Nineties kids were annoying after The Me Generation were annoying, which was after the Free Sex Generation were annoying, and preceded the people who are annoying me now. That is, I don't remember a thing. Spıke ¬ 23:28 9-Nov-13

edit Faces

I see you've sunk the VFH nom of the faces in the cloud. May I have one question. In the past you talked about not looking at pictures from your computer. Did you look at the photograph in question, look for the faces, as well as the other stuff described? The page and its subpage are hinged on the picture, and if you didn't see it, I submit this to the judges. If you did look at it, never mind. Aleister 10-11

In fact, I did. At one point I followed the article's hint on where to look. Your question proves my point that the article exists to make demands of the reader rather than bring fun to him. Not on our main page! Spıke ¬ 11:34 10-Nov-13
Alright, thanks. I had to check after remembering you sometimes don't look at pics. And these don't seem like very demanding "demands", just a curious and, ah, fun, thing to do, and it would reward lots of people when they find some faces. JFK is very obvious, as is Bevel, and King if you can see him peeking out from behind some white clouds. If you have time maybe go back and spend some time with the page, and if a face or two comes into focus, maybe you can reconsider your vote. Proof is in the pudding, in this case, in the pic. And I'm still working on that baseball page, and put in more stuff about Babe Ruth. George to his friends. Aleister awhile later

edit EvilCecil4th userspace clean-up request

Hey there. It's been quite a while since I've been on Uncyclopedia (took the email notifying of the deletion of that dumbass drug-induced article I wrote when I was 15 to get me back here :P), but if you don't mind; there's two drafts I was working on (not exactly Uncyclopedia related) that are of the same drunk-shooping nature and after taking a look at them they don't seem to going anywhere anyways. I kinda want to clean my main profile here up so I'd be grateful if you could delete these two sub pages for me:


User:EvilCecil4th/Abuse Of The Lulz

(if there's a way to do this kind of thing yourself, sorry. My wiki skills are pretty rusty). Thanks for your time. --EvilCecil4th (talk) 14:20, November 10, 2013 (UTC)

These two are gone. Take any others to QVFD. I've nominated Lads on VFD; not one of yours, but more of the same; if you agree, I welcome your vote (if not, I welcome your editing of it). Spıke ¬ 14:26 10-Nov-13

Oh yeah, completely forgot about QVFD! Thanks for your help. --EvilCecil4th (talk) 14:30, November 10, 2013 (UTC)

edit Policy on original video

Speaking of uTube....what are your thoughts on original video content (like Unfomercial:Playstation)?                               Puppy's talk page05:05 11 Nov 2013

My thoughts on unoriginal video content, and on original video content posted on other sites (that is, on using Uncyclopedia to advertise one's other work) are clear. I envisage Uncyclopedia as a place for "original comedy writing" (that is, more than a group television watch), but Wikia techies have made a push to acquire videos and to get them to download faster, so it is comfortable with hosting videos. An Unfomercial in the form of a video would be funny, and the video format would correctly imitate the real-world thing being ridiculed. A video in an "encyclopedia article" doesn't look like an encyclopedia article, but it's only if the motive is to catalog funny things done elsewhere that I'd try to fight it in the style guide. Spıke ¬ 10:21 11-Nov-13
I don't think video snippets are always outside of an encyclopaedic tone though. There's a few WP articles with video in them. Although I agree that adding one of the several hundred Wilford Brimley videos here wouldn't help.
I'm probably harping on about this as it has seemed to me to be a logical extension of Uncyc - having video content - but one that has always been contentious. But it's the same as uploading images from demotivational posters, xkcd, et al. I have no concern about linking or uploading original content, but youtube vids are a minefield. Have a look at what Love was prior to the rewrite, for example. It's a personal bugbear though.                               Puppy's talk page10:48 11 Nov 2013
This is a topic I was going to ask about and maybe have a reversal. I missed the change from having youtube vids run on the page and now they are listed as a 'file'. Some pages I've worked on include youtube vids as things to listen to while reading the page, or to contemplate just afterwards while still on the page. In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida is a listening one, as is an unnews about marrying brown rice, and the best one of all, at the bottom of Gildy and my UnPoetia:Well-Oiled Birds. In these pages they are part of the format of the page. It would be nice to have them back, and was this a Wikia decision or an in-house decision? Thanks Aleister 13:34 UTC, 2013 November 11‎
If you are in the mood for an epiphany, then stop worrying about what the author is listening to in the background — stop trying to control the reader's mind, as in Faces (see just above) — and simply serve him comedy. PS: It is not 11-11-11 so I gave your post a correct timestamp. Spıke ¬ 21:05 11-Nov-13

edit User Opples ond bononas

Listen....It's not about gayness and rape. It's actually real funnyness. Listen, this is not from another wiki and i'm not criticizing, but personally this wiki is really unfunny and pretty much it needs a little explicit jokes to make it funny I'm trying to make people laugh. That's what I do. I don't offense or anything. — Opples ond bononas (talk) 00:15, November 12, 2013 (UTC)

Even when you create an imitation {{Construction}} template that calls the reader or the admin an idiot? "Listen." I'm sorry you think this website isn't funny, and I'm sorry you think you are. Perhaps take it elsewhere over the next month. Spıke ¬ 00:27 12-Nov-13
Not about gayness, eh? I counted, and the terms "gay" "gayness" or "homo" are used eight times in the article. Seriously, if gayness isn't part of the comedic strategy of this article, that number needs to be cut at least in half, or perhaps replaced with the more formal term "homosexual". Making fun of gays is immature and overused, and has worn out its welcome here, as discussed in HTBFANJS. Likewise, the terms raped, rapes, raping, or incest, are used 9 times. Most people don't think rape jokes are funny, and the few who do usually find offending other people funny. If this is your mindset you might fit in quite well at Encyclopedia Dramatica, where they already happen to have an article written about Hetalia, and shock images and offensive articles you will find plenty of. Calling other editors or admins idiots isn't funny either. It violates Rule 2. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 01:29, November 12, 2013 (UTC)
He seems to be trying, to be communicating, and likely will take guidance. Isn't a month's first time ban for someone who both writes and communicates harsh? Mars needs women. Aleister 12-11
Problem is, there were two offenses. So basically two weeks for the dickish "Constuction" template added to his article, and two weeks for recreating a deleted article that was userspaced. That's not even including the 15 to 30 minutes to read HTBFANJS for failing which, a ban from 2 hours to 1 day is typically given. ---- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 01:53, November 12, 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, Aleister, for your advice. My harshness was based on him dumping Hetalia on us in one gulp, as though sporking it from ED from the beginning, and rebuffing attempts to advise him about this article, including with {{ICU}}. The attitude shown above — This wiki is unfunny and you need me — iced it. Every ban involves a judgement on the future potential of the recipient, and I don't have much doubt about this one, except whether he is one of our past attitude problems under a new name. Spıke ¬ 01:58 12-Nov-13
To be fair, he did cross out what he had said about the wiki being unfunny, as if he had second thoughts about that. However, I have been watching him too, and his overall response so far has been trollish. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 02:09, November 12, 2013 (UTC)
No, he did not file that comment and strike it out after reconsideration; he filed the comment struck-through in a single edit. (His second edit was to sign the message.) In other words, "Here is what I'm not going to say about your wiki. But oh! I did now, didn't I?" Spıke ¬ 02:31 12-Nov-13
Personal tools