User talk:Un-Algorithm/archive2

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

More Fisher Price gripes

I made a category for Fisher Price so that we wouldn't have to have a sub-heading. Having a subheading in the article defeats the meaasge which is, Fisher Price was made, and remains as, a short petty vandalism. Mr. Briggs Inc. 00:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC) Eh?

Without the link, new users wouldn't get the joke. Granted, they probably won't get the whole joke even with the link, but at least they'll find it funny. I really don't think the addition of two extra, obviously separate, lines adversely affects the content of the page. --Algorithm 01:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Help me?

You are an Admin right? So I was trying to register but I typed the spam blocker code inccorectly twice. I can't register now, when I try it says I allready have two accounts but when I try to login I am not able to. Can you help me?-Absurdism

Headliners Template

Thanks for that edit, I've been wandering round trying different things trying to work out how to acheive that, cheers!

Now if you could just edit the css on the UnNews Main page so that external links don't show that little logo... :P --Olipro Icons-flag-gb Co-Anc (Harass) 11:58, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Use <span class="plainlinks"></span> (or a <div> for the whole page). --Splaka 06:10, 30 April 2006(UTC)


I’ve come here because you’re the first admin on the list and I couldn’t be bothered looking any further. Several people are insulted, on religious and political grounds no doubt, at the article about God. The article is continuously being reverted to a crap version with sections like “how to contact God” with a phone number on it. This is funny? It may seem like a drastic measure, but would it be possible to put a warning sign on the article similar to the one on the article about George Bush? If this is a step too far could you do anything else to help prevent this? Thanks. Weri long wang 17:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I've come here because I'm one, of several, users who've reverted the "God is a twat" version of God because, while the "fuzzy bunnies" version has weak spots (on the "how to contact god" Mr. Wang and I are in agreement), the "twat" version is mean and unnecessary.
I'm not offended on religious or political grounds, I'm offended that, "God is possibly the best known fictional entity on Earth after the Beatles." is being overwritten by, "God is a vindictive psychopath who supports George Dubya Bush and his 'crusade' in Iraq, a country filled with swarthy skinned non-Christians, usually referred to as "terrorists" in the southern states of the USA and on Fox News.". One is occasionally, funny. The other is consistently bad-tempered.
For a possible solution I suggest moving the "twat" version to Yahweh and leaving the "fuzzy bunnies" version where it is. That would put the Old Testament in Yahweh with the smiting and the wrath, and the New Testament in God with the smiting and the wrath, not so much.
Of course, there's always Thunderdome...I could play the little guy. Maybe User:Chronarion or User:Carlb could play the big guy. Modusoperandi 02:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
The funny version of the God article. Apt title I'm sure you'll agree. Weri long wang 14:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Or mayb you might to rename it the angry version of the God article?Weri long wang 14:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Dealing with an insult from an admin

I made something inadequate;was looking for what I think were legit ways of linking other articles to one of mine. One admi warned me and I immediately stopped. But another left an insulting message, where I took the liberty of deleting the insult alone. How should i react to this? Elmicael 02:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I've looked at the "insult", and honestly I don't think it was meant to be insulting as much as it was meant for emphasis. People use foul language here on a regular and consistent basis, so if that sort of thing truly bothers you, this may not be the best site to visit. Try not to get your feathers ruffled over it.
Also, you should keep in mind that deleting or altering other people's messages is generally considered bad wiki etiquette. Report it to an admin if it's truly offensive, but please don't delete it yourself, ok? --Algorithm (talk) 03:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Quick question

Is there any function that gives you the number of articles in a particular category?--Rataube 09:56, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Nope. --Algorithm (talk) 12:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Rat: You can try browsing through Special:Mostlinkedcategories and Special:Wantedcategories though. --Splaka 03:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Fisher Price

Instead of reverting it every time it gets modified, why not just protect it? --Mindsunwound: (NS) Torture Water IVotedForMindsunwound There 2cents.PNG 18:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)


Hi. I was wondering what the purpose of {{PAGENAME}} was in Template:Title-left. Is it just so people can use {{title-left}} without specifying a page name (in which case it has no effect anyway)? Angela 03:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, it has an effect: it strips off the namespace. Mostly, though, it's just there for consistency across the three templates. --Algorithm (talk) 03:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

NRV rewording

Hi, I made a new version of NRV that's less intimidating as the result of discussion in the Dump. Isra said to ask you your thoughts. --Hobelhouse 02:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine. My only objection to the earlier change was the removal of the phrase "no redeeming value" from the No Redeeming Value tag. --Algorithm (talk) 07:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

PFP, FI, and all the likes

Hiya, Algo. I noticed you removed the negatively voted featured images from PFP and the FI-template. Now there's nothing wrong with that (of course), but may I request a wee favour for next time? Namely update the scores and such... For you see, when updating PFP, I copy the coding from the last update into a Word document, and compare it to the coding from the most recent PFP version (using the special feature Word offers to its Microsoftian slaves). Though this method requires a bit of finetuning, I have noticed that because the removal of some sections, it's all shot to shambles... Of course I couldn't expect you to know of my method, so I thought I'd just give you a heads-up. :D Thanks in advance, and take care. --⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ignSTFU F@H|NS|+S 09:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


I restored it... looks like it was a previous revision... but I don't really know where it came from. I guess I just kind of took ZB's word for it... which is never the right thing to do... Anyway... sorry fo any confusion or wrongdoing, and spare the lectures because I've heard them all... Tompkinssig Smallturtle t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 01:02, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Nerves... Shattered... On Edge... Can't think of clever heading...

Sorry to have resurrected that old Google-ban thread, Algo - I just figured it made more sense to keep my latest bit in context with the original reference (to Morton d's sporkification) so that the newer people wouldn't think I was whining about something completely out of the blue. Not that the whining isn't bad enough, mind you...

I also wanted to thank you (and Spintherism, too) for being voices of reason last month when that whole business with Tompkins happened... I didn't even see any of that until more than two weeks later, when I finally decided to start checking Uncyclopedia again, and realized I'd only really been blocked for about 10 minutes! And by the time I came back the page was already protected, which was just as well, really - it gave me a fairly decent excuse to try and just forget the whole incident.

So I'm hesitant to post this for fear of needlessly stirring things up again, but I feel like you deserve at least some sort of explanation. Obviously my behavior leading up to that point was confrontational, for which I'd apologize if anyone were to ask me to, or if I thought it would do any good. The reason for the whole business was that it was shortly after first appeared, and that of course led to a witch-hunt over at Wikipedia, which apparently is still going on. The Wikitruthers made some sort of coy little jibe (since deleted) "thanking" David Gerard for "mirroring" their site, which led to misunderstandings among some clue-deprived types about David being directly involved, which in turn led to this talk page entry. (The "two sockpuppets of one troll" are User:Mahroww and myself, in this entry.) And shortly thereafter, David started this forum, in which he pointedly speculates about who's responsible for Wikitruth based on their "writing style," and since AFAIK he still thinks I'm the person he referred to there on his WP talk page (it's the same person who started this thread on, which seems to be as far as they've gotten with this), I basically put two and two together and decided David was essentially trying to pin the whole thing on me! Which is not only waaaay beyond ridiculous but, well... you saw how I reacted - badly. Maybe I wouldn't have minded so much though, if I didn't consider to be completely reprehensible.

I know it's ludicrously complicated, insane even, and that's why I haven't made such a big deal over it - there hardly seems to be much point in asking people to follow up on all those links and absorb all that material, especially if they're among the 98% of users here who are unfamiliar with the situation to begin with. AAAAAAAAA! Meanwhile, Wikitruth has since been proven to be the work of "rouge admins" over at Wikipedia, so I guess I'm off the hook for that at least. (Sheesh!)

Anyway, all I seem to be good for these days is getting in a snit about sporkings by Wikipedians, both incoming and outgoing, and that's only constructive up to a point — which I'm finding is very easily reached! But either way, thanks again, man, and keep up the good work.  c • > • cunwapquc? 06:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


Heh, sorry about Forum:BENSON, it was just really pissing me off in Forum:Village_Dump (and feel free to remove the message there in a day or so, or make it less ugly right now, or ban benson and huff all the shit). ♥ ♥ ♥ --Splaka 06:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


Someone told me that admins like pie. Here you are: Failed to parse (unknown function\Large): \Large{\pi}

Mmmm. Irrationally delicious! --Algorithm 19:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Main Page

Hey Algorithm, I am contacting you because you're the first one in the sysop-list. The link to the German uncyclopedia on the main page doesn't lead anywhere. I can't change it, nobody reacted to my post on the discussion page :-( and I don't know whom else to tell. So I'm telling you. I think this is the correct URL: Will that get us anywhere? -- Krankman 09:38, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

(I forgot to add a new section, durr)

That's actually a good idea (a list of top level forums in the forum). And since Wikia hasn't installed the newest version of your extension yet, you could add an optional feature: hideself=true (that is, it would exclude itself if it was in the listed category), so you could just the contents of Forum:Index in a table at the top with that added parameter to list all *other* forums. Just a thought *grin* --Splaka 11:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Phil

Hi, why did you huff my UnBook on Dr. Phil? I spent quite some time on the cover art.--Shandon 08:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but it was poorly made and unfunny, as was the article. Please note that we are currently in a Forest Fire Week, so anything that isn't high-quality is at risk. --Algorithm 21:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough, I can't hit 'em out of the park all of the time...--Shandon 21:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Forum Archives

How about, to delay having to make a final decision, we start archiving forum topics by putting them into [[Category:{{{1}}}/Archive]] or [[Category:Forum archive/{{{1}}}]]? Either by editing {{Forumheader}} to accept a parameter, or by creating a new template like {{Forumheader/archive}} (and then get Hymie to go through and change all the topics older than 30 days). This would allow easy restoration later. And then, any topics older than say 1 year could be huffed? --Splaka 05:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Once the new version of 1.7 is conclusively installed, the upgraded forum software combined with DynamicFunctions makes this problem moot, as each forum page will be able to serve as its own archives. --Algorithm 21:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote Template

Could you check the quotes template talk page when you have a chance? Thanks! User:Alexjohnc3/sig 01:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


I just checked the new PFP page (I've been out of town most of the past month) and I have to say I think it makes things more complicated than they need to be. Having a separate page for every image is sort of a mess - it's already that way for template:FI and it's a headache (though in that case I don't know if there's a more elegant solution). I think it would also discourage voting by forcing you to click to another page. The worst thing is that, unless I'm missing something, there's no way to get a list of up-to-date scores - meaning to sync with template:FI we'd have to check every individual page. The only real advantage to this system that I see is that no images should languish at the bottom, like the oldest stuff sometimes did on PFP. Overall I don't think this change is a good one at all. I know the old PFP was bloated, but it still seems like a much easier way to do things - and additionally, some people have petitioned to raise the standards for PFP, which could cut out a lot of stuff. —rc (t) 19:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

On further consideration, you're right; I went too far. Still, I think it was important to both a) split the very large PFP listing into individual votes for maintenance purposes, and b) upgrade the PFP template to match the current format. I've restored the main PFP page to something closely resembling the original layout, and moved the forum monitoring to a separate page.
Additionally, the new layout may be sufficient to render Template:FI/all obsolete. Should I go ahead and merge these pages together? --Algorithm 23:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Might as well, if it's easily done. —rc (t) 04:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Original Jesus

Dunno if you're busy, or not, but when you have some time can you look at Original Jesus. A new user has been, in my opinion, butchering the page. He's trying to be blasphemous, but instead his edits are just puerile (as with problems with a different user's edits on God, I have no problem with someone else's take on the same subject, except when it changes the vibe of a page).

The problem initially started when he cut my favourite line (tho' it be mine, which makes me biased). We sort of had a revert war, I backed off and put a message on the user's talkpage. He didn't reply, but his next edit had "(Oh, wow! All the blood has gone to Dick's head! Oy vey!)" as its comment line...which seems kind of rude. Anyway, time moves on, he decrufts a bit, makes more jokes about shit, abortion and mary's tits...yada yada yada...but now he's gone too far. He cut the section on "Bend it like Bethlehem", my second favourite bit.

Long story short, do you mind checking the page out? In particular, the His Birth section after "What many don't know...".

I just need to know if I'm off base here. A second opinion is valued and you helped out on God with the recent unpleasantness. If you say the changes are good I'll abandon the page to the mad clutches of whomever (I might be too close to the trees...), but if we agree then it means (potentially) that we can take up ladders and storm the gates at dawn. Or something. Preferably something that doesn't involve ladders, running, or getting up early.

But I digress. I've also pestered Chronarion, as he too got involved in the unpleasantness and a three opinions are better than two. Even if one of them is mine. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 20:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, Modus, Original Jesus is a very bloated article, and such articles are almost never consistently well-written. I can't really take users to task for eliminating small sections of bloated articles they don't find funny, since they're generally honestly trying to improve the article's quality. With this in mind, I'd recommend creating new pages out of the sections that have been excised, and adding back links where appropriate. This way, the sections can be judged on their own merits, not by whether they bog an article down.
In fact, you may want to split some existing sections out of this article as well; it really is quite a mess. --Algorithm 23:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Seen. I figure it's not worth throwing a tantrum over ("We were here first!" just doesn't ring true with the anonymity of the interweb). My main complaint is that the rewrit bits are worse than what came before; OJ was unfocussed but funny, now it's still unfocussed but the focussed bits have been stretched and distorted into non-funny. That, of course, is just my opinion and, as long as it remains just mine I'll leave the page alone, potty humor and all. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 23:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I suspect that I'd feel differently if he was behaving in a rational, adult manner. But he's being a dink about it. For his most recent edit he cut a witty joke about the Beatles being bigger than Jesus (flipped around to have Jesus smaller than the Beatles) and put in the edit comment "(*blows raspberry*)". It reminds me of when I was little and had a neighbour that tossed his dog's shit into my yard. If I remember correctly my father eventually got pissed and chased him around with a shovel...ah, good times. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 02:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Fact of the matter is, he hasn't done anything banworthy, so there isn't much I can do at the moment. My advice: Calm down, wait until he's finished, and add back what you like. Anything you do right now will just lead to higher blood pressures. --Algorithm 02:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry about it. I'm not going to resort to dinkery. In fact I'm not going to do anything at all. this what it feels like to be the bigger man? Kinda nice, really.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 02:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
...oh, and I wasn't trying to get anyone banned. I was asking your opinion as a user vice admin to see if my opinion was way off base because we'd agreed on the bad edits in God awhile ago. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 21:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


Since your online could you do me a favor? I resently rewrote Darth Hitler for an AFD in which the vote was rewrite. It was huffed anyway despite the vote. I was wondering if you could put a copy in my user space? Thanks, --Darkfred 04:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

NM someone else did it. --Darkfred 04:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


Concerning this diff...

I changed it back because the point of this room is that you can't get past the Grue until after your knife wound has healed. The "blood...ravenous" serves as an explanation for this. --L 10:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

While that's true, it's my feeling that this is already conveyed by the "dripping blood" remark, and the extra explanation makes it less funny. But to each their own. --Algorithm 10:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Posers Page

Dude, please help me. Somebody deleted the Posers page without even discussing it with anyone at all. Like I just edited it yesterday and now its gone. I'm not sure who to turn to but I know ur an admin. Can you restore it or at least tell me what I can do to help get it back? Or could I just have the html to the page or something.

Please, Please for the love of god help me!! I want my Posers page back!!

When a page has been deleted, the first thing you should do is check whether it has been listed on VFD; this can be accomplished by clicking "What Links Here" in the sidebar. In this case, it was indeed listed on VFD, and deleted due to the fact that the article consisted almost entirely of a series of unfunny lists. Really, there wasn't a single thing on that page that was remotely creative.
When a page is salvageable, and a user asks politely, admins may often choose to move a page into that user's userspace, where that user may attempt to fix it up before moving it back to where it was. However, if a user instead decides to recreate a deleted page with insults to administrators, the page is generally re-deleted and locked, and the user is banned.
I've taken the liberty of re-deleting the page. Consider this a warning. --Algorithm 03:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

You know what you prick, go fuck yourself and die. Don't tell me it isn't creative and other things are, don’t tell me it wasn't funny you idiot, don’t tell me that was a warning. This whole site is just a bunch of bullshit anyway, how can you possibly be able to say one pile of shit is more important than another pile of shit???? I won't be coming on here again so go ahead and ban me I don’t really care, so just go fuck yourself, and slit your fucking throat as a favor to all us uncreative, unfunny, and unapologetic people out there!

Go to hell you fascist nerd!

Wow, that guy really loved his page. His page may not have been funny, but his outburst was.

DPLForum extension problem?

Hi Algorithm. There seems to be a little problem with that extension, and I was told that this might be the best way to contact you. If you have a moment, please see this page. I'm trying "addfirstcategorydate=true", but the date doesn't show up correctly (instead it reads "2006--1-0-"). Is this a problem with the extension, or am I the problem? :) You can reach me via the talk page of that article or leave a note on memoryalpha:User talk:Cid Highwind. Thanks. -- CID

Can we move Asian People to Yellow People?

cf. Black People and White People.--Mrasdfghjkl 14:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

For lack of knowledge on who to ask...

I'll ask you who to ask. I believe the article on binary ought to be reverted to its sensible state, but am at a loss for who to talk to about un-locking, copying in the good binary code, and re-locking.

Just my 2c, though.

My talk-page entry

Or is there somebody else you'd like to refer me to bug? Like i said, imma n00b.

04:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

My first attempt.

It was on the Un-news page, and it was called Mad Stander stikes again.

If it was shit, fair enough. But I didn't get a warning and I'm not really sure why it's been deleted. Is there different rules to follow on the un-news compared to the rest of the site?

If you could let me know why I was shite, that would be nice. I can then try not to do it again, or kill myself.

--Jake Justice. 18:18, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Xmas Mail

Xmasmoosewreath Nothing says [[Insert religious or pagan holiday of your choice]] like getting drunk with a moose. So this year, why not savour a treasured Canadian tradition with a bottle of hooch, horns, hooves, and hypothermia? The drinks are on me. ~ Todd Crown Royal

A great year. Thanks for all you've done. --Sir Todd GUN WotM MI UotM NotM MDA VFH AotM Bur. AlBur. CM NS PC (talk) 16:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

page deletion


Basically, there is a page called finlay_physics. Although the page doesn't really name an exact Finlay, the Finlay in my school that generally follows the guidelines of the page is threatening to go to the principle if the page isn't deleted. The original author also attends my school. Is it possible to have the page deleted (or moved to an obscure location where said finlay can't find it) so that me and the original author can escape being punished by the evil principle overlord...

Basically, can you delete it?


(I would of followed the normal deletion system, but a) I don't know how it works and b) there isn't much time between now and it getting reported :()

Leo (-- 16:21, 20 December 2006 (UTC))

Choose tags

Hi, i've been googling about the "choose/option" tags, and your name came up :-)

Am I mistaken or you are responsible for them ? If that's the case, I have a question for you (else, you can forget about me, ;-) )

I was trying (on the portuguese-speaking uncyclo, Desciclopédia) to create a template. Inside each option tag, there was a image tag, and each image tag would have a parameter (left/right). Example:

... <option> [[Image:Norrisss.jpg|thumb|{{{position|left}}}|100px|Chuck Norris, o poderoso]] * [[{{CURRENTDAY}}]] de [[{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}]] - Dia em que Chuck Norris encarou o mundo. </option> ....

It seems that, when the template argument (in this case, "position") is used inside choose/option tags, it gets ignored. (i've tried the same code, without choose/option, and the paremeter works like a charm).

Is that some known issue with your extension ? Or Desciclopédia may be just using some old version (in this case a new version would be working and i'd just tell a sysop over there about it) ?

Thanks in advance.

WendelScardua 02:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this is a known issue, but not with my extension. I'm afraid that no MediaWiki extension is allowed to use template arguments, as they are replaced and purged before extensions have a chance to access them. May I instead suggest you encase the entire <choose> block with <div align={{{position}}}>? With a little CSS tinkering, this should provide much the same effect. --Algorithm 06:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the help :-) I'll try that...
WendelScardua 03:31, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Admin help

I’ve got a picture of the Flying Spaghetti Monster on my user page. Can somebody please give me some advice on how to scale it down to a sensible size, and push it to the right hand side of the screen? Thanks. Newze rules 22:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


how do you put pictures and other things in your signature?--Vfdtyler 21:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Please refer to the How To Get Started Editing page. --Algorithm 03:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

deleted article

How do I find out what happened to my article? I wrotwe an article entitled "he's gaining."

Also is this the best way to contact an admin? Or is there a general forum for that? Also, is there a template to put on my page, when I have a question, (like {{helpme}} on wikipedia)? Appreciate any help you can give. thanks. --Sm8900 12:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

What happened to my article? I wrote one called "Motörheadbanger". It was funny and everything, and had a good size to it and links to other articles and stuff, the only thing it didn't have was a picture. So why was it deleted and how can I can it put back on? Do I have to type it up over again? I don't have an account on this site but if you could answer me it'd be great. Thanks.


i had made a parody page of a school near where i live...but it seems to have either not come up, or has been deleted, but no one had said anything to me about it...The name of the article is West carteret high school, and was what i had intended to be the begining of a series of parody of local places where i live. Is there something im missing? (17:26 july 31, 2007)--Hydrorunner 21:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


i had forgoten that tidbit...well thanks for the info.--Hydrorunner 00:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools