User talk:ChiefjusticeDS

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 08:28, February 22, 2013 by ChiefjusticeDS (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Bloink1 solid
This article was nominated for deletion on January 12th 2012.
The result of the discussion was Delete.

Archive #1, Archive #2, Archive #3, Archive #4, Archive #5, Archive #6, Archive #7, Archive #8, Archive #9, Archive #10, Archive #11

Hi, you are reading the preamble on the talk page of ChiefjusticeDS. Feel free to leave him comments, views, opinions, cake, and more. Be polite, civil and generally a lovely person and we will get along just fine.

New comments at the bottom where everyone can find them (especially ChiefjusticeDS)

Also if you leave a message and it needs a response it will most likely end up here, although it could wind up on your talk page, it all depends on the alignment of the stars.

Journalism so yellow it's orange: The UnSignpost

 ~ Capt. Sock Monkey ~ (berate) Beeverpedia ~ Thu, Dec 6 '12 12:45 (UTC)

Sloppy, falling-apart, and duct-taped-together: the UnSignpost!

--Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 13:54 Dec 12 2012


you dead? D: ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) Icons-flag-au 07:23, December 19, 2012 (UTC)

Watch your step! It's a steaming-hot pile of UnSignpost

 ~ Capt. Sock Monkey ~ (berate) Beeverpedia ~ Wed, Dec 19 '12 17:21 (UTC)

Normally I don't trust you but I need your honest opinion here

What do you think of this article? Is there anything you think I should change? (I'm asking you since you're the only Admin here who's awake and on Uncyclopedia right now.) Welcome to the machine MATTHLOCK 19:05, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

The article isn't bad, I'd suggest that you try to cut out some of the more unnecessary parts as the article seems to linger around some points. The aspect of buying the dictionary need not take up two sections. There's opportunities for jokes, but consider condensing what you have down into a slightly smaller section. Make sure you also keep it as a general guide, it's fine to say "If you have family who speak Farsi why not swear at them repeatedly and see if they pick up bits of furniture and try to insert it in you", but don't be any more specific than that. Also consider trying to take the article somewhere more unexpected than buy a dictionary, learn Farsi, start swearing. Have a look at some of the other How To's and see if any of the endings there give you some ideas of a better way to finish. Hope that helps. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:08, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I thought my idea about crazy old Uncle Mahmout went a little too far. Thanks for confirming my belief that I was driving that joke into the ground. (I think that maybe the stuff about the reader's family could be better off it it were put into a footnote.) Welcome to the machine MATTHLOCK 19:42, December 29, 2012 (UTC)
I don't know how I'm going to misdirect the article and lead it to an ironic ending (I'm irony-impaired, I know you know that since you read my failed article on how to be Matthlock, but I just can't think of anything that would make the reader think "I did not see that coming"). I don't want to stereotype, but since you're British, you could actually probably think of a really good shock ending. Give me an idea and I'll put it into consideration. Welcome to the machine MATTHLOCK 20:08, December 29, 2012 (UTC)

The Night I Chased Slender

I am having trouble organizing the beginning. I want the piece that goes:

It wasn't my average trip through a forest amongst that amount level of creepy. I don't even remember when I traveled there. I thought at first it was maybe Jigsaw, but no. It was it. It had to be it. It was tall, and its face... NO! It didn't have a fucking face! It had nothing! Not a nose, not a pair of eyes, ears, or a mouth. Whiter than my ass, and my ass is pretty white. It had to be Slenderman. It was abnormal. It had a suit, a black suit. It looked like a man, but it-- there, no. There was no way that thing was human, it is impossible. He was slender and scary, but it didn't get the best of me. I didn't let him-- no! I didn't let it get the best of me. This was my story, my tale, my legend... this was not the night Slender chased me, no. This is the night I chased Slender. I will tell further, if you have the guts. If you're unafraid.

I want it to be like the "post-story" added to the beginning. Like a prelude letter or something. Also, could you go through and proofread it when I am done? Better yet, do you want to collab with this? You do seem to know a lot about Slenderman like I do.--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 20:52, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

I'm more than happy to assist you with the article, the bit above may need to be re-hashed a little for the reasons I have gone into. I'll experiment with the article a bit when I have some time if you want. It all depends on where you want it to go. I'll have a look at the intro and see what I can do with it, if you've got any particular suggestions by all means say so, and if you don't like what I decide to try then say that too. Give me a little while and I'll try and make those changes. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:03, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking something like a diary version of the video clips in the movie Cloverfield. Haha.--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 22:20, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
Possible, I was growing quite attached to the idea of doing more as written from the point of view of someone who is completely obsessed with the Slender Man. This being his account of his singular encounter with the Slender Man. The main issue being that the diary idea from Cloverfield relies on people being able to see what is happening, where we have to explain it we lose the urgency in the narrative. The diary idea can work, it just needs changed a bit. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:29, December 28, 2012 (UTC)
We can keep him obsessed. While we discuss, can you look at Battle of Hulao Pass? I want to know if that is VFH material.--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 22:38, December 28, 2012 (UTC)

Thank ya, thank ya!

Good scissors Murder Frog has awarded you a pair of scissors!
Now go run around with them.

Have these scissors as thanks for voting for the article Jim Morrison on VFH. It is now featured, which is pretty awesome. --Murder Frog Dull interest wanes. 01:45, December 30, 2012 (UTC)

Are you online?

Are you online right now?--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 01:21, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

No, I was not. I am now. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 19:22, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
Wanna work on the Night I Chased Slender next weekend with me?--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 19:35, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
Can do, I'll see what I can do about the first section over the next few days. I'll let you know when I've done it. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 19:37, December 31, 2012 (UTC)
KK....K--Sir Peasewhizz de New York (Chat) (Stalk?) 20:48, December 31, 2012 (UTC)

Drop your pants and grab the eggnog! It's the UnSignpost.

 ~ Capt. Sock Monkey ~ (berate) Beeverpedia ~ Wed, Jan 2 '13 13:11 (UTC)


I liked your comments on the forum. It may be you and I running down the halls here, and with me being fake gay and all, watch your trousers. I don't know what will happen to the site, mainly because this will be the search engine uncyclopedia for a long long time unless that is a number one priority for the people in control of the policies and plans of the new site. It won't be uncyclopedia until when I put "uncy" into the search engine that site comes up. I hope everyone there also keeps a foot in this site, and moves new articles onto each. A new world, maybe it's the Aztecs mucking around with us. Aleister 12:22 3-1-'13

Hopefully it won't just be me and you, though that would streamline the decision making process. I'd like to see what happens on Saturday rather than moving into an "us and them" mentality. Also, as you will be remaining we are going to draw up one policy, wherein a sturdy pair of trousers are worn at all times whilst editing the wiki, I'm not going to be fake gayed to death in my sleep. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 12:27, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
I have already come out as a 'stayer'. So that makes at least three people remaining here. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 19:16, January 3, 2013 (UTC)
On a serious point Chief, we appear to be the only two active admins who are not looking to move elsewhere. I don't want to go via the emails here to talk about this but you can contact me at Thanks. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:12, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
Will do. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 08:13, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
I'm here, too. Thank goodness you guys are as well. What about Unnews? Is GlobalT going to continue with his good job?--Funnybony Icons-flag-th Agnideva-small.jpg AGT-logo-small.jpg 09:35, Jan 4
I don't know is the simple answer, I don't think we will know until Saturday. There is likely to be some disruption either way, nice to know you'll be sticking around. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 09:49, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
Hiya Chief! I sent an email to Romartus - with a few other questions. You are most welcome to email me any time. BTW: Can/will Spike be an admin? How about Aleister? What is Jimbo Wales going to do about this site? Will he maintain it? Who is ultimately in charge? I personally don't care about a warning message and a few ads - companies don't exist only on air, and Uncyclopedia is already free. Have to see ads even when we go to a movie - and we pay to get in! Jeez! What's the big deal? Best to you, mate!--Funnybony Icons-flag-th Agnideva-small.jpg AGT-logo-small.jpg 10:15, Jan 4
Yeah SPIKE has been hyper-active lately, if he's going to be an admin I'll give a Symbol for vote For.. Even though he stalks me quite a lot... Cat the Colourful (Feed me!) Zzz Sleeping Cat 10:19, 4 January, 2013 (UTC)
Hi Cat, do we get to vote for admins? I always vote for Spike (even though he never votes for me - grin!). I hope he's an Admin. Cheers--Funnybony Icons-flag-th Agnideva-small.jpg AGT-logo-small.jpg 11:14, Jan 4
As I've already mentioned, I'm not wanting to start making decrees or establishing interim governments until we know what is happening, I'm anxious that we don't fall into an "us and them" mentality, anyone who goes to the new site is welcome back here anytime, no questions asked and no comments made. In terms of new admins, there may be a need depending on who goes to the new site, when we look at a VFS next month we can see what everybody thinks. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 10:27, January 4, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, Chief. Cheers!--Funnybony Icons-flag-th Agnideva-small.jpg AGT-logo-small.jpg 11:14, Jan 4
I declared I'm staying last night. That the Chief is staying is heartening and is part of what I meant by "mature Administrators," Romartus being the other part. Dividing the effort is regrettable, but many of the serious comedy writers seem to be staying and all the vandals with spray cans seem to be leaving as a clique. Cat, I am not stalking you and in fact Unwatched you yesterday. Funnybony, my status is: perhaps with a greater technical aptitude than you guys, but totally untrained at the nuts and bolts of MediaWiki; still with a creaky, metered, rural Internet service that induces me to run with Javascript and photos disabled most of the time; willing to Patrol and be nice (when warranted) to new users, but generally still more interested in writing than administrating. Funnybony, I never vote for anyone (though I recently voted against Dannyboy) and I was happier not caring about VFH. My DOS dial-up mail at went out of business since Chief and maybe Funnybony last mailed me, but the link from here works and Romartus has my e-mail address. Spıke Ѧ 11:29 4-Jan-13
Thanks Spike. Once upon a time you were the Unnews editor. I was bummed when you got moronically banned by the very drama queens, then quit. Global is doing a good job, but I don't know the plan. If it's a legal fact that Wikia purchased and owns "Uncyclopedia" - then this is kinda wrong. I have no objection to ads and a warning note. Unless Wikia charges membership fees or gets enough donations there is no other option. Sorry about using your talk page, Chief. Cheers!--Funnybony Icons-flag-th Agnideva-small.jpg AGT-logo-small.jpg 13:37, Jan 4

A request

I would like to request you review the block of SPIKE made by TKF. I consider entirely unwarranted (as should be clear from that I reverted it twice - arguably not a good move either, but egh) and have taken this up with him previously, but there is little more I can do at this point. Given the politics of the moment (are you leaving? Is TKF? Is SPIKE? How much did that play into this?) and the fact that TKF deopped me, however, I can appreciate that this may not be a situation you would like to step into, but you're one of very few admins left that I know of whom I would consider sensible. -— Lyrithya 03:22, January 5, 2013 (UTC)

I'll make this as brief yet thorough as possible, to avoid prolonging this:
  • My ban was completely warranted. Spike has been speaking without a filter lately in a whole variety of ways, from calling articles "crap-cakes" to calling Aleister "deluded," and has resumed the arrogant sort of behavior that got him in trouble the last time he was banned. These offenses, cheerfully overlooked because, as Sannse says, this is a tense and strange time for everyone, but the boulder that broke the camel's back is this. Hammering a noob like that is inexcusable from anybody in any situation, let alone someone who repeatedly brags to being one of the only sensible people left on the site (hooray more arrogance), even more let alone someone who is nominated for UotY. The ban, as I see it, is well-justified and unavoidable. Zombiebaron agreed on IRC.
  • Lyrithya undid the ban rashly and without context. She says herself how out-of-the-loop she feels, and she speaks the truth. The fact that she undid my ban means nothing. Romartus undid my ban because he thought I based it on the conversation on Socky's talkpage, where Spike call's Kip's article a "crapcake." I specified my reason with the second ban and, so far, Romartus has said nothing.
  • I deopped Lyrithya in order to shorten this argument, knowing tensions were so high, and prevent further rash conflicts. This is not the first time I've deopped her briefly as a cooldown (a hella controversial practice, I know, but it's proven to be pretty effective). I was about to restore her before I noticed Zombiebaron had done it first(again, my talk page).
Them's the facts, sir justice sir. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 03:46, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
I'm not wishing to pour oil on troubled waters here by going into the specifics of whether what happened last night are right or wrong, I will give you my thoughts on SPIKE's block. SPIKE, it seems to me, has come in for a great deal of stick from a number of people on this wiki and while telling newer users that by moving to the new site they will be "sucking up to autocrats" is not particularly friendly, it is not exactly unprovoked, if not by the user in question. A ban it seems to me is appropriate in the context of what has been done, SPIKE needs some time to cool off and calm himself down a bit, a brief ban justifies that means.
I do not excuse arrogant and rude behaviour from anybody but I feel it is rash to overlook the situation as it is, the community is going two separate ways and tensions are quite high because of that. SPIKE should serve a brief ban for violations of rule 2 and biting the noobs, but I feel a month is a very long time for an established user who has proven multiple times that he only has the best interests of the wiki at heart, we should also consider the backdrop to SPIKE's current behaviour and accept that others in this community are not wholly guiltless in causing it.
Lyrithya: I would like to think that the block is not in the context of the site move, at least not in the sense that it would cause any issues for those remaining here, as far as de-opping you goes that is down to TKF's judgement, that is a right the community gave to him. As administrators we have to accept some of the opinions and actions of our fellows in good faith; wheel warring is never where we want to be. I would say that approaching TKF and trying to come to some kind of compromise is better than a wheel war over the block.
I propose that SPIKE's block is reduced to 48 hours starting from last night in the interests of ending this argument and considering more important things, for instance, the question of sniffing attractive people whilst standing behind them in queues to "see if they smell nice too". I'm personally all in favour but nobody else seems to want to talk about it. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 07:28, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
Fair compromise. I'll go get the nose extensions. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 07:50, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
I abide by the Chief's decision in this matter. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:17, January 5, 2013 (UTC)
I'm too busy sniffing pretty people to discuss anything at present. Also I'm suffering from UN:N syndrome.                               Puppy's talk page02:34 05 Jan
Spike called me deluded? Very perceptive of him, if I may imagine so myself. Aleister 14:39 Uncy's 8th Birthday


Hi Chief. Just a check to see if you are receiving my messages. Thanks. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:48, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

I have been, last one I have is from January 10th. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:15, January 12, 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Chief. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:28, January 12, 2013 (UTC)

Page moves

Hi Chief. There are changes (page moves) that have not been corrected here. Sorry for my english it's (all) Greek to me. Thank you. --Fililost (talk) 10:50, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll sort those out. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 10:56, January 13, 2013 (UTC)


Hello, Chief. I've been Patrolling edits and there are a few remnants of the big vandalism wave in RecentChanges (click Hide Patrolled) from the 11th and the 12th. I defer to you on these, as the goal is not to reverse specific changes but to restore the pages, some of which were vandalized in multiple ways. Cheers. Spıke Ѧ 15:55 13-Jan-13

Undelete request

Didn't realize this was in my user-space; can I get it undeleted? Thanks. ~ BB ~ (T) Icons-flag-usSun, Jan 13 '13 23:04 (UTC)

Which page are you wanting back exactly? The one you linked me to hasn't been deleted. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 07:41, January 14, 2013 (UTC)


Good sir,

I would like to ask you for assistance. At the time you deleted the Bronies page, I had already attempted to complete the page to no avail. I had also asked Romartus to help me improve the formatting - but no matter how I tried to edit the page to make it more acceptable, the WIP tag would not go away.

Although I'm asking a lot, I would kindly ask you to restore the page with all the necessary changes done. The reason I ask this is not to be ungrateful but because I'm lousy at formatting. If you could also tell me what exactly needs to be done in order to make it an acceptable article, I would be much obliged.

Finally, if you cannot restore the page, I would very much like a copy.

PS I had to edit another headline on your talk-page - it is now named "Vandalism", since under the previous name, the page would not allow me to save these changes.

--TrollzinSpace101 (talk) 08:46, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the page into mainspace. I have made a couple of changes to it but do not wish to go about making bigger changes to the formatting without some direction from you. The main problem as I see it is the massive image of the map which would be OK in a smaller size but the big, unrestricted size just looks untidy. You are also doing a lot of unnecessary spacing which isn't helping you out either. I've altered the first line of the article to a simple disambiguation and moved some bits closer together as well as changing the Polish wikipedia template to our bog standard wikipedia template. I'm happy to make some more changes to the article if you'd like, just let me know what you want doing with the map image and if there's anything that should categorically not be removed from the article. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 09:09, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

User Ralfiano

You blocked Ralfiano for two days for cyberbullying, evidently on UnPoetia:Ronald Mcdonald‎‎. But "Jimmy Saville" [sic] is a perv in the news. Before I saw your ban, I reverted him at Folk, where he stated that a list was "widely regarded as some of the shittest musicians in the world." Recommend you block him instead for being a dope. Spıke Ѧ 11:47 15-Jan-13

He had created a page which I had already deleted called "Declan", this was about how "Declan" has a ficticious medical condition that prevents him excelling in various school subjects, hence the ban for cyberbullying. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 13:12, January 15, 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see. (Which means: I don't see, the page being deleted.) Very good. Spıke Ѧ 13:33 15-Jan-13

Edit conflict...

Vfs edit conflict

                              Puppy's talk page08:17 17 Jan

Lol. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 08:19, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

User Animalcollective94

You were correct in tagging Ice cream tub and elastic bands with {{ICU}} but (as I wrote on QVFD) I would have given him more of a chance before deleting it. After his first blanking, I wrote to his talk page suggesting that he keep trying. His second blanking may be the result of shock at seeing a sign of official disapproval; he might not even know that other people are looking at his writing. If you would return this to userspace, I'll contact him again and see if we can salvage him. Spıke Ѧ 15:55 18-Jan-13

Page blank by sole editor is QVFD material. Recreation of deleted content is pushing ban-worthiness, but I chalk this one to noobishness. Maybe a polite nudge on how to create content in name space might be worth a pop?                               Puppy's talk page04:11 18 Jan

My verdict on him is noobishness, and he should not be punished for his second try as it was probably a result of my nudge. I have a polite nudge written, depending on what the Chief has to say. AC94 is too noobish to have replied to my earlier contact. Spıke Ѧ 16:18 18-Jan-13

I've dropped a copy back into userspace, I appreciate we are trying to help them, but we must balance that with quality assurance and it is imperative he/she realises that the ICU isn't to tell people that the work is bad, but to let us check up on it in a week so we can get rid if it is abandoned whilst incomplete. Perhaps try and prod them towards making some more active contributions elsewhere in the community to get to know us all, that might help them understand the tags and the procedure. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 17:50, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

I'll revise my remarks to include that point. Spıke Ѧ 17:53 18-Jan-13


I could be wrong, but this is possibly a recreation of deleted material. It's QVFD worthy, but I'm hesitant to add it to QVFD as it's a subpage - and as part of a greater whole it may be worth keeping. Gut feeling is to firstly delete, and secondly to axe any links to it, but I'm handing it to you to check out previously deleted versions first.                               Puppy's talk page04:08 18 Jan

There are no deleted revisions which match up with this one. There is a very similar one from March 2011, but it was more extensive than this one. The only mainspace link is through the McDonalds article which isn't particularly compelling itself. If this page is to exist it needs to serve a purpose and for that it would need to be longer and be amusing in its own right. I'd delete as it is now, but I'll let you make the call, chuck it on QVFD if you think it should go. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 17:42, January 18, 2013 (UTC)


This thing is being annoying. I can't patrol the changes as the page is locked to Admin+ access. As this bot is not an account per se, it also can't be marked as auto-patrolled. Can I get you to mark off this as a patrolled edit?                               Puppy's talk page03:26 19 Jan

VFS noms

Are we closing noms at 0:00 UTC tonight?                               Puppy's talk page09:11 21 Jan

Yes indeed. Coincidentally, voting begins immediately afterwards! --ChiefjusticeXBox360 13:39, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Chief, what the hell.

I'm still in the race for VFS-- I actually had three votes at your time of "moving". What is the deal? A (Fallen Reich)13:48 23 January 2013

Aimsplode, the reasons I struck your nomination are as follows: You were once banned indefinitely on this wiki for bullying, rudeness and inappropriate behaviour. Your reappearance here coincided with your being banned indefinitely from the forked wiki. You have not contributed to mainspace since November, all your edits are to forums, VFH, your userspace and occasionally to QVFD articles from your userspace. All the votes you had polled were from yourself, two people who have moved over to the other wiki , where cries to have your indefinite ban revoked are noticeably absent, someone who hasn't edited in 7 months and Kip the Dip. You have a disregard for other people's contributions and revert administrators when you believe they have acted "unfairly". If you want to be an admin you need to demonstrate commitment to this wiki, a change in your behaviour and a nomination from a user consistently editing here. That is why I made my decision to remove the nomination. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 14:29, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
Just because you believe I am all of these things does not make it true. If the populace wants to make me an admin, then they should. And they are voting. Just because you, one person, does not like the selection, does not make it official. That's why we vote in the first place. A (Fallen Reich)14:56 23 January 2013
Chief, I think your decision and rationale should appear in the record at UN:VFS. Spıke Ѧ 14:58 23-Jan-13
Aimsplode, that is my decision. It is final. I do not simply believe all those things, I have seen your contributions and attitude in person. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 15:15, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Hey Cheif, I think I'll put this here to keep all the VFS stuff on your talkpage in one place. While I completely disagree with your circumvention of the democratic process re:Aimsplode's nomination, I have something else that I am here to ask about. Can you please tell me why sannse changed your userrights? That is typically the job of active community crats. I was on IRC all that night and nobody tried to contact me so I could update your userrights. I would very much like to remain a part of this community and I am hurt that I seem to be being excluded for no reason. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 19:39, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I did not intend to exclude you from the process. I was working a night shift on the 21st and Sannse had emailed me at about 21:00 my time about a separate issue and I replied and asked if she could do it. Had I been sat at home I would have gone on IRC to speak to you, as it was I simply asked Sannse because she was there, not intending to exclude anyone from anything.
As regards Aimsplode's nomination, I say again, if you are so keen on him you can op him on the fork, had I closed the VFS vote to persons who are primarily editing the forked uncyc Aimsplode would have not have been nominated and if he had would have so far polled 1 vote, from himself. I am not interested in this wiki becoming the butt of a joke,I have seen discussions on IRC along the lines of "It'll be hilarious if Aimsplode is made an admin on the old Uncyc". I have gone out of my way to include persons who have moved to the new wiki and been as tolerant as I can be, but where the votes are "For. Now I'm pissing off back to the other wiki" or "Lol this is so funny" I will not sit and watch it happen.
I do not wish to tar everyone with the same brush, many users who have gone to the fork have voted sensibly and properly, however when all the votes for Aimsplode are from people primarily using a wiki he is banned indefinitely from I begin to question whether I am witnessing a democratic process or a deliberate abuse of that process by people wishing to have a "joke" candidate opped here. Aimsplode may someday be an admin here, but that will be after he demonstrates that he wants to improve the wiki, not just have some extra buttons. Were there any question in my mind that the users remaining on this wiki "sincerely want him as administrator" I would re-instate the nomination, but the fact is that those voices are not forthcoming. If anyone who has made consistent edits to this wiki since the split wishes to dispute my decision then I will reverse it. As it stands the people who "sincerely" want him to be an administrator are the same people who are hoping that this version of Uncyclopedia is "buried" by the new wiki. This is not an acceptable state of affairs.
TL;DR version, I still love Zombiebaron. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:37, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
And you are thereby invalidating real votes from administrators and users because you do not like the reasons why someone was voted for. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 22:52 Jan 23 2013
Ok I understand why you talked to sannse instead of me. I don't like the precedent that it sets, but whatever. I do not, however, understand why you removed Aimsplodes nomination. There seems to be a major erosion of trust as a result of the move, and nearly everyone on the Wikia site appears to be assuming bad faith from those they perceive to have abandoned them. If it seems like maybe a few of us are joking around, take a step back and see that we are on a comedy website. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 22:55, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
I would define attempting to corrupt the result of a vote by deliberately voting for a ridiculous candidate ans an exceptionally ggod reason to dislike a vote. I have seen several discussions on IRC about how funny it would be if Aimsplode were made an admin. I assumed good faith in the vote itself by allowing persons who had moved to the fork to vote, despite arguments from others to prevent them from doing so. The result has been that I am being accused of being a demonic fusion of Stalin and Hitler for striking a nomination for a user you guys banned indefinitely 1 week after the split for being "An arrogant, unrepentant asshole". I am distressed to hear that I am now being accused of assuming bad faith despite having seen evidence for people acting in exactly that way. Nobody who had voted for Aimsplode edits here any more and the instant wheel warring from EMC when someone does something he doesn't like makes a mix that is near guaranteed to foster both resentment and an erosion of trust.
I do not feel abandoned, I feel the community that has remained is being treated unfairly by those who have gone, being regularly described as bitter, foolish and ridiculous. I've read the forums, watched the IRC chats and seen the comments on talk pages. I wish I could continue not to mistrust many of the users who have moved, by their stated intention in many cases is to ultimately "bury" a wiki that I continue to maintain. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 23:03, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
I unbanned Aimsplode because you incorrectly assumed that he had reinstated his VFS nomination. So please let me know what wheel warring you're talking about. --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 23:07 Jan 23 2013

Hey ZB. On the issue of asking Sannse - the change logs are here, if that helps you get an idea of timeframes. You weren't excluded as far as I can see, just second to the party. (Sorry if I came across as frivolous on that earlier, but I assumed you would assume good faith.)
As for Aimsplode being removed - didn't you do the same with the MrEx nomination going back a while ago? And didn't I call you out on it? And didn't your decision stand? All rhetorical questions - I recently reread the exchange on the talkpage of UN:VFS. Wouldn't leaving the nomination there and allowing people to continue voting to pull it out at the last second be more of an issue?                               Puppy's talk page11:05 23 Jan
Mr-ex got one vote in a nomination round, the purpose of which was to not have frivolous nominations in the main voting round. I do not see how that is parallel to throwing away several votes from both users and admins. -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 23:15, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Is there going to be another round of admin voting? If so, then why sweat the user round so much, no matter the baldly shitty faith of whomever? With a race as tight as 4-2-3-3-1-0, leaving him nominally in won't impact the final outcome none. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 23:28, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I am curious. When did exactly Aimsplode show all those qualities that made him an ideal sysop for this site? Someone promising good behavior is not the same as actually doing anything constructive, rather than destructive as his ban log so evidently exhibits. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:39, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Another, but less Drama-filled VFS issue

In many of the nominations, there are statements that look like they could be either a vote or just a comment. Obviously, that is an issue when trying to determine vote count. --Mn-z 19:20, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

We'll have a final count closer to the end of the month. Hopefully avoiding any drama in the process. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:38, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
I'm concerned if we don't clarify earlier it'll create drama. I was going to go through and start adding "for", "against" and "comment" to those that missed them, based upon my understanding of what those users were after. It'd mean making assumption, but It'll create less work unravelling it in the end, and give people a chance to clarify themselves if unhappy.                               Puppy's talk page11:05 23 Jan
When someone says "Clearly the best" or "the only suitable candidate," I would (correctly) assume it to be a vote. Context clues are a thing. I would only worry about it if it's a Lyrithya-esque massive, ambivalent paragraph situation on every single nomination. --Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 23:26, January 23, 2013 (UTC)
Your votes are clear even if not clearly marked. (For Sims, I seem to recall, and definite Against me). Not everyone has recognised that, which is why I'd rather bring it down to a clearer perspective. (As both of your votes had been stricken due to that ambiguity previously.) VFS is a drama-fest, as usual. Let's try and minimise it with a little clarity.
Speaking of which, the exchange you and I had on my nomination deserves to be read, but it's making clutter. Do you mind if it's in a “show/hide” thingy to clean that page up? (My preference for neatness while keeping things clean, but I don't want to appear to be trying to remove your comments. And could you change “untrustable” to “untrustworthy”. I assume it's what you mean, but it could also be confused for “distrustful”. It caused me to have to clarify via the context.)                               Puppy's talk page12:15 24 Jan

"I think you know why"

But, do you? The last restoration of the voting for Aimsplode (at 21:31) was by Meganew.

Hotadmin was on recently and I made two requests to him regarding users. Most importantly, the Template Spammer returned. Could you re-ban that guy (it's on Ban Patrol too). My other request to Hotadmin was Autopatrolled for Lollapalloser. Spıke Ѧ 22:46 23-Jan-13

Resurrected and blocked appropriately. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 22:50, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Thank you (and Hotadmin); by the way, your note on VFS referencing this page satisfies my previous concern for documentation. Spıke Ѧ 22:52 23-Jan-13


I have decided that instead of abondoning this site completely I'll drift in between the two (well mainly focusing on the fork) so could you plz gimme some rollback/unlock my userpage plz :) ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) Icons-flag-au 03:59, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

If you're able to keep the two sites separate then I think you're still eligible for admin. The community hasn't asked you to quit the role, and - personally - I'd rather you stayed on as admin here.                               Puppy's talk page05:58 25 Jan
Thankyuo yuong man. im probbly too drunk to edit eihter site atm but cool. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) Icons-flag-au 08:33, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
I've only just managed to finish work now (about 9:30 AEDT). I'll catch up with drinking soon. Happy oi oi oi day!                               Puppy's talk page10:26 25 Jan
Frosty was one of our most capable and diligent patrollers and is geographically useful. But he made a commitment to the Fork and, uniquely, renounced Adminship here. His irrational polemic against me on UN:VFS makes me question today's change of heart; particularly the armchair psychology regarding the fact that I voted for myself, the claim that my relations toward one manipulative user are typical or likely toward new users, and even that segregating that user's many Can-I-Haz'es into a separate archive so we can search without wading through them was a show of egotism. I would welcome another hand to bail the Mother Ship, but require due process to let him back anywhere near the helm. Spıke Ѧ 13:43 25-Jan-13
What due process? Should we have a trial! A trial would be fun, ah, educational. Frosty to the docket! Aleister 13:48 25-1-'13


Chief, I think ICU may be harsh for this article: It is about a real band (that none of us will ever listen to) and even the mayhem-centric comedy take seems to relate to something in reality. I've given it small tweaks and pointed it to the corresponding Wikipedia article, and advised the author about how best to write band-cruft. Spıke Ѧ 15:41 25-Jan-13

Ultimately it makes little difference between ICU and WIP. It's just to ensure the article isn't abandoned following it starting off. If the author is happy for us to replace the ICU with a WIP then there's no issue. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 16:03, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Yet another complaint

Against votes...count. A (Fallen Reich)04:38 26 January 2013

Ho hum.                               Puppy's talk page04:59 26 Jan
No Aimsplode, they don't. I have removed them since, in my view, they were being utilised to attack other users and otherwise not be particularly nice. In order to be fair I have removed all of them, as well as the comments which were cluttering up the page and making it difficult to count votes. When we reopen the page anybody who has had a vote removed will be able to cast a vote for someone else instead. For being the operative word in that sentence. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 07:15, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I haven't seen a real-world election where against votes count. Aimsplode, you should be glad they don't count, you have lots of votes now. And I'd suggest that you prepare to be an admin, even though your nom may not survive the obstacle course to come, by becoming more active on the site and by asking present admins what the most important jobs are, how to do them, how to patrol effictively (I found catergorizing helps, through it I've learned the site, where things are, when an IP edit is in good faith and if their edits fit the page or doesn't - kind of like getting good at judging intent). You should maybe ask all admins to adopt you as an admin, to show you how they do it and why, all the things you need to know. I for two have faith that you will use this experience as a learning curve both for your on-line life and your off-line life. It's like God is handing you a gift, and with this gift you can learn how to expand your understanding of other people, of emotions, of caring for something as large and Unimportant as uncyclopedia, and how to watch your temper so it comes out in a diplomatic way rather than an "them versus me" way. Stuff like that. And I've got a feeling that as this becomes real you may want to turn it down. I'd suggest you don't, and that you try it for awhile, and both play and work with a great spirit. This is all said in satire, of course (or is it?). Aleister 11:39 26-1-'13
I would suggest clearing the votes and starting over. Also, maybe 3 votes per person would make more sense. Or, maybe temporary admins until the end of March, so we can who is and isn't editing here in good faith. Perhaps we could op 2, but give chief justice the right to de-op the temporary admin, and replace with the 3rd place finisher at his judgment. --Mn-z 11:58, January 26, 2013 (UTC)
All the noise in the current vote has come from two other wikis, and I would no more have them make our decision for us than keep us from making one at all. But I don't mind making any new Admins probationary and letting the Chief de-op for cause--less eager to let him declare that a loser is actually a winner. We can already see who's editing in good faith (for example, since 5-Jan); the hope I expressed that opping Simsie would draw her in is diminished by the fact that nominating her hasn't, except for brief patrolling. On more minor points, the promotion of the Chief is done and had no controversy at all. And three votes for two Admins doesn't make sense. Spıke Ѧ 13:07 26-Jan-13
Separately, Template Spammer is back, today at Spıke Ѧ 13:17 26-Jan-13
Range block required?                               Puppy's talk page01:19 26 Jan
Yup, I would, all of 228.228, even at the risk of plunging the entire Detention Hall into darkness. Spıke Ѧ 13:23 26-Jan-13

Getting back to VFS

What if we op 3 probationary admins? I think de-opping someone tben re-opping someone else might have some issues. Or, what if we op 3 admins, then launch a Deop forum if and when one (or more) of the new ops gets out of line. --Mn-z 14:04, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

Probation for everyone (except the two drop-ins who got contentious during their own candidacy) (count me out too if that solves anything). This is justified by the current situation, in which the Chief and Romartus are the only Admins providing more than sporadic coverage. But moving from an observation of excessive drama to a potential "Deop forum" is crazy. Spıke Ѧ 14:17 26-Jan-13
Ditto for me relating to taking on an admin role. Whatever you decide I'll back it.                               Puppy's talk page03:31 26 Jan
My intent is that we will clear this matter up on Monday. I'd rather it was done by way of the vote. I have spoken with Romartus and I think we can manage for another week more. Email me if you would like further clarification. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 16:25, January 26, 2013 (UTC)

An Explanation

I merely want to know why you eliminated my nomination for admin when, unlike Aim's massive bandwagon vote, I was wholeheartedly serious about these proceedings. With no offense, it disgusts me to see the bureaucracy take my sincere attempt at running for admin in a time that the Wikia Uncyc requires such a thing by treating my solidly serious nom for admin. Give me a real reason for doing it, please... I've had long enough relations with the admins to know what dodgy and otherwise non-sustenant responses are.

Thank you, --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 00:31, January 29, 2013 (UTC)

sustenent? Do you mean substantive? (Sorry, just aiming for clarity. Not trying to nitpick.)                               Puppy's talk page12:50 29 Jan
I meant sustenant. As in containing sustenance. Sorry if that word confused you, Puppy. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 01:00, January 29, 2013 (UTC)
It was agreed between myself and Romartus that your nomination be removed as you have not made contributions to mainspace articles for over 3 months and you primarily edit forums and talk pages. We also wished to ensure that the bandwagon voting did not simply switch over to you. I appreciate that you will be disappointed but there is always the chance to be nominated for VFS in future and the best way to achieve that is to contribute consistently to the wiki rather than simply hoping to be nominated when a VFS takes place. I hope that satisfies your request for an explanation. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 07:38, January 29, 2013 (UTC)
There is also the aspect of the sole nominator and voter withdrawing the vote as it was a joke nomination.                               Puppy's talk page10:03 29 Jan


Hello, ChiefjusticeDS. I am here today to beg ask very politely for you to adopt me. --LumaShock (talk) 19:18, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Hi LumaShock, I'm more than happy to adopt you. There's very little to it to be honest, you drop me a message on my talk page any time you have a question or want assistance doing anything. You can use the "email this user" function to get in touch if required. I'm usually about every single day, I'm sad that way. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 20:20, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Please adopt me too

And since I'm asking you, an idea for executive action. Can we just admin all four candidates (by changing the number to 4 instead of 2, that should do it). For obvious reasons, and because no other admin has shown up to take up the workload. Aleister 19:30 31-1-'13

Ultimately there is no rush to op people, and I would hesitate to op all 4 candidates, we should try to op based on requirement, if the two candidates we get from this VFS aren't enough then we can easily op the others over the next couple of months. Adminship isn't something everyone needs, there's a predisposition to maintenance and I'd much rather people don't see potential adminship as the only reason to write on or maintain the site. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 20:26, January 31, 2013 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia Legal Department

If I'm not mistaken, was the purpose of that project simply to spam a template into several articles? --Mn-z 17:33, February 3, 2013 (UTC)

It does seem that that was the ultimate result though I'm sure there was some other idea behind it. Unfortunately Zana got herself indefinitely blocked so very little has happened with it. I don't see that there's any point doing anything about it at present. Are we intending to actually do something about it? That would be very drastic. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 18:44, February 3, 2013 (UTC)
There is a very easy solution, fortunately. And this site needs another active writer of her quality, hint hint. Aleister 12:50 4-2-'13
Zana is welcome back at the same time as her manners, which appeared to desert her shortly before she was banned indefinitely. Her behaviour fully warranted the indefinite ban and it came after several very clear directions not to persist with her behaviour, as well as several administrators resurrecting her. Nobody wanted Zana to go, but if we don't ban someone for edit warring with the admins, being rude and abusive to other users and several instances of ban evasion, what do we ban them for? --ChiefjusticeXBox360 13:16, February 4, 2013 (UTC)
True, all true (except her last ban, which I proved on Romartus' page was unwarranted and a mistake - she had gotten permission to do what she was banned for), but she was so much fun! Aleister 13:22 4-2-'13
I was in email contact with Zana but received a bounce back some months ago so I can't say where she is now. Zana has my email address so the next move is hers. Perhaps she has moved on to pastures new. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 14:46, February 4, 2013 (UTC)

Voting systems


Just a thought. We have abundle of systems we use for voting. Some of them work well - VFH, NotM - and some of them work poorly - VFS (obvs), VFD. What I'd like to do is use some of the more structured systems we have on some of the more awkward votes. As a for instance, use the VFH format on VFS, wher the comments are obviously separate from the votes, but keep the votes to “For” only. 'otY people done like our 'otY for articles (auto nominations for those who hit an 'otM in that area over the year). Stuff like that. Given we're in a position where we can comfortably change the structure going forward, it may be the time to start working out those structures.                               Puppy's talk page08:52 04 Feb

I'm open to suggestions. Different procedures--if they are improvements--will further distinguish us from a certain impostor Uncyclopedia. Aleister has proposed on Romartus's talk page an administrative alternative to waiting for voters to straggle by on VFH, but I don't like a rule that gives specific powers to named individuals nor requires them to read everything self-nommed on VFH. The voting system at VFD works just fine, only there are no voters any more.
Other unsolicited suggestions:
  • We should renounce the tradition (just when I could benefit from it!) that Admins have 2 votes. There are some things that Admins can do with no vote at all, such as ban and huff. Admins are ultimately in a position to say that any given question should not be subject to a vote at all. However, if we agree that a certain decision needs wide buy-in and that everyone's opinion is valid, we ought not invent arithmetical tricks to skew the result.
  • If there is a way to make sport of our recent drama-fest without thereby prolonging it, it is time for an UnSignpost.
  • I've added the two new guys to UN:AA and, with fond memories of Rev. Zim ulator, distributed the insignia. It would be useful if UN:AA were a table with at least each admin's home timezone (for those who care to disclose it) so that people can get a sense of who is likely to be on call at given times of day. Spıke Ѧ 12:40 4-Feb-13

Pizza Planet

Are you sure about that revert? The guy seems like a decent writer (except for his occasional emphasis on poop and his knowledge of American civics) and I had posted to his talk page to try to guide him. Spıke Ѧ 19:37 5-Feb-13

More than happy for him to try again, the additions I rolled back weren't particularly high quality and the tipping point was the signature and the extra categories. If you have spoken to him about it then there's no problem with restoring the edits. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 06:06, February 6, 2013 (UTC)

Calcitetrol's Wildeisms

I came to the same conclusion as you on that user's out-of-control and unfunny Wildeisms--I think I reverted four more that he added as Anon--but was trying to give him a chance for repair and maybe even clean-up at User talk:Calcitetrol. But let your revert stand. Spıke Ѧ 11:27 8-Feb-13

He added a bad Wilde quote to Street Fighter. He has no sense of humour. It's a mercy killing.                               Puppy's talk page11:33 08 Feb

You might revert in the name of consistency. At this point there are so many that he is not going to go back to all of them and "do the right thing." Spıke Ѧ 11:43 8-Feb-13

Already undone edit by Chief. I'm not sure if it works on here as it may be different depending upon the version of wikimedia, but there is an option to “nuke” edits on the mirror. That'll revert (or maybe undo) all edits made by a user if the edits are the top edit of a page. I remember UU mentioned it once many moons ago. I can look into the process again if needs be for here. But we do tend to undo or revert most edits on merit, and that tends to be a one at a time effort, so it may be a possible option that you choose to not use.                               Puppy's talk page11:57 08 Feb

To be clear, I meant revert Calcitetrol on Street Fighter only. I don't propose to countermand the Chief, least of all nuke him, and I see no merit to Calcitetrol's edits, only a teachable moment. I had already returned to his talk page and explained why he had been reverted. Spıke Ѧ 12:03 8-Feb-13

Content warning stuff

Re-pasting Pup's message on my talk page regards the Achtung! Site Danger message:--LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:15, February 12, 2013 (UTC) Okay - my coding is not always perfect, so be ready to revert this if it goes askew.

I've only edited the areas of common.css directly related to the content warning. This should replace the content warning completely. I'd suggest having a second browser open to check the content warning after the changes have been made (one where you're not logged in) just to be on the safe side. If it buggers up, then revert.                               Puppy's talk page12:40 12 Feb

I will put an alert on the Chief's page as he is the site Bureaucrat to have a look. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:08, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

The rage name

Indeed it does not serve us to have a user with a name that permanently references a mishap with me, especially as Romartus says the Fork is about to do an UnSignpost on our harsh rule. But the guy has a sense of humor--the conflict in question is not specific to me and stems only from the fact that he's never been pushed to stretch his humor to article length--and I tried to bring him along on his (ugh!) talk page. Stay your sentence for a couple days? Spıke Ѧ 13:11 17-Feb-13

I think you can ban the username without preventing the underlying IP addresses from registering with a different account. --Mn-z 13:18, February 17, 2013 (UTC)

As the only sacking offense is his choice of username, this should be done. If I know it is he (and how would I?) I can resuscitate my comments that he didn't "fail at comedy" but only at writing an Uncyclopedia article and post it to a new talk page. On the other hand, if he was employing the tendency of adolescent Americans of playing a Guilt Card then leaving the table forever, screw him. Spıke Ѧ 13:29 17-Feb-13


I was hoping to e-mail you. Could I? I have an account which is If you are busy, that's cool. No biggie, I just had a few things I wanted to discuss with you off wiki. BTW... MrN Icons-flag-gb (talk to me) 09:46, Feb 20

Sorry - did a revert and partial restore to reduce the risk of that address being picked up by spammers. Not trying to suggest it was vandalism.                               Puppy's talk page10:17 20 Feb 2013
Sure. I've sent you an email. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 11:05, February 20, 2013 (UTC)


I mentioned privately that I had edited a number of these, merely to improve their description (from, for example, "something something".)

Today I continued editing their documentation:

  • Applying further changes to their descriptions
  • Changing filters 7 and 15 from "deleted" to "disabled" so they will appear in the listing, though continuing to not take effect, along with a description of the original intention
  • Changing the location of page breaks in the code of some abuse filters, for clarity, and
  • On disabled filter 15 (Block any and all edits), remove the "block" reaction to make it even clearer that it isn't in effect.

With your permission, I'll make one substantive change: Abuse filter 17 is triggered when someone adds a line with "http://" or "https://" to a page (and does not delete such a line; that is, is not merely editing an existing link). Currently there is no reaction. I'd like to add "Tag" as the reaction, so it will show up in Special:RecentChanges in the same way as removing {{ICU}} or {{Construction}} does. I'd like to see these changes because "we are not a catalog of funny stuff available elsewhere on the Web" and such edits are usually revert-worthy. Spıke Ѧ 18:41 20-Feb-13

Sounds fine to me. If it works: it was a great idea. If it doesn't work: I told you so. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 10:04, February 21, 2013 (UTC)

Management thinking, that. This is implemented and first shown in Special:RecentChanges on a test edit of mine at 12:10. 12:13 Never mind; doesn't show up since I deleted the test file (of course). Spıke Ѧ 12:18 21-Feb-13

I just ran through a few tests myself (same location). As far as I can tell it's working smoothly.                               Puppy's talk page12:27 21 Feb 2013

But only your fourth edit (12:25) actually got the legend in RecentChanges. Why do you think that is? I changed the coding; it used to define what a weblink looked like, but MediaWiki already knows, and counts them, so I just used the count. Unique weblinks added must exceed unique weblinks removed for it to fire. Spıke Ѧ 12:31 21-Feb-13

Test 1 & 2 were links internal using external link parameters (with and without {{FULLURL}}. Test 3 was an iw link. 4 was the only true external link. I'm not sure what will create, but it's a defunct address anyway that just redirects back. (I'll find out what it does after I hit save here.) Also, there is another issue with the abuse filters, but I'm looking into it.                               Puppy's talk page12:41 21 Feb 2013

Dayum! Like clockwork! Spıke Ѧ 12:45 21-Feb-13

Ahem. There may be others. My new housemate is sucking up my wifi bandwidth, so having trouble checking.                               Puppy's talk page12:50 21 Feb 2013

Do you like the stub warning better now? Spıke Ѧ 13:29 21-Feb-13 (Bandwidth? What would I do with bandwidth?

PS--We got a false positive now as Mn-z added an IP to Ban Patrol; maybe I need to exempt this page. Spıke Ѧ 13:38 21-Feb-13

Ooh... so gives a false positive?                               Puppy's talk page02:39 21 Feb 2013

Not just putting four numbers on the page. But (TalkContribs (del)Block (rem-lst-all)WhoisCityProxy?WP Edits) seems to produce an external web link, as we should see at RecentChanges. 14:46 Yup. It would be easiest for the filter to special-case UN:BP. Where else do we ever use {{IP}}? 14:50 PS--I coded UN:BP as an exception; also the entire UnNews namespace, where we tell 'em to provide at least one Source, which is typically an external link. It hasn't trapped anything else in five hours. Spıke Ѧ 22:07 21-Feb-13

Template:Ban Patrol instructions

As a consequence of studying the code at Ban Patrol, I've done two things:

  1. Moved the instructions into a template so reporting users don't have to wade through them in the edit window (if they edit the page and not just the correct section) and,
  2. Edited them to sort the instructions by audience and by sequence, and not to crack wise except at the start. (Indeed it doesn't need to contain my username but it ought no longer include ZB's.)

Should I put one or both of these steps into effect at UN:BP? Edit the template as you see fit. Spıke Ѧ 15:38 21-Feb-13

I've made a couple of cosmetic changes to it, the light-heartedness of Uncyclopedia is very important as it is what stops us being the "Humorous Essays" category on Wikipedia and we should keep hold of the warnings at the end rather than moving them back into the text as a warning. I've also changed instances of the word "offender" to "user" as it sounds better and more friendly. Otherwise the template isn't a bad idea. Make sure it's protected when added, Ban Patrol itself should keep it's current protection level. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 08:28, February 22, 2013 (UTC)

Personal tools