User talk:Anton199/archive7

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Contents

edit Poop throwing monkeys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You tried to delete Poop Throwing Monkeys????????????????????????????????????????? (takes a breath) ??????????????????????????????????? You, sir, are no Russian, as Russians like myself love Poop throwing monkeys. What are you really, a Canadian? Or worse, a Finlander???? If I could throw poop through a computer screen you, sir, would be covered.

Then again, let me explain the article to you. As you can see if you read it, a learned antropolgist is lecturing at the zoo, and they come upon the chimps. This learned man is hit with poop from the chimps, a couple of times, and within a matter of seconds he reverts to being an ape and throws his own poop. This is a satiric look at the importance of self-important people, and the fact that we are all apes. That's it in short. It should be featured imnho. I am but a humble servant of the poop throwing monkeys 15:55 11-7-'13 Sir!

p.s. As for your assertion that it's author is "long gone", hello, I'm right here!!!!???
Dear Al, you can spend your whole life explaining the concept of your articles to me, which may be good, as you manage to convince me somehow, but I will still be against the articles which I find gross, vulgar or obscene. Sorry. Even though some people say that toilet humor should exist and can be funny, I am the one who will always be for its extinction. Sorry again, but I really think that the reader will appreciate only ethical humor. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:29, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
If I could put in here, an article that requires the author to explain the concept (and this is not the first time) has a problem that transcends poop. Nevertheless, it survived VFD, so let's move on. Spıke ¬ 16:44 11-Jul-13
MoveOn.orgpoop Aleister 16:53 same day
In fact, I don't want to move on without having a longer last word (which assumes you two don't want to have the last word even more than I). I would not use the term "ethical humor" because, if it means anything, it means we impose an ethic on the reader. This article uses poop to make a conceptual point. The problem is that there are many times the authors that use poop not to make any point at all, to revel in writing about poop to unwilling strangers, and because some of them, at the age of 11, are still in the anal stage of development. And there are millions of Americans between the coasts who would just as soon write letters to get the school library to use filters to block access to Uncyclopedia so they never have to tell the difference. I am not as categorically against obscenity as Anton is, and the last time we discussed it, gave him examples of cases where I used obscenity and thought it worked great. In this article, poop is prominent, and the message for the reader is comparatively subtle. Aleister may pat himself on the back for this subtlety, but all that leaves for a lot of readers is, gratuitous poop. Spıke ¬ 18:49 11-Jul-13
Spike, concerning school filters... me chuckles... My friend, it is the very filters themselves that let me edit from school! I do pay attention in class, but only when I'm not being taught something I can learn in khanacademy or wikipedia infinitely faster. Anyways, lightspeed systems filter, is set up, to whitelist any wikimedia site. I tried getting on the fork from the school, but it was blocked. Yet this, with all the stuff gets through. So school filters work towards us, in some cases. --The Shield of Azunai DSA510My Edits! 08:53, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
In fact, this is not "concerning school filters" but obscenity. My focus is not Anton's "ethical humor" but suitability of the product to the audience; to-wit, to give even the hayseed Kansas farm-wife such a fit of chuckles that, when she encounters the inevitable spate of Feces Humor, she abandons her notion to write a letter to the Superintendent of Schools. Separately, a hundred bucks says you don't pay attention in class, and it is only by feeding your Ritalin to your parrot that you are able to operate a keyboard at all. Spıke ¬ 15:09 12-Jul-13

edit Okay, you have Teh Rollbackz

I saw you painstakingly Undoing four Anon changes, one at a time, and asked the Chief to give you Rollback, which he has now done. Read my instructions to Denza for the implications of this. I hope it makes your job easier (and induces you to do more patrolling)! Spıke ¬ 18:37 11-Jul-13

Thanks! In past, I heard you asking Scott to mark edits as patrolled but I do not notice any flags or exclamation marks near the edits. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:42, July 11, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I saw one. That just means that almost all of them got patrolled. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:43, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

I let this task go, over the weekend. Currently, the Boston baseball team is playing on the US West Coast (that is, until after midnight my time) and I have been working down the backlog while listening to the games. There are only about a dozen left, on which I can't decide. One of these, Feminism, I have asked Simsilikesims to look at. However, I've worked on most of today's edits needing patrolling. Spıke ¬ 18:53 11-Jul-13

I will also try to finish this work. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:58, July 11, 2013 (UTC)

edit Patrol of Columbo

I have marked an edit of Columbo as patrolled as it is not vandalism and the anon tried to make a joke. I don't think it changes anything, as the humour of the article was already a bit random and anon just pursued it with the idea of Sonic the murderer. If anyone thinks that it is not funny, he can revert it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 06:52, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

You should mark all edits (which you can) patrolled, and then go back if you need to undo/rollback. That way, the mark isn't left for others to worry over. Hope that helps! --The Shield of Azunai DSA510My Edits! 08:55, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
Anton, you are correct that a patroller's options include not only marking an edit patrolled or reverting it, but post-editing it, as you did here. In fact, if Anon had any sense of humor at all (and if the article is not a Featured Article that should be preserved against latter-day attempts to move it in new comedy directions), this is the best alternative of all, though the most time-consuming.
As above, one motivation for this additional stripe on your epaulette was to induce you to do more of the patrol work. It doesn't help if you notify us of individual Patrol decisions. If there is a reason for me to review your edit at Columbo, I'll do so. Otherwise, we trust that you did it right. Spıke ¬ 13:34 12-Jul-13
I am glad that I have rollbacks and I am trying to help you with your work. I was not going to notify you about everything I did (as otherwise I don't reduce but increase the amount of your tasks) but I was not sure about that particular one. However, you don't have to look thorugh it as I am prettu sure it does not make the article worse. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:48, July 12, 2013 (UTC)
There is nothing surer than the form, "I certified an edit although I am not certain," to make me feel compelled to look at it. If you are not sure, feel free to ask me or others--as, again, I asked Simsie, who just now has attacked her task at Feminism with zeal. Setting out to help patrol edits should not be a commitment to pass judgement on each one! Indeed, the editor of Columbo has a playful mind, and the only thing going against this edit is that it adds an item to an aimless list--but a solution to that waits for the day that the article has an actual owner/steward. Spıke ¬ 16:44 12-Jul-13
That's what I thought and thanks for looking at it anyway! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:46, July 12, 2013 (UTC)

edit Russia?

So I read through the new USP and noticed you were the biopic? You're russian? WOW! That means we're neighbours, in a way! :) I'm finnish, nice to know this about you. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 14:08, 14 July, 2013 (UTC)

Anton's not Russian, he's a true Russian, a Ukranian, you fool! And all ways will be. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:15, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
PS - Nice to know you're Finnish. Never been there though. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:16, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
This is why we really need the biopic contributions from different users! Don't the Finnish and the Russians have good opinion about each other? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:44, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
Is it the right time and place to mention one of the bravest actions of the Second World War, the Russo-Finish War? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:51, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
PS - Nice to know someone apart from the editors reads the USP. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:52, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
Yes. This is what I wanted to say. But the Russo-Finnish war stuff was not very significant, we always had good relations apart from that. Well, almost always. Thanks for the UnSignpost and well done! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:48, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
It may not have been significant in the story of Russo-Finnish relations (I'm sure Finland was just passed between the Russian and Swedish empires for ages) however it was significant in WW2 and is one of the most pride-filling, great stories of WW2 for the allies (Russia not being counted as an ally in this part of the war because of Hitler and Stalin's pact). Of course that aside the Russians made a huge, pride-filling, great contribution to WW2 when fighting on the allies side and in the Napoleonic Wars so I love both nations. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:21, July 14, 2013 (UTC)
Somehow, Scottpat, you made me more proud of my country than I were before :) thank you :) Also, nice to know you're ukrainan Anton, nothing wrong with them neither. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 05:54, 15 July, 2013 (UTC)
No probs, makes me want to be Finnish too. I was joking about Anton's nationality though. He is Russian, it's just if you want to wind a Russian up you call him Ukranian. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 06:24, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
I personally have nothing against the Ukrainians. It is just rather strange that the two countries that were together for a long time become separated but it is fine with me, as Ukraine has almost a completely different culture. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 08:41, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Oh ok so you ARE a russian? Damnit, this is so confusing :) Well, Russia did have quite a lot of countries under it, like Estonia, for example. I really love Estonia as well, very similar weather like on Finland, and the language is similar too, with few exceptions. Like, Pete, which is a common name in Finland, means 'gay' in Estonia :D Just a random fact I wanted to share. But yes, many countries were under Russia at some point, altough Russia wasn't called as Russia back then. But that's really cool man. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 09:29, 15 July, 2013 (UTC)
What I meant is that Ukraine and Russia were like one country since the beginning. Kiev was the capital was the first capital of Russia, for instance (but the country was called Kievan Rus' and not Russia at that time). Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 09:33, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
I think that when Cat refers to "back then" he/she means USSR and Cold War rather Anton and I are refering to the Russian Empire from Medieval Times to 1917 (which was called Russia so not sure about Cat's point). During this period many countries swapped under Russian rule and Swedish rule in the Baltic including Estonia and Finland (even St. Petersburg was once a Swedish city). Russia extended from Finland down to Poland and across to Dagestan and then up to Mongolia (even bigger than it is today!). However I too like Sweden, especially their heroic leader Charles XII. So to be honest Russia, Ukraine, Finland, Sweden and Estonia are all wonderful countries in their own rights. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:45, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Scott, sorry but Saint Petersburg was founded in the 18th century and before that there were only swamps there. After that the city was the capital of Russia and Sweden has never invaded it. So it has never belonged to Sweden. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 09:50, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
I agree Scott. I'd like to visit every single place on Planet Earth. I just meant that Russia was called Soviet Union or Soviet Russia at some point. Russia is 'Venäjä' at finnish, but Soviet Russia/Union was 'Neuvostolitto', which is whole different name. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 09:58, 15 July, 2013 (UTC)
Sorry Anton, slight historical inacurracy there. I should have said that Sweden once possesed the territory which St. Petersburg now stands in and St. Petersburg was actually built once the Swedish were forced off it. But to save my skin part of St. Petersburg was given to Sweden later on because of the huge influx in Swedish workers however this territory was ceeded back to Russia when the Finnish and Swedish occupants had a row. So technically Sweden ruled over part of St. Petersburg for a bit. On a side note St. Petersburg was primarily built by Swedish workers and based on a Swedish city. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 10:38, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I did not the fact about the Swedish workers! But I know that the majority of them died because of the climate in the swap area and so people say that St. Petersburg was built on bones. By the way, do you remember that you said that I should ask someone to revive the Reviewer of the Month competition? I created a forum about it and it is called "RotM". Could you, please, visit it as the only person who noticed it was Romartus? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:01, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Sure, I will. You may know about the Swedish workers but you didn't seem to know that Sweden did actually rule part of St. Petersburg after it was built, that was my point. Anyway, I have never been, but St. Petersburg is meant to be one of those great cities of Europe. It was part of Peter the Great's dream of modernising Russia and turning it into the superpower it became. I need visit it one day (I need to visit Russia one day and I will take a detour through Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark on my way). Suprisingly I've never travelled much and have only visited countries in North America and Western Europe. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 11:12, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Well, since the formation of Moscow many foreign workers there had their parts of the town almost to themselves only, but that's cool that you know a lot about Russia (don't tell me you don't, not everyone now knows about Cossacks, for example). Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:15, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
I know of Cossacks from my love of Napoleonic War history, I know of St. Petersburg from my broad knowledge of 17th-18th Century Europe covering the Great Northern War. I know of Russia herself through means of three Russian friends (apart from you), a broad knowledge of the rest of history, a love of geography, a relative's frequent trips to Moscow and a Brit's above-average general knowledge basis. Apart from that, to quote Manuel, "I know nothing, I know nothing" (but I'm not from Barcelona!). Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 17:00, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Well, you have a very full knowledge about it! This is something I certainly appreciate (not concerning Russia in particular, but history, geography, the world itself in general). Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:53, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
Well thanks but I think you're knowledge of British culture is much more amazing. You need to visit Britain. Have you been? (Have I asked this question before? (It happens sometimes!)) Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:38, July 15, 2013 (UTC)
No. Shame on me. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 07:52, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
No don't feel sorry about it, it's fine. If you do visit don't go to far North. You might bump into the Cossacks of England - Northerners. They'll bombard you with crazy accents. Stick in the civilised South. Just travel guidance. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 11:13, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the advice! I will surely remember about this when I visit Britain. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:35, July 16, 2013 (UTC)

edit PLS edition of UnSignpost with extra poo

Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:00, July 14, 2013 (UTC)

edit RotM

Lord ScottPat has brought the House to your favour. On your command the contest may be re-opened (well actually on an admin's command). Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 11:23, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:10, July 15, 2013 (UTC)

edit Long time no C

Hey Anton! Are you still in Paris or your motherland? LaurelsV V I P ® 22:17, July 15, 2013 (UTC)V V I P

Paris. Motherland will be tomorrow. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 07:52, July 16, 2013 (UTC)
I thought that in Russia, home flies to you!!! Spıke ¬ 14:13 1-Aug-13

"If the mountian does not go to Mohammed, Mohammed goes to the mountain". Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:48, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

edit Communicating with blocked users

Anton, you should not reach out to blocked users for the same reason you should not post to anonymous vandals. For one thing, in theory they cannot respond (though this one is committing ban-evasion and is promising to do more of the same). This user in particular manufactured a large piece of her grievance with the site, vows that she has no interest in helping with the business of the site, and dishonestly blames her third resignation (and the associated thesis that we have a duty to mankind to shut down the website) on a fleeting mood she was in. The whole thing is a waste of our time, and the only result will be future drama. If you ever had to break up with a girlfriend who always needed to say one more thing in her own defense, you would know what happens next. Spıke ¬ 14:13 1-Aug-13

I what? I never promised to do more of the same...? I just wanted to be unblocked.
Please, I only want you to understand that I criticised you too severely. You know it, I know it. So we agree, then, don't we?
I do not want to make any more drama, and for this reason I should probably remain blocked (and of course quit editing under my IP). I just want to end this cleanly and leave on good terms. I suppose I can't do that now, but I am still trying. I have a nasty habit of refusing to give up. I also insist on correcting those who say things about me that are not quite accurate. I did not manufacture my grievances; they are however mainly about things that did not happen on this wiki or to me personally. My comment to Simsilikesims ('I am tired of hearing about Wikia's ToS') was in fact made in the wee hours when I was not thinking too clearly; the long speech about whatever-it-was that I made on my userpage (not the one you see now) was made when I should have been awake but was not thought out as well as it should have been and really did not belong.
No, Anton should not be 'reaching out' to me; you are right. I am not here and would not be here if I did not feel this need to set the record straight, so it is not doing any good.
Finally, please don't twist my words. I never said that we have a 'duty to mankind' to shut down Uncyclowikia. I believe it would be the logical thing to do and could prove beneficial to Uncyclopedia as a whole (by this I mean all of them - cy, fr, ...). Anyway, I feel like I am running up against a brick wall here. Now that I have left for the second time (yes, second; the time I redirected my userpage here to my Welsh one was just because I was more active there - it's not that uncommon a practice), it appears Spike does not think I have anything worthwhile to say and am only causing drama. Maybe he is right. In any case we are all wasting our time here and I would like to take back my unblock request. (I am starting to get the idea the block is about more than the talk page blanking anyway.) 99.241.177.184 16:17, August 1, 2013 (UTC)
Llwy. You know what? You did not respect the most important rule here (it is urgent for you to use the link I just gave) and this is really bad. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:28, August 1, 2013 (UTC)
And it is very good that I am not an admin because I love uncyclopedia and think that this project in general cannot exist without uncyclowikia. So I would be an admin, I would ban forever every single person who says that uncyclowikia should not exist, thinks that uncyclowikia should not exist, has friends who think that uncyclowikia should not exist or knows people who have such friends. But I don't think this is very related to what we are discussing. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:37, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

I hope you did not take me too seriously, I was just in a very good mood. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:49, August 4, 2013 (UTC)

edit Here you go

Noobaward Noob of the Moment June-July 2013

Oh, why, thank you! (Although it will seem as though I was talking to myself) Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:48, August 9, 2013 (UTC)

edit Abuse Filter

I apologize for the inconvenience caused by the Abuse Filter, though removing external links is generally a good thing anyway. You can reference a Wikipedia page, such as their Signpost with an interwiki link and get around the Filter. (In articles, this should be kept to a minimum too, as the goal is not further study--except, as in UnNews, when necessary for understanding--but laughter. Spıke ¬ 11:53 10-Aug-13

Ok. I see. Thanks for giving me this tip. And I agree with "further study" and that's why I decided that the link would not be essential. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:02, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

Also: Thanks for finishing up some Patrol work. I was unsure about the edit to Hero; also, EStune has had enough pieces of my mind, but you handled it the right way. Spıke ¬ 12:05 10-Aug-13

You are welcome! However, assuming that a person is Russian while he is from a country that was part of the USSR before 1991 is almost as bad as giving bad advice. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:08, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

I didn't say that your pleasantries were the best, though he shouldn't be offended. Besides, "In future we are all Soviet!!!" Spıke ¬ 12:18 10-Aug-13

PS--On Talk:Scientology, you had already disavowed parts of your review with strikethrough. Please don't delete them, as they are part of the record. They are inapplicable, not just because you have changed your mind but because the article has also changed; but your first impressions might be valuable. Besides, talk pages don't have to be totally pretty. Spıke ¬ 12:24 10-Aug-13

Ok. Then I will restore them. And we are not all Soviets in the future but all Martians. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:26, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
Won't those wire antennas hurt in bed? Spıke ¬ 12:28 10-Aug-13
No idea. Haven't tried them yet but one of my relatives did, went for a walk and still has not returned. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:30, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
(Referencing the same ancient TV program) He probably did return but is simply invisible. Spıke ¬ 12:35 10-Aug-13
Oh, yeah! I always wondered why Wells's Invisible Man resembled him so closely. But the storyline is a bit different. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:40, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

edit Hello

I have returned from the wilderness. How are things? Nice UnSignpost and thanks for sorting it out. I forgot to make sure I did one before I went! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:02, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome back form the wildeness! What was it? Things are not bad except for the fact that a week ago I noticed that the fork changed its UnSignpost format and so it looked more like Wikipedia's. I thought we need that too and I spent a whole week figuring out how to fix all the problems. And apart from that there is not much extraordinary happening here, nor at the fork and you are probably not interested in how the Russian uncyc works, so I am afraid I don't have much to tell you. Ah, yes, there was Scots Law re-featured a while ago which might be interesting for you. And a discussion of something on your talk page which you noticed. But maybe I just have a bad memory. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:51, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
The wilderness relates to anyplace where English gentleman go to point and laugh at natives. The savages are tasty though. Good thinking on UnSignpost. Back to article writing for me. On the subject of law. I added my own version of British law into the Alternative legal systems article. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:17, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

I did not write any articles for a long long period. I think I might go back to that as well. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:25, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

edit Thanks!

Thank you for the compliments about my revert jobs I've been doing lately on my talk page! Anyways, I am not that new this month, but I felt that I needed to make Uncyclopedia grow some more and that I would do my best on this funny wiki encyclopedia online! Feel free to go on my talk page if you want to have a conversation, or maybe talk about something important! Newman66 (talk) 23:48, August 10, 2013 (UTC)

You are welcome and I will go there sometime! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 07:44, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

edit Mass nominations on VFD

Hello there Anton199. Make sure not to fill up the VFD space too much, okay? And make sure not to remove any content from VFD either. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 14:11, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Why not to fill it too much? More articles, the better. I meant "less articles". Oh, well, never mind. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:17, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

Wait... Did I remove something? And, by the way, I finished nominating all this garbage. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:22, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

VFD has been languishing lately, and the more the merrier. (I will jump in soon, though there are two baseball playoff games to attend today.) Anton knows the limits on nominations and has not violated them.) If we are having a scold-fest, let me get my perennial one in, and urge everyone to write section headings that actually describe the discussion, for ease of finding it later. Spıke ¬ 14:57 11-Aug-13

edit Then we might as well describe the whole discussion in the section headings

Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:20, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

edit What about Llwy?

What's happened to Llwy? Was there a big argument I missed? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 15:11, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

It is not news. Llwy, the defender of freedom, is now repressed by the Uncyclowikia and blocked for three months. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:13, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

And see above: Spike just reminded us to create section headings that explain something. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:14, August 11, 2013 (UTC)

edit And if you are going to deprecate my point by going to the other extreme with super-long headings

then you should sign them. Spıke ¬ 15:48 11-Aug-13

edit Ye Arse!

Dude, you fucked up the edit buttons on every page you put the USP on. As such, I'm removing mine till you fix it. GOOD DAY TO YOU KIND SIR! *Denza puts on his skirt and leaves--The Shield of Azunai DSA510My Edits! 10:36, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Dude, fix up the new USP-format. It destroys the edit-buttons next to topics and the content-box. Please mate, do something. Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 10:38, 13 August, 2013 (UTC)

Guys, please, keep calm! I will remove all the USPs and place them back when they are fixed. Meanwhile, you can read this issue at the UnSignpost/20130810. Fine? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:46, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

edit Headers

<h2></h2> has the same result as == ==. This means that to have that header that way you have to use __NOTOC__ __NOEDITSECTION__. If instead you changed the <h2> to a <span> and the content of that span also have a {{h2}} you'd end up with a similar appearance but without having to use __NOTOC__ et al.

Personally I'd actually open up {{h2}} and look at the code you have in there, and incorporate that into your <span>. One thing you may not be aware of is some users may have section numbering in place (like me) so your current headers actually add into the header numbering that is already on the page. This means the first section of the UnSignpost would show as section number n +1. The UnNews main page uses the {{h2}} template fairly extensively, if you want to see an existing example of how that's been worked.

In case you're not aware, I helped rewrite {{h2}} (and the relevant templates), as well as having written the templates that the "older" look UnSignpost used. The "older" look I kept in place when I was main editor of USP (by default, because nobody else was doing it) simply because it was in line with the original USP, which was put together by Skullthumper, and someone else who I can't recall at this moment. I also created a bit of code that meant that I could autogenerate the frame of the USP new each week - and would also give it the relevant page name with the date. That was eventually removed when it was misused, but if you want it back (with or without the newer format) then don't be afraid to ask. Or for any other wiki-fu questions, for that matter.

I may not be around as much as I used to be, but putting these kinds of things together is a bit of a talent. (Have a look at Microsoft knowledge base, Twitter, God's answering service, UnTunes:Social Networking the wind, UnDebate: Is it ever right to restrict freedom of speech?, Game:Alone in the dark, or almost any other article I've written if you ever want to know a good place to steal code from.)                               Puppy's talk page01:13 13 Aug 2013

edit A little navelism might not harm the next USP

A certain "encyclopedic" parody of Uncyclopedia exhorts its readers to "be bold", ridiculing our command that Uncyclopedians "be italic," and one Uncyclopedian stepped up to be Bat Fuck Insane. As previously reported, France annexed the UK, meaning that every Englishman on Uncyclopedia took the entire month of August off, including the editor of this august journal. Assistant Editor Anton199 stepped up to fill the void, as he lives in a worker's paradise where no one gets any time off at all.

After a brief period changing the signage to read "Acting Editor" and changing the locks, then several days studying how better to mimic that "encyclopedia" wiki as a form of payback, the previous edition of UnSignpost was rolled out and delivered. The immediate result was that buttons stopped clicking on everyone's windows, and people's keyboards started getting gooey and sticky and full of hairballs even though the cat was being boarded that week. Later, little windows started popping up advertising well-endowed women who love to talk dirty at two bucks a minute. A few days afterward, problems emerged at regional power grids, there were two military coups in Africa, and skyscrapers in Mexico City resumed collapsing despite the recent new regime of redoubled Government Inspection. And the Uncyclopedia connection made it problematic to blame all of this on global warming.

In barely a week, it had all been sorted out, and the vital news of the wiki had been re-delivered in a form that more closely resembled the boring old version we had come to know if not love. One Uncyclopedian emeritus offered advice, realizing that spending so much time on an alleged "real-world job" makes it hard for us to remember what a good coder he was. The Acting Editor has not been seen lately, as the stack of MediaWiki textbooks in his office has grown taller than he is. For the rest of us, despite the initial scare, the brief pratfall was a welcome interlude to a summer at the ballpark watching lazy fly balls turn into more costly pratfalls.


Spıke ¬ 14:22 13-Aug-13

Never understood baseball. It's just not cricket.                               Puppy's talk page02:46 13 Aug 2013
Regarding the dropping of balls hit into the air, the two sports are virtually identical. Spıke ¬ 15:26 13-Aug-13

To Spike: Great. Thanks! I laughed so hard as if it was one of the best featured article on Uncyclopedia.

To Pup: Thank you for your advice! I am afraid I am even more ignorant concerning all that wiki-formatting and stuff and even though I generally understood what you were saying, I basically did not and am trying to figure out how the "h2" things are connected to my UnSignpost.

P.S. (Anton199 thinking about Pup's message): looking at the format now... Yes, there is a <span> thing somewhere in the middle of the issue. Does this mean that it changes itself into a header and then spoils everyone's buttons? I don't think so because ...I don't see it like a header. I see it as a <span>. But there are no other headings in the USP I made... Anton199 makes such an expression that everybody who are looking at him, begin quietly moving away and dialling the number of the mental clinic. ......Hmmmmm......Is this supposed to mean that there is an invisible heading that spoils the USP?.. Then maybe I should just delete the "span". Yes, a great idea. Click, click, click. Wow, that is not the UnSignpost anymore... Hmmmmmm.....

Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:14, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the praise, Anton! Although I did read the UnSignpost, I don't "take it at home" and did not suffer the ill effects. What came to mind when I read the complaints is that NOTOC and NOSECTIONEDIT, occurring inside a template such as the UnSignpost, would affect the entire page it's in. If that's not the culprit, I'd be intrigued to learn just how you did it. Spıke ¬ 15:26 13-Aug-13
Oh, ok. Anton199's brain begins to work Oh, yes, I do remember that there was a template with the NOTOC and NOSECTIONEDIT stuff... Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:28, August 13, 2013 (UTC)
I didn't dig that deep. The relevant point is that the USP itself is a template, and templates work by inducing text to be substituted ("transcluded") into the page in which the template occurs. Spıke ¬ 15:35 13-Aug-13

Now I understand what the problem was... However, I deleted the NOTOC things, just to see xhat would happen and the content box appeared in the UnSignpost. And knowing that I stole the Uncyclopedia:UnSignpost_Template from Wikipedia and knowing that Wikipedians never recieve Signposts at their talkpages as whole, this means that either the template should be changed, or the UnSignpost should not contain it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 15:44, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Aaah… stolen templates can be an issue at times. I've gone through and chopped up Uncyclopedia:UnSignpost Template, and added bits I chopped out of Template:H2, and I think I've given you the desired outcome without the issue of the undesired TOC and section edit suppression. Or, in less codey language, I think I fixed it. Let me know if this is what you were after.                               Puppy's talk page08:36 13 Aug 2013

This is exactly what I wanted. But it is not only this. Actually, I know it is cruel to ask you to fix all these problems but could you, please, just advise me what to do in order to have an option of minimizing this USP (show and hide buttons)? Or is this impossible to do with the current version of the newspaper? Sorry for taking your free time. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:03, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Not too hard to do. Give me a day or so to get back to it though.                               Puppy's talk page09:23 13 Aug 2013

That would be great and thank you very much for fixing all these problems I made! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 07:28, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

edit Because I want to test this, and I never bother delivering any more

UnSignpost/20130810

Uniquely delivered by                               Puppy's talk page08:36 13 Aug 2013

edit Ehm...Olive?

OK. I can see why you reverted the edit I made, since now that I think about it, the edit on Pickle was a bit stupid, but why Olive? I thought it would have been funny for the reader if the post said something that is a characteristic of humans (well, funnyish.) -TiExEx (TXX59)

Thank you for the question and your contributions: you are certainly welcome to express your opinion on your edits if they are getting undone (which is a rather painful experience)! So let's look at your edit.

The paragraph you edited: "Olive can also be used to describe something, referring to the unappealing color that disembodied eyeballs are known to acquire with age and the unusual choice of color on this text - seriously, it makes my eyes bleed." To be honest, the sentence is simpler to read and probably has even more humour but there is the use of the first persona which has never been present in this article (as in many others; here we try to parody encyclopedias and so are writing articles - except for the HowTo, UnScripts, UnNews and such - in an encyclopedic tone). In addition to this you say that it makes your eyes bleed, and this is a bit strange, as the reader understands that the person who wrote this sentence is not the person who wrote the article. Because someone who wrote it, is the person who chose such a colour (he would be stupid to choose a colour which would make his own eyeballs bleed), if you get what I mean.

So the reader would immediately ask himself whether such point of view would be a humour strategy that he did not understand and he never will be able to answer it, as this is the only part of the text where the first persona and the effect of the olive colour used in the article is mentioned. This is all very complicated and it will be even more so for the reader, so why not to simplify the life? For example - I am not saying that you cannot edit this page, you can and you can even go back to that particular edit I undid - why not to take your text ("the unusual choice of color on this text - seriously, it makes my eyes bleed") and change to eliminate all the problems mentioned above. You can do it whatever way you prefer, but here is my example: "Olive can also be used to describe something, referring to the unappealing color that disembodied eyeballs are known to acquire with age and the colour this text uses, best-known for disembodying the eyeballs". Do you see the difference? The tone is now encyclopedic, your joke (about the harm of the colour of the text) is still here and the repetition of words "disembody" and "eyeballs" is another joke which connects the text colour and the eyeballs' colour.

Thank you for your inquiry and I hope I did not discourage you with your edits being reverted! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:57, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

If I may kibitz: Anton, I am pleased at your lengthy and methodical explanation; such teaching is how we learn. TXX, he is right; you must keep in mind that our articles must superficially look like an encyclopedia; use of the first person ("It makes my eyes bleed") does major damage to this, without delivering major laughter (most of it to yourself). Separately, we are not supposed to be this picky on other users' talk pages, but I'll change the title of this section from "Ehm..." in case someone in the future wants to find what was discussed about Olive. Spıke ¬ 12:31 14-Aug-13

edit myki

This is now saveable, if you would like to strike your Delete vote at UN:VFD and flip to Keep. Spıke ¬ 12:06 14-Aug-13

That is how admins convince people to vote for them! I will do this with a great pleasure! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:10, August 14, 2013 (UTC)

Huh? Does this mean you will travel back in time to January to vote for me??? Spıke ¬ 12:24 14-Aug-13

edit It was a mistake vote...

I accidentally nominated Cupar before I realized it was already previously nominated. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 18:48, August 18, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, that's fine. You can just say this on the VFD page and see if anyone votes or if the nomination just goes away. By the way, I tagged the Newburgh article with the {{Construction}}, as it was born today. Sorry for ruining your VFD nominations but it is good if bad articles attract attention of different users and then get better, right? And I will actually work on "Cupar". Thank you for your work! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:51, August 18, 2013 (UTC)
By the way, if you see that an article has been created lately, please, leave a but of time for the author to improve it. Tadistan revolution is not in a good shape at all but the author just probably did not know that he had to put the construction tag on it. I tagged it myself but I am not sure that the admins will notice this. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:59, August 18, 2013 (UTC)

edit Did you know…

…it was Asimov's stories about Yoko Ono that caused the Berlin Wall to fall?                               Puppy's talk page11:25 19 Aug 2013

I thought that a lot of pressure was applied at a particular section of the wall developing a weak point in the wall's structure and thus allowing the wall to collapse but maybe you're right. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 12:38, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Well, two versions are correct: Asimov's stories were mainly repeated at one place close to the Wall and this made it collapse at that particular place.. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:20, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Personally I prefer the Russian story of how it collapsed: "It didn't, it's still there!" Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 13:24, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Well, isn't it? Do you know what happens to those who travel from one part of Berlin to another nowadays? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:52, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

I have travelled across. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:01, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

Well, the effects will show up after several years only. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:08, August 19, 2013 (UTC)

edit Pee Review of Ministries of the UK Government

Thanks once again for a great review. Just some points:

  • "Seat on the Cabinet" I thought would be correct as you can have a seat on a council and a seat on a committee. But I'm not sure. Consult the Pirate Code (Spike) for that.
  • The "largely ignore them" was not originally written by me but re-written by Spike (I think). As the Government can actually be a plural word in English, the government may be refered to as they so "They ignore" not "They ignores" but I can see how you thought that the government can only be refered to as singular "It ignores."
  • Many images in many of Uncyclopedia's articles are not directly connected to text. They can be seperate jokes on their own.
  • The Ministry of Magic is a parody of Harry Potter's world's Ministry of Magic, which is supposed to be a secret ministry in the British government that only the magic world and a few muggles are aware of.

Everything else you have said I am improving including intro to ministries and logos next to ministries. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 15:45, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I might be wrong, of course. The article is good and you added a funny paragraph. So you do not have to worry about this. Am going below to respond to you in the new section. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:17, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

edit Resignation as Chief Editor of UnSignpost

Anton you have done a much better job of UnSignpost than I have recently. I seem not to have as much time as before to write UnSignposts and you seem to know the technical details much better than I do. I therefore conclude that it is time for me to give up my position to someone deserving of it. I may have brought it back-to-life but my inspiration ended there. You however have changed it dramatically for the better and you deserve the position of Chief Editor. I will of course still write articles for it and I see that the Deputy spot will become vacant shortly so I still support the paper however I can no longer keep up with your changes and I originally only wished to write news for it. Please accept the role as Chief Editor.

Your good friend, Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 15:54, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

Scott, I am very much flattered by your words, thank you, and it is a pity you don't have inspiration and time! If you are not able to control all the UnSignpost issues anymore, I will, of course, have to do this.
However, I wanted to tell you a secret: I have never wanted to take the position away from you, as I honestly appreciate everything you did to bring the newspaper back to life! In addition to this, (which is another thing I haven't told anyone yet), I am getting a bit tired of all the work I am doing here - even though admins do a lot more and do not complain - and I was thinking about taking a long rest from Uncyclopedia and even Internet as a whole; a new hard school year also begins, so I thought it would be hard for me to find time for both activities. And finally, I got very much discouraged by the new format failure (as I call it), not only did the whole system get messed-up, but I am still not sure about how to repair everything, so it will, at least be as good as before (I am not even talking about being better).
So, my suggestion is to keep on collaborating. Of course, if we ever get out of this mess, I will keep on issuing the new papers, but I think that you do not have to abandon your position at all (unless you cannot hold it anymore). Thank you again for everything that you have done! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:31, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
Scott, if schoolwork continues to be burdensome, then for my part I will chip in and service your wife.
No, seriously, Anton, maybe you can dredge up from ScottPat's archives the little speech I gave him that he would burn out if he volunteered for everything. One can also burn oneself out applying oneself to a single task so completely, when the task has serious technical problems. Pursue "sustainability" and volunteer only what you feel you can keep doing and have fun doing. ScottPat, finding someone to take over a job "temporarily"--that is, delegating--is the way organizations grow. There is so much else to be done here, such as reloading the periodic awards for another firing or organizing more competitions that even drew a few Forkers back here.
Above all, stay level-headed; that Anton has done a fine job during your absence doesn't mean you didn't, nor does it mean he wants to do it himself forever, either. I agree: keep collaborating on it! Spıke ¬ 22:02 20-Aug-13
PS--Provided you can keep it light and not self-promotional, the prospect of the two of you graciously trying to saddle each other with the smelly gift of Sole Editorship is yet another great topic for the next issue. (Though in proposing it here rather than on the public page, I am again guilty of coup d'état.) Spıke ¬ 04:55 21-Aug-13
OK, thanks for the advice both of you. Seeing Anton's position now I think it best we share joint Chief Editor ship. I wasn't attempting to volunteer for everything and burn out I simply thought it was time for me to relax my UnSignpost duties to focus on article writing which Spike has always up-held as the primary focus of this site and which I am slacking in my duty despite many ideas. I also saw Anton as a stronger voice for the UnSignpost.
I will therefore continue to do my best to produce bi-weekly UnSignposts for the community to read. Three topics to cover for next week's issue: Coup d'Etat and Spike's involvment, the Reverend has a funny and Chief Editor attempts to resign in scandal. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 08:08, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
Hey - I became editor in chief by simply taking it over when no-one else had. So that was more a coup d'apathy.                               Puppy's talk page08:12 21 Aug 2013
Same here. There hadn't been an UnSignpost produced in 4 months before I took command. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 08:45, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

edit New Design for the UnSignPost

I made some new head design for UnSignPost using my petty Photoshop skils. Here is [[1]] and here is [[2]]. It looks very similar with some subtle differences. Is it possible to use these designs and should I post this on the Village Dump? LaurelsV V I P ® 17:17, August 20, 2013 (UTC)V V I P

Thank you! I don't think it should be posted on Village Dump (I will steal it right away). I like both ways very much and will be glad to replace the current image with the either one. You can choose! And maybe Scott will also tell what he thinks! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:36, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
I see a couple of issues:
  • This is an image, which means it is a higher data load than plain text. As we are trying to reduce data load in USP, this doesn't strike me as a good idea, unless the image is heavily optimised.
  • This is a raster image. When using an image as text (especially plain black and white) you can significantly reduce the data size of the image by using a different format. GIF is one option, but I'd prefer to use SVG for text.
  • The image has a white background. To ensure that it works in all contexts it should have a transparent background.
  • Web safe design suggests the use of web-safe fonts rather than images. I'd suggest 'Comic Sans MS', cursive, sans-serif if you want to add that “class” to the header. There are no real web-safe calligraphic fonts.
  • It doesn't have the appearance of the WP Signpost, which we are trying to emulate
  • You spelled it wrong.
                              Puppy's talk page11:25 20 Aug 2013
I agree that the headline image should use a transparent background.
As noted in the Forum, several of us pay per megabyte, but even I am not worried about downloading these illustrations (if and when I elect to read the UnSignpost) as they seem to be only 5 Kb and 6 Kb. For routine operations, I run with images off, and wouldn't even get that load. I thought .PNG files were able to economize a black-and-white image by transmitting groups of adjacent pixels of the same color via shortcut, as .GIF and .SVG can too.
Of course, it is a waste to download a photo of how calligraphy looks, rather than simply specifying the text and the font. Calligraphic fonts look more newspaper-like, but the goal here is to mimic Wikipedia and not the Detroit News. I don't have any calligraphic fonts on my PC. By "web-safe," Puppy, you mean the risk of downloading malware by picking up a font from a third-party website? VVIP, you should use your shooping skills to formulate some new rendition of the Sophia potato logo, and not indeed render lettering by bitmap.
And Puppy is right, it is UnSignpost not Signpost (I don't think SignPost is correct: There is no need to capitalize the P as "signpost" is both an English word and the Wikipedia name). Spıke ¬ 23:51 20-Aug-13

V V I P did not do anything wrong, if something is wrong with the picture, it is entirely my fault, as it is me who uploaded "File:UnSignpost.jpg". I did this because I saw WP:File:Signpost2.png. And I don't think that Uncyclopedia Signpost is wrong, as the UnSignpost can be considered an abbreviation for this. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:38, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Anton for some clarifications. However SPIKE I used the font because it had the same atmosphere as the Wikipedia Signpost, the newspaper-ish feeling. LaurelsV V I P ® 10:53, August 21, 2013 (UTC)V V I P
It does, huh? (I never look at it; somehow, I don't conceive of Wikipedia having "news.") In that case, carry on. Assuming you still have the bitmap of your creation, it should be easy to use Photoshop (or even freeware like IrfanView) to implement Puppy's suggestion on file format and transparent background. A transparent background raises new possibilities regarding having the text overlay an illustration. When people agree on a design, perhaps upload another copy with the lettering in white for such use. Spıke ¬ 13:32 21-Aug-13

edit UnSignpost/20130821

Producing a new UnSignpost now. I am going to use old format for now as new format is still in discussion and too many news stories are backing up. I was thinking of writing an article on the Coup d'Etat and Chief's attempted resignation in scandal and you could write an article on technical problems being faced by UnSignpost. I shall dedicate a side-box to the Reverend's actions. Sound good? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:09, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

Yep. Very well. By the way, there is Spike's article waiting to be published above. I will copy and paste it myself. And then add something from me as well. From now on, the UnSignpost is the newspaper that makes a huge mess and then informs the reader about it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:39, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, just noticed that you did it yourself (Spike's article). Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:40, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
Yep it includes journalist scandals, religious scandals, people turning French. I've done the usual parody of a newspaper including contradictions: How crap our Chief Editor is and how terrible the people who want to get rid of him are. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:47, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

That's cool! By the way, do you think that we ought to include another box and just tell the readers what is the current situation with the UnSignpost and what should they expect or should I just write another article about it? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 14:53, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking that you write an article on it. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 15:01, August 21, 2013 (UTC)
Done! I am sorry but I found out that I still have to leave Uncyclopedia probably until the beginning of September. I will ask Puppy final questions about the USP format and then maybe even fix it. But I will still have a bit of time today to tell you more. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:19, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

edit Bye!

Sorry to leave so quickly, even though I haven't done everything I wanted to do! I am also sorry for accepting the Chief Editor's post and leaving immediately after this! Scott, you so not have to redeliver the last issue with the new format (everyone has a link to it on his/her talkpage), if you do jot want to. But if Pup helps you to make the new format appropriate for the delivery, you can make further issues using it. This current paper, to which I added the article, is almost ready for being sent out! Thank you and I will return as soon as possible!

P.S. The reason for my leaving is somehow a different one from the one I stated above, it is just that I won't have access to the Internet anymore. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:57, August 21, 2013 (UTC)

You have terrible timing.
Okay - screwing around with the last issue I've managed to trim down the appearance on the user talk page, but shows full appearance on the actual UnSignpost page itself. I'm not 100% happy with it - personally I think it needs a lot more work.
The magical step was to use this:
{{#ifeq:{{BASEPAGENAME}}|UnSignpost|''What you want in the full version''|''What you want in the delivered version''}}
I'm too lazy to explain exactly how it works, but that might be just the trick you need to be able to get this to the format you want.                               Puppy's talk page11:18 21 Aug 2013

Pup, I understand why you are not satisfied with this. What I can say is that this is a lot better than the previous version but needs a little fixing. Maybe I can even do this myself. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:04, August 27, 2013 (UTC)

Puppy, it actually looks perfectly well for me! Thank you very much! I will deliver it as soon as possible! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:13, August 27, 2013 (UTC)

edit So you're back!

Welcome back, and congratulations on getting the high-speed connection at the dacha. Spıke ¬ 13:00 27-Aug-13

Thanks. I am still basically on vacation, so I can't promise to be very active. What I am planning to do is just to send all the UnSignposts after they are finished and respond to everyone who needs responding. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:03, August 27, 2013 (UTC)

Ah, yes, you did seem to put stamps on all the envelopes and then leave them on the kitchen table as you drove off! Sometimes it is pleasant to have a vacation from your vacation in the middle of the vacation. Good luck! Spıke ¬ 13:27 27-Aug-13

Love the new style. Shall I send the new one out like that or not? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 13:41, August 27, 2013 (UTC)
Can you, please, finish the delivery I began? Sorry to ask you but maybe I won't have time anymore time and maybe this is my last message before the end of August.
Spike, just wanted to say that, fortunately, I am not on our dacha, as there we barely have any telephone connection, not even talking about wi-fi. The only place where you can make calls from is the bridge over the river (which is actually a parody of the river) and it is now broken. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:20, August 27, 2013 (UTC)
Damn! and I thought T-Mobile was crappy! ♪♪See you in September!♪♪ Spıke ¬ 19:38 27-Aug-13

edit It is back!

Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:10, August 27, 2013 (UTC)

edit User talk:86.12.191.100

It was nice of you to soften the blow to Anon after reverting his edits, especially in view of the recent dust-up between two new Uncyclopedians over Mizoram. However, editors who don't register are not entitled to our help with their humor writing. That comes with the user name. Spıke ¬ 13:26 28-Aug-13

But that's real nameism! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:37, August 28, 2013 (UTC)
There have been exceptions - the IP who later became User:Qzekrom springs to mind - but I can't think of any others of substance. It's more if someone is expecting help, then the least they can do is register. It shows a bit of commitment. If you think that an IP shows promise, then Template:IPJoin is an option. Otherwise edit and/or deletion summaries, or responding on talk pages, is your best option.                               Puppy's talk page02:42 28 Aug 2013

edit UnSignpost - Delivered every [other] week!

Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 10:41, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

edit MEGA PROBLE!!

I presumed that when you click on an article header the article expands beneath however when I click on an article header it takes me to the old UnSignpost issue full page. Unless you want to write a seperate piece of coding for each article could you please try yourself or get Puppy to make it expand instead. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 10:47, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

I see. I will try to fix it myself. Wait a bit. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:03, August 29, 2013 (UTC)
Pup's article template works like this: {{USP article|Section title|Article title|Article text|UnSignpost page name (for link)}}. It is just that there was a link to the old UnSignpost in the place where it says "UnSignpost page name (for link)". Nice job with noticing this! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:14, August 29, 2013 (UTC)
Oh ok. Great work. I love this format so much. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 11:22, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Me too! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:25, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

edit WHOAH..hey!

Just realised that you transfered Ukraine to the fork without my permission. Now you will receive full credit for the work and for a feature if it becomes one! You know how personally I take egoism! A little mention of me on both the talk page and VFH page (if you are featuring it) would be nice. Don't transfer any other articles over that I wrote without my permission please. Also both sites have very different articles now so it's not a great idea to give all our articles to them if we don't have our their ones coming back. As the merge is not likely to happen at least now I'd like to know that people come here or there because our or their comedy is better rather than only to one because the other doesn't have every article. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 12:32, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Well, yeah, I transferred Ukraine. Sorry for not asking your permission but I did give you credit in the change summary and was planning to do more if I would ever nominate it on VFH or talk about it to anyone. The reason for my actions was the Forest Fire Week that will soon begin and which mayb burn the existing Ukraine article, as it is one of the pages with far too many edits and is of a bad quality. Sorry again! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:39, August 29, 2013 (UTC)
Oh right. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 13:10, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

edit Democracy

To save filling up everyone elses pages and forums with our enlightening debate if you wish to rebuttle my points do it here.

You seem to be confused by my point of view as you said I have changed it when I haven't. I shall lay down my argument here (which hasn't changed) to solve any confusion:

  • In democracy anyone can vote however they wish even for extremist views. Instead of censoring extremist views politicians and other people are forced to educate people by use of speeches and debates to believe their view. People therefore understand each party's point of view clearly and can make a clear choice. This means that the party that everyone wants and likes comes to power.
  • Your view presumes that racism is bad and multi-culturalism is good. Where is your proof? The only proof I can think of is that people don't want to be criticised for something they are born with (can't help) therefore the people decide whether it is good or bad and therefore this is reflected in a democratic election so the racists will lose.
  • Finally what is your alternative to democracy? Totalitarianism and philosopher Kings presumes that those people have "correct" views but there is nothing to judge whether their views are "correct" or not considering in the Universe there is no such thing as "good" and "evil" outside of human society.

Also Anton don't let this draw tensions between us. I respect you as a friend and my comment to Spike was not meant to be hostile. I debate with my friends all the time and enjoy it. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 16:38, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Scott, we are friends and I also enjoy debating. I thought I did not say anything offending, if it is so, then sorry! Now:
  • I think that democracy is a very old system and is not improving much. The main argument I have against it is the fact that we allow people to vote, whilst many of them can either be uneducated, not educated enough, do know much about politics, have unjustified opinions about something, etc., etc. and democracy allows all of them to vote!
  • My alternative: I have never been against democracy as such, as what I mostly respect is the freedom of speech, thought and writing and free will. I just think that we (humanity) should change our system to have a more "intelligent" democracy. We ought not to prevent anyone from voting, but my idea is to provide them with all the objective information about the person for or against whom they are voting and any information about current politics, economy, etc. So the votes will be a bit more intelligent.
  • In addition to this, democracy was created just to give all the people more liberty and an ability to participate in politics. And that's why it is more than terrible, when this democracy, when not developed enough, allows a completely different system to be put in place, which denies the people the right they have just gained!

Now, concerning racism, I certainly agree with, how you called, the only proof of its evilness. But even this, is not very fair, as you seem to be saying that it is not a person's ability to change his race, whilst I would say that it should not be changed at all! (I am exaggerating your words, of course, but you said something a bit like this.) I think that racism should not exist for two main reasons: all races are equal (as I just said, and even better, it has been scientifically proved that it is so), so persecuting someone for being of a different race is just wrong, like saying that the Sun spins around the Earth. My second reason is that there each person has different principles and different opinion about things but the humanity as such tries its best to make the living of all the people better, therefore is humanitarian. This is, at least, what everyone believes when they vote for a particular politician/party. And racism intentionally makes living a lot harder for some people. So it goes against the main principles of the humanity (these have been unchanged for several hundred years in many countries). To be even more clear, racism goes against the main principles on which the government was created and, whilst this government, at the same time, gave birth to or spread racism. So it is two times wrong. Doubleplusungood.

Have I proved this? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:41, August 29, 2013 (UTC)

Yes you have certainly given a most convincing statement there Anton. Scientific facts help as well. Unfortunately you presume that some people's opinion of a better quality of life is one in which there is more equality. Unfortunately some people do not. Some people believe themselves to be superior and believe they deserve more rights. These people therefore share an alternative theory to you. Also good and bad are determined by humanity itself so whether the human race is a good thing or not is an opinion, so if people think not and want it to end they should have the right to say. It would be lovely if everyone was rigorously, scientifically obiding and there is no reason to suggest that we may not be in future however
The flaw is in education not the system. I would rather give the chance for people to explore every wrong option and then get educated in to finding a right opinion, that only ever be presented with the right option. It stimulates the mind more, makes life more interesting. It challenges humanity in coming up with new ways to "brainwash" (I use this term to mean "persuade someone's opinion" as scientifically this is the same thing as "brainwashing") the people. When people aren't exposed to everything in their environment they can easily fall trap to something they never encountered before. If we were to sensor facism and eliminate it then 100 years later someone will have the "bright idea" of it and then people will have to re-learn that it is bad, the hard way (Communism is probably a better example as it is more deceiving). If people had been exposed to facism then they would think "tried that already, it's bad and doesn't work." Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:02, August 29, 2013 (UTC)
Everyone should, of course, explore wrong ways in order to discover the right ones. But this can be done through books/movies/documents. To explore this in real life can harm others. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:35, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
But harm to whom? Is it harmful for us to kill off pests or is it beneficial? You are implying that the human race is beneficial and "right" and therefore ought to survive and be protected when there is no judgement of "right" and "wrong" it is merely a human perspective. Some person my want the human race to end/be oppressed because they justify it and think it is "right." You are blocking out their views. You will then say but these people are an extreme minority, if not in-existant. Well that's fine because in a democracy minorities do not get their way, only majorities. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:38, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
You have convinced me. The human race should not exist. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:41, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Talking seriously, some harmful (for the human race) minorities do become majorities when they talk well and can convince people in something stupid. And we are humans, so I think it is just natural for us to defend the human race, although some people may have different opinions on this. [1]

Yes however the harmful minorities becoming majorities is not the problem of democracy but a problem for the opposition to those minorities to deal with. They need to convince the people better. In the end of the day whoever convinces the people that they are "righr" is "right" as there is nothing else to judge "right" and "wrong" by so they should win. Censoring not only eliminated people who want to harm the human race but also people who want to advamce it. If censoring had been around during the last 500 years evolution may not have been believed nor quantum therories because at the time every other scientist ridiculed the fact. We would be as blind as those scientists if a new breakthrough came now so democracy and free speech gives them a chance to convince the people that this ubsurd thing they propose is actual "good" for the human race. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:58, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
The more we debate, the more I agree with your new posts. Now I completely agree with your last paragraph. Is it because we both changed our opinions or is it because we just expressed our opinions more clearly and discovered that they are not very different in fact? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:21, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
Everyone has a logical mind-set in this world. If you debate for long enough and clear away each cloud one by one every two opposing views no matter how different have the same meaning and logic behind it, simply expressed in different words. Great debate Anton and may I congratulate your skills. Most do not work out what you just stated in your last paragraph and give up. That is why the longer you debate for the better. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:27, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I love debating! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:22, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

edit User talk:RoboPanda

I am very confused by the meaning of your comment here Anton. I am inclined to revert it on the grounds that a debate ought not be held on a new users talk page on something which has ended and been clarified by the pirate code. Not meant to be hostile. Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:28, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

I am also confused by my edit. I just wanted to make the conversation funnier. It is Uncyclopedia, isn't it? And vandalism is not always not funny. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:51, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
No you are right there, where are my comedic principles. Just worried that it might confuse the noob too much but I'm probably just too paranoid! Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:56, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

If things are equal, that does not always mean they are equal. Doublethink, not crimethink. Have you read 1984? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:58, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Yes wonderful book. Bit confused how a proper British Gentleman like Orwell could have led himself to write the nudity scenes though. I mean the Communist world was a lovely utopia but the sex scenes were frankly quite off. I've crossed him off my Christmas Party guest list. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:01, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
What the hell is the "pirate code," if the named pirate is unable to decode it??? Spıke ¬ 20:13 30-Aug-13
I already brought this up in a previous discussion when an argument rages for ages and you come in and settle it immediatly with pure wisdom like the scene in the Pirates of the Carribean where they consult the pirate's code. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:20, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Sex scenes were not very good, but they showed how good it is to live and be free and happy and not to be a slave for your whole life. And if I could talk to people who are dead, I would talk to Orwell. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:37, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

My one rule in life is to be "different" because originality is more fun. Unfortunately I fail this rule countlees times but always attempt not to. My favourite person from history is Winston Churchill and as much as I try to be different from normality i can't find a more imspirational person for me personally. I don't even agree with the majority of his views! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:41, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
Interesting point of view! I try to be different as far as I am not different from myself. Otherwise, I am not myself anymore. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 21:17, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
True however I am myself, if different to others. I search long and hard for a greater person than Churchill and yet I cannot find one. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 21:20, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
There are few people who can compare to Churchill! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:18, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

edit "Good writing but hardly encyclopedic"

You have gotten in the habit of spitting the above words of mine back at me (two VFH votes I cast on articles in alternative namespaces). You have done this on (1) the VFH of Dianalysis, an article that does try very hard to present its brimming nonsense in the format of an encyclopedia article; and (2) the VFD of Jelly beans, which is definitely not good writing. We have aired our difference of opinion at Forum:Namespace prejudice. Carrying the disagreement to other voting pages is needless drama, and doing so by parroting me--especially when my actual words don't apply--is churlish. Spıke ¬ 19:40 30-Aug-13

I just thought they were rather suitable in these cases (rather = relatively). And I thought it would be funny. Uncyclopedia becomes too serious with all these namspaceisms and discussions and debates. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:54, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
I know that both of you will disagree with me here but I think debating on Uncyclopedia isn't bad at all. It stimulates an interesting discussion which gets us to know each other better and the debates are rather better and more interesting than the ones on TV because to be a comedian you have to be quite intelligent unlike the bloody politicians. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY

If you were merely cracking wise, I apologize. There were personal attacks in the above-named Forum and I did interpret this as more of the same. Spıke ¬ 20:13 30-Aug-13

I did not mean any personal attacks and nor do I think I personally implied any. I confirmed this with Anton on his talk page half-way throughout the debate, we are good friends. Obviously I disagree that debating should be used as an excuse to attack people based on spite. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:22, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
We should neither attack people based on spite, nor should we attack them based on Spike [2] I have never wanted to attack Spike. And I think that debates are healthy. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:32, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
  1. I personally think that animals (all the animals, counting insects, birds, swarms, etc.) have a right to live their lives freely and harming an animal is as bad as harming a human, even though our instincts tell us the opposite.
  2. Another joke

edit Forum:Second World War Community Project

You couldn't pop by here and give your own thoughts on this for a good friend, could you please? Thanks. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:03, August 30, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Good idea! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:33, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. You can specialise in the Russian invasion section if you wish! Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:43, August 30, 2013 (UTC)
There has never been a Russian invasion! We do not get invaded by our enemy, we let him in and then throw him out. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:08, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
True, a fact my other Russian friend is only too keen always to remind me. Unfortunately I was refering to the invasion of Eastern Europe by Russia (evil laugh!). Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:29, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, that one! This is just that the Germans forgot of their stuff in Russia. So we ran after them to give all of it back. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:32, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
(Grammar correction: "Left their stuff in Russia"). Hitler dropped a lot of his precious bombs on us by accident so we decided to help him by giving them back to him too. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:34, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
PS - Not sure why the Americans came along though. Maybe they got confused between Germany and Japan. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:36, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
I wanted to say "left most of their stuff in Russia". Yeah, Americans like being part of the world. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:39, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

edit Normandy

Kind of on topic but nothing to do with Uncyclopedia:

As a Russian what are your actual views on the Normandy landings and their contribution to winning the war (WW2)? Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 18:41, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

I don't know very much about it. The only thing I know is that the event was of an extreme significance but the organization was not well done, which caused a lot of deaths. And I also know about soldiers who tried to get to the shore under the enemy's bullets, which is in itself simply heroic. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:49, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
Well where I come from in my multi-cultural, liberal society the respect for the British Empire and the wars it fought are out of fashion. The 1950s-1970s patriotism of the British Empire has been almost wiped out.
My friends always say to me that Britain acted pathetically in the war and that Russia deserves the credit for the whole war as it suffered the heaviest sacrifice in casualties and destroyed the most German units. To this I always said that it was nonsense that Russia should only be a-credited for the war as Britain is only a small nation and historically has never produced large field armies. I always was under the impression that D-Day and Normandy was a stroll over for the Brits and Americans and that D-Day could compare to Stalingrad in military excellence.
However my opinion has very much changed on the matter. After reading two books, "The Desert Generals" and "D-Day" (can't remember which two authors wrote them) I realised that the British contribution to D-Day was quite a disgraceful, lousy effort (from the General's contribution). The Americans who were at first given the less important roles as they were less experienced but proved themselves well. Leaders like Patton and Eisenhower were very good at their jobs. Unfortunately the British Army was commanded by General Montgomery (Monty), the most famous British General of the war. Monty was only made famous by Churchill's propaganda. His military blunders were far too extreme for him to be in that position. He nearly lost the famous Battle of El Alamein (2nd battle) despite a huge military supremecy over Rommel despite the fact that Auchinleck (in the first battle of El Alamein) had inflicted a heavy defeat on Rommel with equal numbers on both sides. Monty mucked up Caen, which was undefended and left wide open to the British and he ended many British, American and the like lives in the Battle of Arnhem.
Therefore I would say that from Normandy onwards in terms of overall military campaigning was some of the worst that Britain has endured in her military history. The Americans deserved a lot of recognition thanks to Eisenhower's skill. I am so glad that that terrible ending for the British Army wouldn't be captured as the last war that Britain fought and that we would redeem our military reputation in the Falklands War and Helmand Province.
For the later part of the war Russia and America deserve the credit but if you look at some of the amazing achievements of the British military in the first half (Battle of Britain, Operation Compass, Battle of Toranto) then I think you've got to hand the credit to the British for the first half-of-the war (that and the fact that the Russians and Americans hadn't joined it yet!). Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:06, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
I was always interested in what British people nowadays thought about the war! And I think that you studied it very well and read many books, so it is very interesting. Russia deserves some credit for the Second World War, but it is mostly Russian citizens who have spent so much time in the factories working against the enemy and average Russian soldiers' achievement than the government's. I heard that Stalin made a lot of terrible strategic mistakes which lead to much loss. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:31, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Things always fall in and out of fashion. In British scoiety today I would say that the Roman Empire is looked on by the less well-informed people as an example of an amazing, wonderous empire that never committed any atrocities while the British Empire is looked on as a backward, colonising, greedy empire, which the World could have done without. I spend a lot of time convincing people that the Roman Empire had some negative effects and the British Empire had some positive effects. Both were bad and good in ways and both were necessary. What's more is that both resemble times where humanity has advsnced relatively rapidly and should be looked on as achievements of humanity and examples to follow when thinking about the future. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:12, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
Yes. Concerning me, I have never considered the British Empire bad, even though it sometimes was greedy and imperialistic (but it was hard not to be at that time, the competition between the European monarchies was very strong). It is, of course, bad to take in account only something positove or negative. Nothing can be completely black or white. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:17, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Yes I agree. I think an empire that agreed with and spawned fantastic scientific discoveries, liberalism, atheism, free speech for women, a faur judicary system and an effective democracy should not be seen in a fully negative light. We should also be proud of our amazing military achievements. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:22, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

This just reminded me of "The King's Speech". Have you seen it? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:26, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
Nope sorry. I know what it is though. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 20:27, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
That's fine. I just liked it very much. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 20:32, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

edit Good news!

I made the article Cowbell to what it should be! It was about to be deleted in the voting process by ScottPat, but then I spoke and then SPIKE protected the page. Then I found my favorite revision without a single "This needs more cowbell" template, then I copied a removed paragraph and pasted it onto the latest revision, then I removed the over-repeating cowbell repetition and removed the most of the foreign spelling of the word cowbell. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 22:57, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

Now, for extra credit, I have a Heroic Quest for you: Infuse a little humor into your Indus River article. I am from the USA and read very little humor anywhere. A lot of it seems hungry to inform us that crazy stuff happens there; only, crazy stuff happens everywhere, and I think we need more hints to see that it is crazy. Anton199 is from Russia and I bet he reacts the same way. For an additional sanity check, ScottPat is from England. I guess you are from India. A lot of the humor intended in this article is "lost in translation." Spıke ¬ 01:40 1-Sep-13
I think Newman is from the USA as well. But you are becoming a real VFD saver! That's cool! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:38, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
Last time my Scottish side checked, I was British and Scottish not English. Don't ever get the words Britain and England confused in front of a Scotsman. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:10, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Scott, I wanted to tell you that I took your image (Saturn walk) and used without your permission. Sorry if you didnot allow me. Is it fine? Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 19:14, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

A. I don't own the image, wikia does.
B. The point of an image is it supposed to be used on multiple pages.
C. I didn't ven make/take the image, I got it of google images.
So of course it is fine. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 19:21, September 1, 2013 (UTC)
You don't need permission to do most things here. Just do it.
SPIKE has always been a very successful VFD saver.
Fresh clap traps for sale...get your fresh clap traps. One dollar. Clap traps here.
I want to draw attention to myself on this talk page rather than write humerous satire. --ShabiDOO 22:08, September 1, 2013 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects