From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
- Napoleonic Wars (beginning)
- Sherlock Holmes and Doctor Watson
- Fourth and fifth reviews
- Second UnSignpost article
- Probability theory on VFH
edit User Collaboration
On the topic of user collaboration as we were discussing earlier, I have some article ideas for us to collaborate on:
- Building An article about buildings. Don't know how to make it funny yet but every encyclopedia has a page on buildings so we need to aswell.
- The Napoleonic Wars Historic. Needs a re-write.
- Germany Another country. Needs a re-write.
- Great ideas! I fully agree. I know something about Napoleonic wars, especially when he tried to conquer Russia.
Also, did you read the Hercule Poirot article to which you made a link? I really don't like it (although it is featured) because the only humor points is that Hercule was gay and pervert (which is not true). Anton (talk) 10:53, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
- It is shockingly easy to get an article featured lately! but we treat them with deference. If you can do a better Hercule Poirot, a better way is to start a parallel article and get agreement to replace the FA entirely in mainspace, making the new one point to the old one. The only person I know who got away with hacking up a FA (to the horror, and then the delight, of its author) was me, on Quebec, and I should really have done a parallel article instead. 11:13 10-May-13
Thanks for putting lots of links on Ukraine, Anton. I love the Napoleonic era, probably my favourite historical era along with WW2. I think the joke we need to have on it is some allied power bias (overdone by miles).
Originally I was thinking of putting bias on the article so that it claims the only important events in the Napoleonic War was the Peninsular Campaign (British campaign in Spain) and that France invading most of Europe and Russia was a sideshow however I don't think you'd quite like that - being a Russian.
If you confirm with me that you want to do this then I'll set up an article in my userspace: User:ScottPat/Napoleonic Wars and probably creat an infobox and introduction.
I suggest that any confering about the article that we have should be done on the article's talk page once I have set the article up. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 12:38, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
- I have finished putting the links (I put 2 links to your articles: the finest militia, Saturn) in Ukraine. You can create the Napoleonic wars and I will help you! Anton (talk) 13:19, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
PS - On the point of nominations you are allowed to nominate others work so if you think that the article is good enough as you have stated please nominate it. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 14:40, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
- You are welcome! Just tell me if you agree with my suggestions of improvement.
- Also, could you tell me if I can use the reviews I have made of your work on my user page in the section of "Other contributions"? Anton (talk) 17:30, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
Please do! Winston Churchill reference I agree with and will sort that out. The sentence that you say does not make grammatical sense seems to make sense to me so please explain more. The reason why the Emus found the war easy and then celebrated is that the Emus did not expect to beat the Australian army but then did so they were quite surprised. You're right - Lewis should be capital as it refers to a name of a gun. The Emus only came in their hundreds on that particular day. Also it's an English expression so not literal. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 17:37, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
- I have modified the review a little bit. Thanks for explaining! Never mind about the sentence, I probably did not read it attentively (there are no mistakes in it). But what I meant about the ambiguousity is that at different moments of your article, the war is presented either as a great event, or as something unimportant. Emus were only an example. But if you don't think you agree with me, you don't really have to improve it because I don't think it is that important.
- I know a lot about Napoleon in Russia; a bit less about his personality, appearance, life; and even less about his other campaigns. What I find funniest about him is his height (he was really small), his behavior during the 1812 war with Russia (I can talk about it), and the aspect of the Continental Blocade (tell me if you don't know about it). Anton (talk) 18:36, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
edit Napoleonic Wars
Oh I know about the blockade. Afterall we were the ones to instigate it. Russia and Britain were the two powerhouses of the Napoleonic War. Like I said, it's my favourite era of history so I know a lot. I'm glad you've got the 1812 campaign covered - most Russians seem to know about this really well. I wish the British education incorporated one of the greatest wars of human history into their history lessons. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 18:45, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
- That is very pleasant for me to hear that (not only because I am Russian, but because I don't like when the truth is not being said). The 1812 was one of the greatest in history! The funny point about the Blockade is that Russia formally obeyed it but really still did not break their good relationship with England which became the cause of the war. Anton (talk) 18:51, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
There's a good reason why Russia didn't completely obey the French. It's called The Battle of Copenhagen. The Danish and Russian fleets formed an alliance to stop trading with the British. The British response was for Horatio Nelson to charge into Copenhagen harbour and sink every last Danish ship. Unfortunately despite the fact that British people like me with hindsight of the 19th Century respect Russian actions and think well of Russia as a country all the way up to today, at the time Britain was wary of Russia becoming too powerful and allying with Prussia (Germany) so Britain after the Napoleonic Wars went as far as to ally with France (that had never happened before) to semi-defeat Russia in the Crimean War. However I like Russia and think it's a great country (though I've never been there). Anyway back to the Napoleonic Wars... Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 18:59, May 10, 2013 (UTC)
edit Probability theory on VFH
Spike, you said that the conclusion should be rephrased, so I have changed it completely! Do you think that it is good right now?
- Yup, the line with which this article ended before was abrupt. "I have finished; it is now time for you to laugh." I went over the last two sections that you rewrote, lightly with a Brillo pad; they now get the reader to your point more quickly. 13:45 12-May-13
edit Pee Review of HowTo:Walk on Saturn without falling over
Thank you once again for a fine pee review job. I think we need to get the pee review prize back up and running as I think you deserve it. I have a few answers to points raised:
- The capital letters are deliberate. They add emphasis to the writing.
- I've made images larger but I won't swap them around because I prefer them where they are.
- How did you guess I took all those pictures myself? I spent ages pottering around in my little spacecraft taking pictures of Saturn!
- I will fix the "jumping over the rings" part.
- The sentence does make sense to me.
- I'm going to leave sections as they are because I wrote it as a cross between a guide and an interlocutor informing you of your situation.
- It is on VFH. (You mentioned that it was worthy enough to be.)
- Thank you for your response. I know that the article is on VFH, I just justified your choice of nominating it. About the images, I only said that it would be better to put one of the images at the beginning of the section.
- Sorry for not being very helpful. Anton (talk) 16:19, May 12, 2013 (UTC)
No, don't think that. You were extremely helpful and as always I give you gratitude for your reviews. I simply gave you some feedback on the comments. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 20:26, May 12, 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Today a new user started an article Amster (almost always spelled Hamster; he will have to reply to my query on this). One of his points was that the Amster appears on the heraldry of Brittany, at which point I changed our existing article on Brittany to be a real disambiguation page rather than just a dumb list of a lot of things including Your Mom.
If you write an article, its final name will be Brittany and mine will become Brittany (disambiguation). Initially, start your article at User:Anton199/Brittany with, "This is the article on the region of France. For other uses, see Brittany" 00:31 13-May-13
- Spike, thank you for your suggestion. I will try to create this article in my user space as soon as I have more time and I will, of course, follow your instructions.
- Scott, while creating the second archive of my user page I have noticed that I still did not reply to your question about UnSignpost. Sorry that it is too late: I find what you did to my article great. Anton (talk) 19:05, May 13, 2013 (UTC)
edit Ukraine Update (and not only)
Once the GCSEs are over (June) or if Pennyfeather's got a break then we should get it proofread and I think we'll VFH it. Just letting you know of the plans for it. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 14:28, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Ok. Do you have any exams? Anton (talk) 14:30, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- If you want to see which articles, as I think, should be created or rewritten, see this page. Anton (talk) 14:52, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I would like to wish you good luck except for it's too late. Anton (talk) 15:16, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
edit Holmes and Watson: Watson receives another lesson
- "Of course, when you don't know that the Earth is spinning around the Sun, dear Sherlock, you will fail at all probability." Anton (talk) 15:28, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"However the Earth is not spinning around any of the other seven planets and so must be spinning around the Sun. Elementary, my dear Watson!" Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 15:31, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Do you know that Holmes has never said "Elementary, my dear Watson". He said "elementary" and "my dear Watson" but only separately. So this is a common fallacy. Anton (talk) 15:33, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"I see I still need to teach you in the cunning art of the trickster, Watson. They deceive you at every step, telling you lies. The world of the thief, the murderer is a dangerous world that's why I'm the hero of this book and you're just the daft sidekick (I've always wanted to say that. Now that Conan-Doyle's dead he doen't control my language anymore). Your no good to me Watson, begone with you." Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 15:44, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- "There are detectives even more talented than you, my dear Sherlock. You can't understand that because of your overwhelming ego. You spoil my life, endanger me... I would better like to be Hastings but I did not say that in order not to hurt your feelings: you would die of a heart attack after hearing that. Now you have said it yourself and you will be sorry there won't be anyone to stop you from putting this needle in your arm." Anton (talk) 15:49, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"By the looks of your unusually smart dress Watson and the fact that you brandish the Conservative Party leaflet fresh form the printing press in your right hand, I would hazard a well-justified
guess evaluation that you have recently aquainted yourself with the local polling station and have obviously been brainwashed by the government (again). My Watson, your sweating and your delirious comment that you said now shows me that you need a sit-down as you have obviously been deceived by higher powers. I did warn you only a minute ago to only listen to the Newtons of this World (i.e. ME!) because only they know the truth." Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 15:57, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- "Brainwashing is the wrong term, Sherlock. They have told me the truth about your political activities: you have always said that they did not interest you but it is impossible! It is in your genes: how about your brother? You lied to me, my dear friend, you are just a betrayer, I have always wondered why you had so good relationship with the monarchs: they are not as grateful and don't have such a good memory to remember several "mysteries" that you solved for them. You are spy, Sherlock! Your expression tells me that I am right: not only you can be clever." Anton (talk) 16:04, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"Watson you are behaving most irrationally. Do you think that there is such thing as a humble British detective who does not meddle in political affairs? Of course I have political views and yes I am brainwashed but it is for the good of the state. Do you really think we build this empire of ours with democracy, liberty and freedom of the people? We are not American or French for God's sake man! We are all politically corrupt and carry out our duties for the good of the
Conservatives Empire. Oppression of the state man, it's what we need."
edit Holmes and Watson: Threat
"You have been called every time, Watson, on my bluff that I seem to have clever reaons for arresting a man who by all other accounts is obviously not guilty. The amount of murders that have been turned into suicides by a flick of my tongue. My words are heeded by all, sir. I only arrest enemies of the state and protect funders of the treasury. Whether they are guilty or not-guilty does not play into it. Maybe you too will understand Watson as if you don't then the ketchup I sneakily covered your kitchen knife in while you were not looking will be good enough evidence to see you in the "Old Bailey" at ten o'clock this next morning." Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 16:23, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- "You have duped me, Holmes! But you are not that stupid to do that. If I will go to jail, that is Hercule Poirot who will uncover the truth!" Anton (talk) 16:25, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"Poirot is an absolute walloon. He comes from a country that thinks it has an empire and their only industrial output is choclate. He will not save you I'm afraid. I only know of one who can possibly save you." Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 16:33, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- "I am afraid you beat me, Holmes. Who is this person? I don't dare make guesses." Anton (talk) 16:44, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"Here he comes now! (This whole conversation has been planned out from the start as usual, Watson). Jacque please take a seat."
- "Good evening commissioner Sherlock. How are you, how is madame and all the little Commissioners?"
"Oh, just fine. May I introduce my mentor, Monsieur Jacque Clouseau! Jacque, this is Dr. Watson my once loyal companion. I hear you have come to solve the murder, Mr. Clouseau."
- "Yes commisioner, of course it won't be easy; nothing worthwhile ever is. That is why I have always failed where others have succeeded.
- Right then. There is someone in this room who knows more about the murder than he is telling."
- "Murder?" (Another man standing in the room)
- "What was that you said?"
- "I said "murder"."
- "What murder?"
- "I-I-I don't know, y-you said "murder"."
- "I said murder? *You* said murder!"
- "No, I said murder because *You* said murder."
- "*I* said murder?"
"If I may, you said there is someone in this room who knows more about the murder than he is telling.""
- "Don't tell me what I said, I know what I am saying. Right this moment I am surveying every inch of this room for clues to this mystery." (Falls over a chair)
"Why, Watson, you look rather lost and quite pale. Perhaps my test of your knowledge of popular English culture has stretched you to the limits. What say you, Watson?" Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 17:17, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
"Yes Watson, I say we are and I drink to that. However you have not answered my above question. Has one never heard of the famous Monsieur Clouseau?" Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 17:22, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
edit Holmes and Watson: Conclusion
That's ok I'll tell you: Inspector Clouseau is the protagonist of the British Comedy Saga of films called "The Pink Panther." He is a French detective played by an Englishman with a hilarious French accent and the humour is composed of making fun of the French accent and slapstick comedy. Just type in "Pink Panther Peter Sellers" (there is an appaling American remake of the films so please do not get confused) on youtube (probably UK youtube) and it will show some clips out of the film. Watch some and see what you think. Some of his quotes I added to the conversation we had above. The actor is very, very funny and famous for his comedy in Britain. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 19:00, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Thabk you for increasing my knowledge about
all that British stuffall those interesting things (I am honest). Anton (talk) 18:22, May 15, 2013 (UTC)
Sorry Anton, I'm afraid I can't understand the above sentence. "Tu" is probably a spelling mistake as it does not exist in English. Could you please rephrase it. Thanks. I like the new headings for the talk page by the way! Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 06:07, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
- When I am typing quickly, I sometimes put the letters in wrong order and even miss several letters. That is how "but" became "tu". I don't really remember which word it was but I think that it is the most probable. Anton (talk) 15:45, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
- It means your impatience works faster than main-page master Romartus. I have corrected the spelling in the new page. 17:32 14-May-13
- Confused by last two points however please do not move article for Russian. Russian deserves a proper page. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 17:23, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed, but the Russian page should start with the "For other meanings, see..." notice. The criterion is whether we believe that the eventual page on "Russian" is funnier (and hence a better first destination for the reader) than the page "Russian (disambiguation)." 17:32 14-May-13
- Sorry! Reading more carefully, I see there is no page "Russian" and thus it cannot be funnier than your disambiguation page is. Yes, it should be named "Russian" and we can always reverse this decision if someone wants to write a real article on Russian. 17:35 14-May-13
Spike, I didn't notice that I had a mistake so thank you! Also thank you for editing Probability theory so it became the way it is right now! When I said "Oops", it meant that I noticed that it got featured.
Scott, thank you again for reviewing my article, it was a great help!
- Congratulations: SIR ANTON (as you may now denote yourself as). It deserved the feature and got the support of most of the active users so well done. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 19:03, May 14, 2013 (UTC)
- PS - By the way you can add this template to your user page if you wish:
| Featured Article: Probability theory|
This person wrote an article which became one of the
Featured Articles on Uncyclopedia.
Thank you for this template, I will put it at the end of my page. I have several reasons against putting it at the beginning: they distract you from the user page when you are reading it; I am planning to get more of those and my page will be a mess; I am
not that modest but like to pretend I am. Anton (talk) 18:25, May 15, 2013 (UTC)
Your criticism of this article is valid, and is a valid basis to vote to delete. The problem is that its faults are not unique to it; Uncyclopedia has a raft of "Worst 100" articles, and in fact most of these, including the one being voted on, have a sidebar listing Uncyclopedia's Worst 100 lists of worst 100s. Most of these are also overlong and unfunny, and most attract anonymous editors who cannot write a complete sentence but can almost have a complete thought and type it into an article. My only involvement in this department was Most overused 100 Star Trek episode plots, which I claim is a way to do it correctly--though there are gaps in the numbers. 22:19 14-May-13
- Sorry, maybe my brain got damaged because of yesterday's euphory but I did not really understand what you are suggesting. Do you want me to create an article about terrible lists or create a terrible list itself to make a frightening example to possible bad writers? Anton (talk) 18:34, May 15, 2013 (UTC)
edit Thanks Anton
- You are welcome! Sorry for deleting one of the templates on your user page (I see that you have successfully restored it). This vandal can become a serious problem for Uncyclopedia.
- What I think about him is that he was a normal user before but got banned by Spike and is now very angry at him and other users.
- Maybe this has no connection at all, so don't make any conclusions but is Dannyboy still banned? Anton (talk) 15:51, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
One replies here:
- The attack was certainly not directed at anyone. Apparently Simsie knows the vandal and some of the users he was attacking don't seem to be active anymore. It had Spike, Mhaille and PuppyOnTheRadio's names.
- About two days ago Dannyboy randomnly sent me a message (see on my talk page) about not honouring him as deputy chief editor in the two previous UnSignposts. You can see my reply. He still hasn't wrote back yet.
- THe previous point reminds me: Article needed for UnSignpost. Same deal as last time I think. One from me, one from you. I think I'll publish the paper on Saturday evening as the whole of next week is exams for me. Can you write one before then and put it in the press room? Thanks. (Perhaps on the recent vandal attack.)
edit UnSignpost: again
- I don't say that the attack was directed at someone, I just say that this person is angry at Spike (this is obvious because he attributes the majority of quotes to him and in one of them says that Spike spends his time banning users).
- Concerning UnSignpost, I would like to write an article but I cannot promise that it will be finished by the time you need it (I will try). But I don't really know much about the latest news: the only things I know are Llwy who has returned and the Votes For Deletion page which is being filled with articles rather quickly (or does it always happen like that?). Anton (talk) 16:42, May 16, 2013 (UTC)
- This vandal is a problem now. Now thank you for reverting several of his edits. Yes, it is a good topic to write about. Anton (talk) 15:01, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
I like your HowTo article Anton. I think we should focus on the Napoleonic War article like we did on the Ukraine one. I've added a bit more about the French Revolution. Anymore from you would be much appreciated.
For news about the vandal check some of the active users talk pages. Also an interesting discussion between Spike and I occured on Spike's talk page about a user from the other site's small attack on a forum. That could be a good article too. Unfortunately I don't know where Dannyboy is and he hasn't produced one article for UnSignpost so I am promoting you to Acting Deputy Chief Editor of Her Majesty Sofia's UnSignpost. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) VFH UnS NotM 15:13, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for praising my guide (I will ask for a Pee Review and as we are only two active reviewers...) and for reminding me about Napoleonic Wars. I haven't abandoned the article but was only searching for ideas and inspiration. UnSignpost article is ready but I don't know if I have mentioned everyone who helped to undo all vandal's contributions. Anton (talk) 17:26, May 17, 2013 (UTC)
- I will add one name in my list as Frosty reverted an edit this night. This vandal is a user who has been banned by Spike for three months, that is what the quote tells us. Anton (talk) 08:35, May 18, 2013 (UTC)
edit No publicity for the vandal
You have now seen that the Wolverhampton vandal will use anyone's name in HIS CHANGE SUMMARIES, including ScottPat, three-day-old user Saddex, and I even saw Anton's name used in one. His goal is to deliver hurtful comments (some directed toward me reflect a reading of my user page) and to become the talk of the wiki. He quickly changes IP addresses and adapts his automated attack to any effort to match specific strings. But when Wikia changed the rules lately, meaning he could touch a dozen pages rather than a thousand, the second goal was thwarted. Just like ScottPat talking about him in capitals in a Forum that I deleted: You will please not help him become the talk of the wiki. Likewise the new guy who inserts random, multilingual garbage in random articles. Likewise the guy who "tags" bridge abutments with spray paint. They are seeking attention and it will encourage future attacks if you give it to them.
Anton, I do not take anything in the quotes as clues or evidence, except that someone at some time banned him with the "unconstructive edits" message, but the Change Summary you reference is repeated with other Admins' (and non-Admins') names as well. But he has been around for years; I do see defenses that a previous generation of Admins left for him.
At Forum:I'm leaving, and it's your fault#Less points to make, we see Multiliteralist (now banned for Terms-of-Use, which means using Wikia's resources to induce editors and readers to go elsewhere) and Llwy herself, argue against me. Multi is here only to lure people to quit, and Llwy rejoined that Forum to rail about wiki administrators everywhere, throwing generic arguments at the nearest Admin available. I am not the best judge, as I am near the middle of this crap-storm; but in my personal opinion, it's not funny, it would be hard to make funny, and rage-quits (and rage-returns?) and misconduct should likewise not be publicized.
So please think about whether it benefits the wiki to deal with these topics, and be willing to consider the possibility that, in view of the above, little newsworthy happened this week. Except that Uncyclopedia is now accepting vandalism at a much slower pace than previously.11:20 18-May-13
- What I have in my article is mockery of the vandal. I have shown his vandalism as absolutely pointless and meaningless. I understand that you don't want him to get 'promoted' but I think that he won't: the article will only give our readers another reason to laugh. If the vandal himself reads it (he probably reads several talk pages), he will see that his contributions are neither funny, nor 'demoralisating'. Maybe this will even make him stop. But if you don't agree with me, you can just ask Scott not to publish this article (and I won't be against this). It cannot be redone as the vandal's attack was its main idea.
- Concerning Llwy, I also made fun of her quick quit and quick return (I hope she will excuse me if she is reading this right now). I did not make a publicity of her behavior: I just updated the latest news, as in the last UnSignpost we wrote that she left and if someone finds out that she is still here, he will be rather confused. Anton (talk) 11:34, May 18, 2013 (UTC)
No, I don't agree; maybe you don't understand vandals. Surely at some point in the past it was painfully revealed that Wolvie was not equipped to make a positive impression on us with his writing, and this is his only way of making an impression at all of the magnitude he desires--and being limited to touching a dozen pages, before Frosty on overnight patrol reverts him, removes that joy. Of course we will try to laugh at him--that is what the UnSignpost does--but it still shows he has made an impression. That was his goal, and almost anything you say about it will help it along.11:44 18-May-13
- So what should we do with the article now? Does it have to be deleted? Anton (talk) 12:05, May 18, 2013 (UTC)
- I personally don't see an issue with the article, it makes fun of the whole thing (which is what we are hear to do) and doesn't give the vandal in question any more publicity that this discussion does IMHO.... --
That's untrue; "publicity" is more than "disclosure." Not only do more people read the UnSignpost than [User talk:Anton199] (otherwise why work on it?!) but mention in the UnSignpost is quasi-official.12:21 18-May-13
- That may be so, but its not only this talk page that is the source of ego-polishing for the individual, a quick scout around recent changes no doubt provides all the sense of accomplishment missing from their sad shell of an existence. I'd sooner see activity such as this met with the response in the UnSignpost. Like all vandals before they'll get bored and more on the less a reaction they illicit. That said an article is out there, if it gets amended now it sends out a message that we're actually bothered enough by this annoying gnat. I say publish and be damned.... --
edit UnSignpost: Vandalism
Scott, thank you for publishing my article and editing the conclusion (as you might have noticed we had a big discussion on whether we should help vandals build their virtual carrier or not). The only bad things I have noticed are several accidental mistakes in my text. Anton (talk) 18:50, May 18, 2013 (UTC)