User talk:Anton199/archive5

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Contents

edit The honor of Mother Russia

Anton, the purpose of this wiki is humor, not defending the honor of Mother Russia.

You renamed the thoroughly unfunny Russian Czar. I would have voted to delete it on VFD, but giving it a name no one will ever type has the same effect without a vote.

You did take Anna Pavlova to VFD, where it failed (because it is funny in its own right), but your discussion on my talk page did not so much focus on the humor level but on the insults to Russia; and your replacement article, though improving, is still not as entertaining a read.

Now you have created a template and stuck it at the top of a half dozen talk pages--as though your opinion were more important than everyone else's--projecting a quasi-official opinion that the associated articles must be rewritten to go easier on Russia.

Who died and made you czar? Get back to writing comedy, and abandon this effort to enforce orthodox points of view. Spıke ¬ 18:59 29-May-13

Personally I like the template idea but don't abuse it as you have done. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:20, May 29, 2013 (UTC)

You are both welcome to give your opinion on an article, but it is just as easy to copypaste text from your userspace as it is to reference the text by template. The only disadvantage is that then it would look like one Uncyclopedian's opinion rather than an official site notice--as it should; the opposite is my entire problem with Anton's gambit. Even an Admin can't do this, unless it is enforcing the obvious goal of the site or a consensus reached at the Forum. Spıke ¬ 19:27 29-May-13

I see what you mean I can see how it is an abuse of power. Perhaps if it were to say Uncyclopedia's opinion rather than Anton's on the top however surely then it would have the same aim as a VFH template so there would be no purpose to it. I think I shall make a template of my own more for jokes on friendly users talk pages and not for the same purpose as Anton's. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:33, May 29, 2013 (UTC)
Of course, I try to defend Russia as this concerns my personal feelings but this template has (almost) nothing to do with this. I said: it EITHER offends Russia, OR it is not funny. Actually, it is always the latter, as the first one is a joke. I expected you to say that it is a power abuse but I felt that I had to warn the creators of several articles, as I have put them on my list and would like to rewrite them. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:14, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
In addition to everything above:
  1. My template is a friendly warning. It doesn't do any harm, except for actually asking the creator to improve on their work (which may be good for them).
  2. My list (to which I have already given you a link) is helpful, as it has already caused Scott to rewrite the Battle of Normandy. Thank, Scott! Less work for me. (I will continue later) Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:44, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Anton, as always great friend of mine, it is true that your template did bring Battle of Normandy to which I am very grateful. I am only half way through the re-write but I asure you more is to come. As to this list you refer to can you repost the link as I seem to have missed it. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:17, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
PS - On a completely, random and seperate topic: have you seen the new Star Trek film? I've seen it twice now, second time today. I've never been a real fan of Star Trek but JJ Abrams'(the director) Star Wars slant on the film and the starring of two very funny British Comedians: Simon Pegg and Benedict Cumberbatch has made this latest film very good. I encourage you to view it. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:17, May 30, 2013 (UTC)
If I have an opportunity, I will watch it. Thank you for telling me!
Concerning, Anna Pavlova, I was sorry to see you still liked the American version of it better than mine but I also see that you have proofread it. Thanks and I hope that I can still improve on it, although I have corrected everything you told me. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:53, May 31, 2013 (UTC)

edit Bonjour!

Hi Anton. I haven't finished Battle of Normandy however could you please quickly read up to the section on "Landing" that I have re-written and tell me whether you think it is funny and what improvements you would make. Thanks pal. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:54, June 1, 2013 (UTC)

I see you have decided to take over from me (only kidding!) and are already writing the next section. The original author seemed amused by anything dirty. I'll work on the rest in good time. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 11:07, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
I did not decide to take it over from you, I was just very annoyed by the dirty part at the beginning of "Landings". You can change the rest and even change my part (if you don't like it). What you did is very good.
I don't have much suggestions, really.
  • The images are the author's (not yours) biggest problems. They are all photoshopped, and even if we are writing comedy, we are writing encyclopedic comedy and this choice of pictures destroys all the author's efforts to make something good (even though he has not even tried hard).
  • The author concentrates too much on Darth Vader. The great majority of the pictures show this (as well as the text itself). I don't think that a person who typed "Battle of Normandy" wants to read a text on Star Wars.
What you can add to the article:
  • How Germans ran away (I haven't noticed it in the existing version and it would be interesting to read about);
  • Which mistakes the French made (as well as the Allies, and as well as Germans);
  • Camouflage (all these flying tank balloons, etc.);
  • Some kind of conclusion as the existing version has none.
But great work! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:48, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
I have already pointed out two mistakes the French made: 1. The French Resistance didn't exist, every single Frenchman surrendered and 2. the invasion force accidently carried the French Royalists living in exile in England over instead of the Free French! Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:56, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, ok. Sorry, didn't read it very carefully. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:58, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
Also being a huge Star Wars fan myself I appreciate the Star Wars meem and wish to leave in a few of the Star Wars jokes in the article and some of the Star Wars images. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:37, June 1, 2013 (UTC)
I have nothing against this but I don't think that the quantity of references to Star Wars the article has is too great. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:18, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

edit World War II: The Movie

Anton this article should not be converted into an article on the actual WW2. Leave it as a movie article as it is making fun of war films. However this Uncyclopedia despite having Nazis and Communists on about every single flippin' page does not have an actual article on WW2. We could do a collaboration in the future if you want. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 07:39, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

I did not like that the only article on the Second World War was the one about a fictional movie. I would like to collaborate to create another one. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:20, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
I will agree that we should collaborate on this but postpone until July. I need to do lots more on the Napoleonic Wars article and PLS comes first below. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:33, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

edit PLS

Don't know whether you've heard but the new PLS competition for this summer is up. There is a category for collaboration and I wondered whether you would want to collaborate with me on an article for that one (as we've produced some great work together before). If so then you choose the article name (although I did suggest WW2 above if you are willing to go for that one) and we can work on it together for the competition. Don't create it yet though as I need to confirm with Romartus when we can create the articles for the competition. So what do you say Anton? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:52, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

I am willing to do this but I don't know the time frames and I am afraid I won't have as much time as before until July begins.
I took a look at the PLS page and found out that the article should be created in 2 weeks. I can try to do it and I will do everything I will be able to do, but I can't promise that I will actually do a lot. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:21, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I still think we should collaborate even if you are a bit stretched I don't mind making up for any parts you won't be able to do. The question is what article do you want to do: WW2 or another article (I have a feeling WW2 will take a very long time so probably best not to do that one yet!). Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:35, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
What do you prefer: to make a new article or to rewrite something? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:39, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations with Boxes! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:46, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
Make a new article. You know me well enough Anton to pick a title. Maybe find a wikipedia page for a title idea. I like geography, history, politics and science. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:50, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
Oh and thanks for the praise on the featured article. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:52, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
Do you want to do something on cossacks as it is connected to our Ukraine? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:54, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
I'll do Cossacks. Shall we do it under your user name: User:Anton199/Cossacks? (don't create it yet though!). Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:01, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

edit Pee Review

I'm sorry to trouble you Anton however TheDarthMoogle has a pee review up entitled Quadruple Agent and I attempted to do the review but could not think of improvements to make despite the fact it desperately needs some. I wondered whether you could do the pee review if you have ideas for improvement as you are very good at them. Sorry, thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:26, June 2, 2013 (UTC)

Concerning the PLS article, I think that "Cossacks" is a perfect topic. We can create it under my name, if you have nothing against this.
Concerning the Pee Review, I will try to make it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:43, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
On the 11th June we can make it. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:50, June 2, 2013 (UTC)
Ok. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 05:44, June 3, 2013 (UTC)

edit UnSignpost/20130603

As I have asked you for many favours recently I will spare you of having to contribute to this week's if you don't want to as I intend to write it and publish it now. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:44, June 3, 2013 (UTC)

If you can, this will be very good. I don't know any recent news and am writing the Quadruple Agent review right now. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:55, June 3, 2013 (UTC)
Right ho. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:05, June 3, 2013 (UTC)

edit A few little things of note

I know you are working on an article about Brittany. Are you aware the article already exists at Bretagne (the French name)? Maybe consider re-writing that one, as it isn't great. I'm also aware of your article on Normandy, and will eventually get round to proof-reading it (I haven't forgotten!), but thought you may want to know that the template for France/French things diverts Normandy to England. Might be worth fixing. Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 19:36, June 3, 2013 (UTC)

I will take a look, thanks. If you don't mind, any comments about Normandy and if it is worth VFH would be also great.
Yes, it is not that great and is rather short. I will take some funny stuff to my article and then finish working on it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:51, June 3, 2013 (UTC)
There is way too much swearing in the articles mentioned, although I've only read the first sections and have judged them from that. Please remove the offensive language, or uncyclopedia will get the reputation of being naughty. Thanks. Aleister ya wanna know the time? Ya can't handle the time. Or date. Or what year it is (UTC).
Come on Al, we're all good friends here. Don't pick a fight with a Russian. You're going to regret it. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 05:50, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
Al, please, don't be angry at me because of only one vote against. Remember: I voted for HowTo:Teach a six-legged man...Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:07, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
I think this one should be deleted after I finish mine. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 05:46, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
OK, my 'pologies. It's not the vote against that I'm fretting about, but the fact that you didn't read the article and then voted against it. So since I have complained so much, I'll explain in-depth (you can yawn now). At the start of the 2038 book "The Second Conquest of the Moon" ther incident which kicks off the moon trip is told by the person who interviewed Selene about it as well as by his personal experience of the incident (I won't give away who wrote the book, if you read the data after "THE END" pic then you can find out who wrote the book). Selene has studied Wilhem Reich, one of the giants of the 20th century, who discovered that you should take all the anger energy you have and put that energy into solving a problem. So Selene, after finding that her motherfucking husband was having an affair with her sister felt the surge of emotional energy which made her want to kill them and swear her head off. Who knows, maybe she seldom swears, and maybe that should be in the story (hmmmmm, that might work well, thinking out loud), but she finds herself worked up into a state that she recognizes as one that Reich described, and instead of breaking things or something else she gets up and walks across town, not even stopping to put on her shoes, and uses her energy to.....well, if you read further you will see what happened. So, in a nutshell, that's the storyline, and maybe I didn't make it clear enough that for her it was an unusual amount of swearing and anger. Please read my page on James Bevel if you have time. He had read Reich and studied his data by the time he heard that the four little girls were blown up in the Birmingham Church in 1963, a few months after the end of his successful Birmingham Children's Crusade. His first instinct was to go out, find the killers, and kill them. He had the hate-kill energy, recognized it, and immediately came up with a plan to obtain the right to vote (he figured that if blacks could vote in the American South then Sheriffs and District Attorneys would want their votes, and not allow things like the bombing to go unpunished, thus making it less likely that someone else would blow up little children just to make a point). Bevel's knowledge of Reich led directly to the Selma Voting Rights Movement and to the march from Selma to Montgomery. True. So anyway, I am proud of the entire UnBook, and think it has lots and lots of interconnected data in it, and it came out in a very good way. So yeah, how about if I make the Reich and anger stuff clearer, and undeftly indicate that it's the angriest that Selene had ever gotten in her life. But this explanation is why the swearing is a part of the plot point, and why that level of energy was needed to get the results that Selene got. Thanks for reading this wall of text, and for getting me into the headspace where I could write this wall of text. Aleister 12:33 4-6-'13
Well, actually your explanation destroys my previous impression but I think that some readers, as me for example, won't understand it and I agree that you need to end something. I will actually read your UnBook, understand what can be improved, then I will tell you and change my vote. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:32, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
You actually explained it very well after the swearing part, what I may suggest is:
  • Move the Reich explanation part to the beginning (so the first paragraph will be the second).
  • It will probably spoil your concept of your first chapter, this is why you can make further improvements. My version is right below (choose to accept it or not):

Lars and Selene never knew if they had a good thing going or not. You ever meet a couple who thought they had it all - success, good looks, and a nice art collection - and yet hated each other without knowing it? That was Lars and Selene.

She suddenly remembered Wilhelm Reich, whom she had studied and who said that when the body's chemistry is given this volume of a jolt, like when you're so god-damned angry you want somebody dead right now, or when you're so deep in grief - like when your dad walked out - or even when you fall in love at first sight, that enough energy is freed up for you to grab hold of it by its balls and aim it straight and deep into your emotional baggage. You can then dig around in the trauma and muscle tensions, and when you get enough of a handle on any section of this stuff to shift the whole package into overdrive the best idea is to take that freed-up energy and use it for something constructive.

So Selene had to get that rat low-life germ-covered motherfucker out of the fuckin' house before she fucking killed him. Moth-er Fuck-er, what in the nasal passage of Oprah's well-heeled ghost did he think he was doing? Fucking her sister! No, he did not. He mother-fuckin' fucked her sister!? Moth-er fuck-er.

So , Selene... (etc.)


How is that?Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:01, June 4, 2013 (UTC)

I read this earlier and you are correct. And if it wasn't for that motherfucker Lars we would never have gone to Mars and the rings of Saturn (but not Europa). I will work on this later, and thank you for helping make more sense of what is occurring in the article. Appreciated. Aleister 18:36 4-6-'13

edit The history of the Earth (all rights reserved)

One of the greatest moment on Earth when Man went to the Moon. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:42, June 4, 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean that it is when a man first went to space? You are probably making an error, as Americans went to the Moon and a Russian astronaut cosmonaut was the first one to go to space. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:20, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
I do know that but I consider the NASA achievement greater but only just and I fully respect Yuri. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:22, June 4, 2013 (UTC)
Second that motion. If I could have one autograph in the world it would be Yuri Gagarin. Well, maybe Yuri Gargarin signing an already autographed first edition copy of "The Kingdom of God is Within You" by Leo Tolstoy (English spelling, not his real name) which Mohandas Gandhi (his real name) had already signed. So that would be two Russians and one little brown man (as he called himself) on the same thing. Yep, those three, with Marilyn Monroe signing the Tolstoy book on the second page somewhere, right next to Clara Bow, Wilhelm Reich, and good ole Aleister Crowley...well, can't think of anyone else on the same level, and that would be a hell of a first edition. I did speak to Neil Armstrong once on the phone, and have met Buzz Aldrin, and met the guys who organized and operated the Hubble telescope right through its Deep Field projects, but that's another story for a quiet evening around the Occupy St. Peter's Square encampment. Aleister 22:51 4-6-'13
Wow! You met them! I envy you so much. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 05:59, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
Not Tolstoy and Gandhi and those guys, I was just imagining a dream signed-first edition. But I had a period awhile ago where I decided to "count coup" on astronauts by phoning or meeting the Moon guys and the ones who came before that. I only personally met three of the mooners (Dave Scott, Buzz Aldrin, and Harrison Schmidt) but talked to most of the rest. Anton, I also met the Russian cosmonaut who was the first to walk in space, a very joyful fellow. The Hubble people was almost an accident - I learned of a conference near my home as I was walking around a student union, and just walked right in. One of the things happening there was the press conference to announce a big find, and it turned out to be the announcement of the first multi-planet solar system outside of "ours" (I all dibs). Still have the press releases. I love the space stuff, and follow the Mars Rovers almost daily. Well, not follow them literally, that would be very dusty and slow. Probably boring after a few days. Who would you guys have autograph something if you could time travel? I'd have Jesus sign a store-bought crucifix just to auction it off on ebay, or maybe a poster of the Shroud of Turin. Aleister 12:07 5-6-'13
I would have Paul McCartney's one as well as Ringo's. (If I could travel in time, I would also ask John and George). Rafael Nadal's and Roger Federer's would also be quite cool. And Novak's.
Concerning the important historical figures, Martin Luther King, Nicholas the Second and Queen Victoria would be cool. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:24, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, come on! It's all about John Major and PG Wodehouse, on a first edition copy of Lucky Jim by Kingsley Amis! Although Rowan Atkinson/Rowan Williams and Clement Attlee wouldn't go amiss, alongside Tom Sharpe and Evelyn Waugh. The Beatles are a good choice. Not quite Dire Straits though... Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 16:53, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

How are those three red-linked? What sort of uncultured urchins are you? Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 16:55, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to change the topic quickly until Reverend is gone: I have deleted the section on Baby P and would like to add a paragraph about Berlin in the post-war years. If you look at it, could you tell me if it is good or not? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:06, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Will do so. I have made a very slight edit to a disambiguation page of yours. Sorry, just couldn't resist. Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 17:11, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

You made it better. So why are you sorry? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:15, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't I be? I'm sorry... for, you know... being sorry... and that. Right, as to the addition to the article. I think the concept and the jokes used are good, and would improve the article. At the moment, however, the style of writing gets in the way a little. Take another look at it, and see if you can improve the structure. If not, I'm sure plenty of others will be happy to help. Even I, though not actually gruntled by the task, wouldn't be too disgruntled by re-writing it (keeping the same jokes). Once this is done, it should be able to fit right in. If you disagree, get a second opinion, or, alternatively, shout very loudly in my general direction. Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 17:43, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean I should re-write the article itself or my paragraph? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:07, June 5, 2013 (UTC)

Your addition. The article is fine, in my view. I would do it for you, but I'm a little sad at the moment. One of the people I mentioned above (Tom Sharpe, author of Porterhouse Blue) has only just died. I was looking forward to a new Wilt book, and now he's gone forever. I'm going to re-read Porterhouse in commemoration. If any philistines amongst you haven't yet, I'd suggest you do the same. Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 11:56, June 6, 2013 (UTC)

This is bad! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:03, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
I can re-write it myself but could you, please, tell me which look I should take? By the zay, thanks for voting for me! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:25, June 6, 2013 (UTC)


edit Anton!!!

Check out the moon page. I used your idea and expanded on it, and I've done enough for this log in and will be back to polish it later. I hope you like it, and thanks again! Aleister 18:05 5-6-'13

Yes. Very good! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:14, June 5, 2013 (UTC)
Because I missed the last conversation: My autographs would be: Rowan Atkinson, John Cleese, Hugh Dennis, Neil Armstrong, Peter Sellers, Jon Culshaw and others who I can't think of at this moment. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 06:04, June 6, 2013 (UTC)

edit Walled

Hi. My 'pologies, as I was going to just do a touch up edit or two on Berlin Wall and then got into it and did a wider edit-writing thing. Please revert any or all. I love the real story of how the wall was removed. It was during the "Eastern European Spring" or whatever they called it, and reporters were interviewing the head control-freak honcho in Berlin, and as he was leaving the room someone asked him if the wall was going to come down. He said it would someday. But the rumor that he had swaid it was coming down spread throughout the streets and hundreds (thousands?) of people just walked towards it cheering and happy and climbed on it, and none of the guards fired on them. A really fun way to have the wall torn down! Aleister 16:15 6-6-6-6-6-

Well, it is a "humor wiki that anyone can edit". And it is the second time this week that I receive apologies because someone edited the page I created or on which I worked. Thank you because sometimes I don't know if the page's grammar/phrasing needs repharsing/proofreading because mine is far away from perfect. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:14, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
I changed 'Fourth Wall' to 'Wailing Wall'. Seemed to scan better in my view. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 18:12, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
I always thought David Hasselhoff claimed he had dismantled the wall when his fans on the otherside tried to break through...--LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 18:13, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
The article is becoming better and better. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:25, June 6, 2013 (UTC)
Hello Anton, I have also come to apolagise. I'm very sorry that I have not been very active lately and therefore have only just read your Berlin Wall paragraph. I think it would be fine to stick in the article now. I have still got exams theough next week I'm afraid but after that I will be a lot more active. Sorry and thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 07:07, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
You are welcome and thanks! I am afraid I am not very active now either. Reverend said that I should rewrite my paragraph a bit and I think I changed it. If there are still problems, please, tell me. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:54, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

edit Ukraine

Hi Anton. I added another image and moved your pic with the car to the economy (along with the line). If you don't like this, feel free to revert. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 20:13, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

No, that's fine! By the way, it was not my picture. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 06:43, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, it actually was. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 06:44, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

edit Commanism: in grammar

Thanks for the review Anton. Looking back at this article the other day I thought it looked awful and definitely in need of improving. Thanks ever so much for your direction pointing and I am grateful for this. Capitalism in grammar was reviewed yes but got a very poor review score not a good one!!! Which it deserved when it was reviewed. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:33, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome! If the article becomes better, I will be the most willing person to vote for it to be featured. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:56, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
Also, is User:ChiefjusticeDS back? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:34, June 10, 2013 (UTC)
Yes check recent changes. It feels like that the man of myth and legend has returned! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:38, June 10, 2013 (UTC)

edit 11th of June!

Scott, I have created a page on cossacks (User:Anton199/Cossacks) as the PLS starts today. I have also made a short introduction where the first sentence is yours. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:13, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks I'll work on it. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:29, June 11, 2013 (UTC)

edit The Egyptian Campaign

Napoleon's invasion of Egypt was historically known as the Egyptian Campaign therefore I am a bit confused why you have change it to African Campaign as that does not add humour. Could you please explain why, please. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 06:56, June 12, 2013 (UTC)

Because I haven't talked about Egypt in that section. I made his invasion unimportant as you advised. But I can change it back. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:54, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, you have already done so. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:55, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
Even so the campaign was called the Egyptian Campaign and even if as in your part he never landed there he still came back and told everyone he did! Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:51, June 12, 2013 (UTC)
I have already finished the section. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 05:37, June 13, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 12:08, June 13, 2013 (UTC)

edit Summer's here! And so is the post

Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:42, June 14, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! It feels good to see that the post is working perfectly. I maybe even spotted you on your bike with a handful of issues rushing to deliver them as quickly as you can. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:48, June 14, 2013 (UTC)

edit A Number

This is my new article. Could anyone, please, tell me if it is any good because I do not think there will be a lot of comments if I demand a Pee Review? The style is specific and you will understand why I am using it if you read "A Number" by Caryl Churchill (about twenty minutes of reading) or an article on Wikipedia about it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:22, June 18, 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree with the following statement; - but does not really tell anything about the problem. Well it does. Because of cloning B1 killed B2 and suicided. I think it is much better if you address it as "solution" not problem, knowing that the book doesn't really show any solutions for this type of society. LaurelsV V I P ® 18:44, June 18, 2013 (UTC)V V I P

Oh, ok. thanks! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:47, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
I will try to improve it even more, thank you for your help! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 06:38, June 19, 2013 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects