User talk:Abacab333

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Redirected from User talk:EpicWinner)
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, EpicWinner, and welcome to Uncyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If not, the door's right over there... no, a little more to your left... yeah. Anyway, here are a few good links for people like you:

If you read anything at all, make it the above three links. If you want to find out more about Uncyclopedia or need more help with something, try these:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being an Uncyclopedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or use the "sign" button (Button sig) above the edit box. This will automatically produce your name and the date.

At Uncyclopedia, writing articles is not a requirement, but it certainly is a fun and easy way to express your creativity. To write an article, it's recommended that you start it in your userspace (for example, User:EpicWinner/Article about stuff) so you can edit it at your leisure. If you decide to create it in the cold world of mainspace, make sure it is in accordance with the policies laid out above, and if you're not done put the "Work-In-Progress" template - {{construction}} - onto it as well.

If the current colonization doesn't suit your fancy, then browse our rewrite and idea categories. We have lots of articles just sitting around for someone to improve, so don't be afraid - dive right in!

If you need help, ask me on my talk page, ask at the Dump, or ask an administrator on their talk page. Additionally, the Uncyclopedian Adopt-a-Noob program is there to bring experienced editors straight to you. Simply leave a message on an adopter's talkpage to join. Again, welcome! Sir Todd GUN WotM MI UotM NotM MDA VFH AotM Bur. AlBur. CM NS PC (talk)

Barack Obama

I reverted your edit as I didn't add anything to the article. There are plenty of other articles out there that need work. New comers that dive straight into a contentious subject (like Obama or Islam for example) are watched closely in case the spray can comes out. You can always ask an admin (see above) for advice. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 14:03, July 25, 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to say that you might be interested in the "Preview" button. I see that several of your edits only changed the size of one picture. I recommend that you use the preview button for such edits, for it has several advantages: It makes the revision history easier to follow, and it doesn't clog up Special:RecentChanges. Also, I see you haven't given up on the Simpsons article... just be careful not to get into a revert war, although I've already left a note on Frosty's talkpage, because I think he shouldn't have reverted your previous edits, because the rollback tool, as I understand it, should only be used for reverting vandalism (except when an additional explanation is given, like how Romartus left a note on your talk page). But apparently, he doesn't "give a shit", so perhaps that means that you're free to do whatever you want. Have fun! Schamschi, 23:22, July 25, 2011 (UTC)

Barack Obama's birth

First: Don't get into a revert war, no matter what the reasoning is. Rollback is designed for removing vandalism, as it says above, but is also used when an edit is made that falls short of HTBFANJS. It's a quick way to undo edits. This particular article has been a vandal target in the past. I prefer to undo or revert edits first and them review them later. That's what I was doing when you reverted my change. This makes it very hard to view the changes in an unbiased light, and it's effectively just being a dick.

Second: I did review the changes, and I have only a minor concern. At the start you have a bundle of footnotes squeezed together on the one sentence. Even on Wikipedia - where sources matter - it's uncommon to see more than two sources for a point, and rarer still to see four. It's not a neater way of formatting. Beyond that, I have no objection with the changes, however this article was written by SPIKE, who has his own very strong feelings about political advocacy (when he doesn't agree with it) and he is likely to remove the edits. I'd suggest talking to him before he does revert the changes.

Third: Welcome to the site. Most of your edits have been really worthwhile. I'm happy to see you around. Just keep in mind that as a community we work on a fine line of civility and anarchy. Keeping things civil and open communication is important.                               Puppy's talk page01:15 17 Sep


Ditto.                               Puppy's talk page01:27 17 Sep


I've put an indication on the main page that there is new stuff to read here. Please avoid attributing quotes to "Generic YouTube commenter" and limit quotes to stuff a real person said, or would have said, or would not have said; not what Some guy would have said. This helps an article look more encyclopedic; more at UNQUOTE. Likewise Oscar Wilde, unless there is some reason, as when it is about Gaol or buggery. Attributing the same quote to a more specific person could provide additional laughs. The Kanye West quote is precise, but so overused that we have a whole Category about it. Spıke Ѧ 23:59 4-Nov-13

Sure thing. Also, I've tried to re-write the article from more of the viewpoint of a YouTube commenter/stereotypical libertarian, simply because a lot of the things they say ("Jews are responsible for all that is bad in America," "I'm not a racist but I hate most blacks, especially thugs like Trayvon who attack heroes like Zimmerman," "White geNOcide is coming," "RON PAUL 2012," "Hey LIBS, blacks commit most of the crimes and the Jew media doesn't even bat an eye") are just too funny to leave out, I'd say. If anything about the article is unfunny, feel free to edit it.--EpicWinner (talk) 00:15, November 5, 2013 (UTC)

(Moved your reply here for the benefit of anyone who might wander by a few years from now and want to see both sides of the conversation.) I haven't read it in detail--despite being the website's actual stereotypical Libertarian--but let me just warn that it poses a possible difficulty for the reader to write an article through an alternate persona. It is especially hard to take an extremist and caricature him (even from the point of view of a caricature of someone on the opposite extreme). Since extremists hold ridiculously extreme opinions, and say extreme things about their adversaries, it always winds up making the reader wonder if someone isn't trying to sneak in actual advocacy. Cheers to you if you can do it well, but my approach of choice is to switch to goofiness, puns, and wordplay when going after ideologies, races, and religions.

Regarding Barack Obama's birth and Puppy's comment above, I didn't talk to you during our tugging at this article, but it was not a matter of point-of-view. As I mentioned in the page history, I wrote this to try to give a panoramic view of the absurdities of Obama's birth claims (but also of the absurdity of his detractors), and I felt you were trying to stuff into it some material from an old version of Barack Obama that was doing something completely different. For that, it would be better to use one of our gazillion unused page titles. Even in this article, the narrator is not trying to make the reader guess that he is really Rush Limbaugh, but taking all the claims from both sides at face value with just enough hints that the reader will see that they are all crap. My favorite narration voice has no bias at all--just helpless myopia and sometimes unwarranted optimism. Spıke Ѧ 00:53 5-Nov-13

I nominated this on VFH as I love the humour. Thanks for the wonderful article. Sir ScottPat (talk) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 12:28, November 23, 2013 (UTC)

I keep misreading…

…your username as “EpicWeiner”. I probably need therapy.                               Puppy's talk page02:31 am 23 Nov 2013

Zelda CD-i

Why....Do you redirect mainspace articles to your one? Just leave make a "see also" section and paste a link there or insert the name of your article in a template connected to Games of Zelda. Anton (talk) 19:25, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I get it, sorry and never mind! Anton (talk) 19:26, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
Could the title be shorter [than CD-i games from The Legend of Zelda series‎‎]? This one sort of forces the reader to know exactly what he is looking for, even the medium (CD-I). Spıke Ѧ 19:40 26-Jan-14
The title of the article has been changed, per request. Also, would it be possible for you to offer suggestions or improvements to my article?--EpicWinner (talk) 19:46, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
I'll take a look. Pursuant to Anton, I assume that what you did was mostly merge existing articles into a single one. If you are replacing discarding all the text of established articles from the main encyclopedia, you should ask for a vote at VFD. Spıke Ѧ 19:50 26-Jan-14
  • No problem with the repackaging, given that you have redirects from the names of the individual games.
  • The initial template almost looks like a personal signature of yours, and I don't see what else it does. We don't sign articles, and you don't need a template to alert the world that you are the author.
  • WINNER and LOSER, while obviously exaggerated, detract from the neutral tone the writer of an "encyclopedia" article would take, and don't really deliver additional humor. I think a joke is better if it holds together without the added assertion that anyone else who doesn't agree/laugh is a LOSER.
  • In "decided to pool their resources"--change to "pooled their resources." The "encyclopedia" focuses on what happened, not their unknowable thought processes.
  • Where's the rest of Zelda's Adventure?
  • Ditch the template at the bottom; we don't care that you got some stuff from Wikipedia (or just use {{Wikipedia}}) and we don't want our readers sent to the .net site. Spıke Ѧ 19:57 26-Jan-14
  • The initial template was created for the Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing article, and I think it would be funny to refer to bad games as "WINNER" (in reference to the "YOU'RE WINNER !" trophy). There was a site called that I used to be a member of, that described the worst games ever as "WINNER" and acclaimed games as "LOSER."
  • An article for Zelda's Adventure had not been created when I merged the articles into one, probably because it's not as funny as the other two CD-i games.
P.S. Would it be at all necessary to mention that some critics *gasp* actually like the first two games?--EpicWinner (talk) 20:41, January 26, 2014 (UTC)
I am glad to read that WINNER relates to something — but that it relates to an in-joke on another website (a former website?) is not so compelling. If you believe the target audience is so likely to know about this that they will be amused, it's your call; but if not, you are writing to amuse yourself. On what it is "necessary to mention" — do so if and only if you can make it funny. This is why when we steal Infoboxes from Uncyclopedia, we modify them so that every field is optional, and no one writes stuff just because they "had to put something there." Do write something about Zelda's Adventure (how funny it is, is in your hands) because the stubby section looks incomplete. Spıke Ѧ 21:44 26-Jan-14

Shadow the Hedgehog

Almost all our articles use {{Q}} rather than {{Nicequote}} for initial quotations (and {{Cquote}} for paragraph-long quotations down inside the article. Your other edits look fine. Spıke Ѧ 02:19 1-Feb-14


This article is vanity and I have put it in your userspace for further work. Taking an obscure expression from a videogame and morphing it into a Wacky Religion or a proposed new website meme is fanboy boosterism, or part of a personal story-arc, that ought not be done in the main encyclopedia. We delete stuff like this all the time on VFD. Also: No pix. Spıke Ѧ 13:31 14-Feb-14

Barack Obama

Your reinsertion of the litany of footnotes with external references is an effort to document a case against Obama, not to amuse. I am no fan of Obama, but this stuff doesn't belong on this website and I have removed it. The final footnote in the litany emphasizes the absurd length of the list. Authors who remind the reader that they have just made a joke are amusing themselves and not the reader. Cheers! Spıke Ѧ 12:35 18-Feb-14

I agree with Spike on this. I think the references are over extended. Also, not a good idea to revert anyone without saying so if it isn't just vandalism or stupid edits.--LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:45, February 18, 2014 (UTC)


Your edit seems to be an improvement. (The old iRaq = iPad = iPhone joke got stale fast.) In addition, there are a few places in the article, including the Infobox, where the only humor seems to be forming a list that goes on for too long. Fix that too if you like. Spıke Ѧ 22:25 21-Feb-14


Hi; please remember to use the Preview button and click Save only at major stopping points, to minimize the "official" changes to be reviewed by our chimpanzees (see also Schamschi's post in Sec. 2 above). Happy editing! Spıke Ѧ 18:28 15-Mar-14

Rocko's Modern Life

On this article, however:

  1. Please avoid using Uncyclopedia to conduct a serious argument--in this case, that a network should have left on the air shows that you want to watch.
  2. If you can't avoid this, please avoid linking to external websites, even Wikipedia, in ways that do not amuse but provide citations or evidence for your argument.
  3. If you can't avoid this, please use the interwiki coding [[WP:article|article]] rather than a full URL, or else you will meet my snippy little notification message again. Cheers! Spıke Ѧ 18:49 15-Mar-14

Template Nicequote

Please join the discussion at User talk:PuppyOnTheRadio#Template Nicequote if you like. 12:37 19-Apr-14 Link is now corrected. Spıke Ѧ 23:49 21-Apr-14

Glenn Beck

There has been significant discussion about this in the past. The FA version is the better version, so is the one I'd want people to see when looking up Glenn Beck, or following a link. The other version barely survived deletion. There had been a huge amount of discussion of all this previously at VFD.

Because it's a significant change to a featured article (changing it's name), it really should be discussed before it happens. Also the page history should go with a page move. Now the history for what is at Glenn Beck is at Glenn Beck (Asshat). Which is why replacing an existing page with a new page should go through an admin, or at least a roll backer, so moves can be made without these issues.                               Puppy's talk page08:05 am 27 Apr 2014

I agree with all of the above. It's featured, its history is where anyone should look for it, and "Glenn Beck" is simpler to find than "The Glenn Beck Show" with a "The". I'll try to undo this. Spıke Ѧ 12:00 27-Apr-14


Please do not put {{Wikipedia}} at the start of the article, which has the effect of stacking it up beneath the photo. Instead, choose a good location lower on the page where it breaks up the text. Spıke Ѧ 12:28 27-Apr-14

While I get that the article refers to homosexuality, the instrument's actual name is a fagot. So that Uncyclopedia isn't accused of straining a pun perhaps we ought to move the page to fagot and redirect from faggot. Just a thought that's all. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:38, April 27, 2014 (UTC)

Philips CD-i

Hello! Please note that this article of yours survived Votes for deletion. No one voted that it was good, but two of us thought you might still be around enough to make it better. Please expand the fanboy tone to other comedy strategies, and note that no one else is as amused by WINNER and LOSER as you are. Spıke Ѧ 17:37 9-Aug-14


A lot of your new stuff is a show-by-show critique. I think our readers will not be interested in how crappy you think individual shows are, even if done with irony, unless the writing is especially good or there is a unifying theme. This is a humor wiki, not a TV blog; and there is no need to touch on every show they did. Cheers! Spıke Ѧ 00:56 31-Aug-14

Revising the Old...Come in the New?

You're not the first writer EpicWinner who is horrified at his first jottings on Uncyclopedia! Keep up the good revision work and stick around. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 17:50, July 18, 2015 (UTC)

Star Wars

Problem is...this was featured. I haven't checked too closely what you have changed but it sort of goes against the idea here that a featured article can only be changed to update it, remove some typos, image issues. I haven't reverted you yet as such but I don't mind you going to a forum to propose changes, what with the new Star Wars film coming out which does mean the article can be amended. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:18, July 18, 2015 (UTC)

Correction. You have blanked the other Stars Wars related articles. If you want to delete them, they should go to VFD. I will restore them as they were. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:32, July 18, 2015 (UTC)
Pssst, you forgot to sign your nomination for VFD (I do that all the time!). EStop:-- 19:28, July 19, 2015 (UTC)

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

Any particular reason you've re-added the extra <font> tags I removed? You should only need one encapsulating the whole block, not a new one for each line. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 11:00, July 20, 2015 (UTC)

Featured Articles

Hi EpicWinner. I want to repeat the earlier advice. Please do not hack around with featured articles! At the moment, we have the original Who article and your proposed replacement/enhancement. Can we leave it that for now. Feel free to go elsewhere or, better still, provide an article that is currently vacant (one of the Star Wars films for example). --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:32, July 24, 2015 (UTC)

Also, leave your reply here rather than going to my talk page. Best to keep the conversation subject in one place. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 10:33, July 24, 2015 (UTC)
OK, now you have a three day ban for hacking away at another featured article - George W. Bush. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 11:43, July 26, 2015 (UTC)

Keith Olbermann

  • Please use {{Q}} for quotations, not {{Nicequote}}, because we are a more coherent encyclopedia if different pages don't invent different styles. Also please read UNQUOTE and perhaps do not use quotations at all.
  • If you must use quotations, do not have a list, as this article did at the end, making the same joke over and over again (the fact that Olbermann once said "How dare you") until the reader is sick of it.
  • Images should come before quotes, because quotes don't have to go margin-to-margin.
  • If you must add {{Wikipedia}}, don't stack it up under a photo, but use it somewhere else in the article to split up a run of text.
  • You didn't have to, in this article, because this article already had one.
  • If you see red-links, remove the brackets, because the referenced articles don't exist. If you write them, you can add back the brackets later. Spıke Radiomicrophone17:17 25-Jul-15

We Must Really Talk About EpicWinner

Well probably not as you have 'earned' another ban for this time blanking an article and then sticking in a redirect. If you think an article should be deleted, send it to UN:VFD. Like my hair, my patience is wearing thin. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:08, July 29, 2015 (UTC)

Arthur (show)

Please do not make such huge sweeping changes to this article, which is still undergoing the voting process at VFH and a few other people already voted for in its current state. I kept a few of your edits that made sense to me, but I reverted the rest. Please ask before making a zillion changes to others' VFH articles, especially considering the amount of work I poured into cleaning it up in the first place. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 16:20, August 2, 2015 (UTC)

As add EpicWinner, leave the article alone unless you want to come back in September. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 16:56, August 2, 2015 (UTC)
Seconded. Feature nominees welcome copy-edits and corrections to grease the way to the main page--not total transformation. Spıke Radiomicrophone17:18 2-Aug-15


How many times have we asked you NOT to hack at Featured Articles?? You know, the ones with the message FEATURED in green on the left hand corner??? Since you have declined to talk to us about this I have no option but to block you for a month. Can't spend everyday checking all your edits. You'll understand if you ever make to be an admin somewhere else. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 11:20, August 5, 2015 (UTC)


I checked the edit history. The original article looked like this when it was featured - Wikipedia back in 2005. It appears it has been added to since then and changed around. I think the current featured version needs work - either to bring it back to more to what it was - or perhaps a removal of some of the junk stuff (the Vandalism section is too long in my view). It was also put through Imperial Colonization which probably brought in other sections we now see in the Wikipedia article. End result is the Wikipedia article is now something of a hybrid. I let your paragraph removal go as I couldn't see it in the original featured version. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:09, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

However, when an Admin reverts your changes, such as at Bill Cosby, with Change Summary "Don't edit featured articles," it means Don't edit featured articles, not even formatting, and no matter how "slightly uncomfortable" you find the text. Romartus was correct when he noted how tedious and time-wasting it is explaining the same things over again, and I am reinstating his one-month ban, hoping you spend some of it re-reading what we have asked you to do above on this page. Spıke Radiomicrophone12:46 9-Aug-15
Concur this time. Your edits EpicWinner seem to be more of a re-write than a change to make them better. Means we have to check ALL your edits everytime to see what you're up to. Also you had another go at a featured article (however poor the current version currently stands) when I asked you not to. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:06, August 9, 2015 (UTC)

Tags in templates

Don't screw with templates, especially to impart the style you prefer to dozens of pages. The <SMALL> tag must be countered by a closing </SMALL> tag or the resulting template will break every page on which it is used. Moreover, <SMALL> has been deprecated for years in favor of <DIV STYLE="text-size: small" ...>. Spıke Radiomicrophone00:42 10-Sep-15

Republican Party

Thank you for curtailing that long list! However, be careful to crack wise about the Republican Party independent of what it (says it) believes in, so as not to alienate readers who believe the same thing (or believe the opposite). The biggest comedy plum from my standpoint is the chronic failure, repeated in the current Congress, for what the Party says it believes in, to rise to the level of doing anything about it. That we all can laugh at. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:19 15-Sep-15


By all means, remove links to YouTube from our articles. Authors should entertain our readers rather than direct them elsewhere. But don't just surround the links with <nowiki so that the reader sees ugly raw HTML code. Spıke Radiomicrophone09:42 17-Sep-15

The Joy of Painting

Good proofreading and edits today! But this last one is bad:

  • No one knows/remembers/cares is a worn-out comedy strategy. That Ross has made everyone forget about Alexander might merit full development later on (along with stating a reason why this came to be). But if no one remembers Alexander, he is just a distraction appearing in the Intro.
  • Get rid of the nonsense numbers. Number of seasons is impossible, and number of episodes has nothing funny about it except being so obviously stupid that it puts the reader on guard.
  • You must have read my note to Chunkles — but you think RAMBo is funny?
  • Renowned, not renown. Spıke Radiomicrophone23:47 21-Sep-15
Rambo is not that funny to me.--EpicWinner (talk) 23:54, September 21, 2015 (UTC)

I like your latest edit. But the movie is never described later on, only the video game. You going to get to it?

Regarding controversy, was Ross ever called before Congress to speak to a massacre in a clandestine American military operation? Did he reply that we had to destroy the jungle village of Serendipity in order to save it? During the years of the broadcast, it might have been Grenada or Nicaragua. Spıke Radiomicrophone00:10 22-Sep-15

I'd rather remove the movie, considering the video game is at least based in half-truth.--EpicWinner (talk) 00:13, September 22, 2015 (UTC)


  1. Please also vote on other people's nominations, to reduce the backlog.
  2. Take care not to raise the total of active ballots above 20 because a ban is mandatory.
  3. Put the # on a new line, which makes it easier to count them in case someone screws up the score. Spıke Radiomicrophone01:18 22-Sep-15
  4. Such as yourself just now. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:49 22-Sep-15

Hillary Clinton

Your post-edits are mostly valid; I reverted a small bit of them. However, mine are designed to bring this Featured Article up-to-date. You are welcome to do likewise, but it is not open season to re-cast the article. Spıke Radiomicrophone01:38 23-Sep-15

One-month ban reinstated

See Sec. 18 and Sec. 20 and Sec. 24 and Sec. 25 and Sec. 31 of your user page. Spıke Radiomicrophone20:14 25-Sep-15

Changed ban down a day. This is irritating EpicWinner. Your other ideas are not so bad but you know from the Fork too that changing stuff on featured articles unless it is to update or remove an obvious type/error or to add a category (within reason) is a no-no. Repeat. NO-NO!!!. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:37, September 25, 2015 (UTC)

James T. Kirk

We have two of you trying to transform the same Uncyclopedia article. It is essential that you synchronize. Please read Section 6 of Talk:James T. Kirk. Spıke Radiomicrophone23:12 1-Oct-15

Caitlyn Jenner

Hi, I noticed this was Hyperbole's article at the Fork. Did you ask him at the Fork about importing this here? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:03, October 3, 2015 (UTC)

He's not active right now, so no. I thought that it would be ok since there's no real copyright laws and sporking is a common practice. That being said, I plan to take the article in a different/more original direction.--EpicWinner (talk) 21:16, October 3, 2015 (UTC)
Back in January 2013 I agreed with RAHB (and no one has objected since) not to do this sporking business between the two Uncs. All writers can move their own material between both sites but not other peoples work. Otherwise it looks like misappropriation in my view. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:16, October 3, 2015 (UTC)
I honestly didn't know. If you want, feel free to delete it.--EpicWinner (talk) 23:18, October 3, 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I will remove it once I come up with a replacement this week. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:18, October 5, 2015 (UTC)


All active users! Check the articles waiting to be featured! --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:44, October 5, 2015 (UTC)


"Rewrite from the POV of an angry conservative" (your Edit Summary) is very hard to pull off well, and is very likely to be advocacy. Adding links to Conservapedia and other external sources in order to illustrate in their own words how funny (=stupid) conservatives are, is definitely advocacy. Write funny stuff, don't make a case, especially in a key article such as this; do not set out to ridicule about half of your audience. See Extremists. Also, do not use {{Nicequote}}. Spıke Radiomicrophone20:39 10-Oct-15

Personally, I feel as though the whole "dude fundies/Bush/Fox News/Southerners lmao" style of humor has become trite, and "stop oppressing me"/"easily-triggered liberal" jokes have become more 'hip', so to speak. I thought the article reflected the former more than the latter, and changed it to "get with the times", so to speak. Feedback is welcome.--EpicWinner (talk) 21:05, October 10, 2015 (UTC)

I took a stab at this, but the whole thing sucks. Approaches that don't work include:

  • Conservatives are ridiculous
  • Hi, I am a stereotype liberal who stupidly claims that conservatives are ridiculous
  • Hi, I am a stereotype conservative whining ridiculously about liberals.

The start, ridiculing Schlafly of Conservapedia, is cyberbullying not humor. In my opinion, the right approach would be to make fun of the seeming inconsistencies in conservatism, how conservatives find they have to vote Republican and never get conservatism, for example favoring the interests of business and seeing it implemented as cash payments to specific business cronies, and maybe specific cases of hypocritical conservatives, but done to look like irony and not bitter ridicule. If any reader stops reading and wonders which side you are on and how you are trying to change his mind, your humor has failed. If you ever add an external link in an article like this, you are throwing evidence at your reader and not trying to make him laugh, even if you laugh at how stupid the people at the link are. Mentioning Conservapedia at all involves us in a Wiki War. I quote Poe's Law in the article linked to above: "Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism...that someone won't mistake for the real thing." I did, before and after your edits. Spıke Radiomicrophone01:37 12-Oct-15

Bill Cosby and two-week ban

Please see Sec. 25 above. Do not edit Featured Articles means do not edit Featured Articles. You are not the only person on this website and you are not free to re-do any article as you see fit. Spıke Radiomicrophone02:18 13-Oct-15

FA's bis

I had it out with Lucifuge Rofacale on the same topic of adding new directions to a Featured Article, as he tried to lard up FA Rick Santorum with initial quotations and stuff.

If you followed the Democrats' debate yesterday, you might want to reach out to brand-new Uncyclopedian Abcdefghi76543, who is starting an article on Lincoln Chafee in his userspace. Maybe he would collaborate. As it is a userspace article, don't go in without his permission. This is also a rule. Spıke Radiomicrophone00:58 15-Oct-15


Please reread Section 30 above. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:46 15-Oct-15

All right, I'll spell it out for you. The template leaves a blank line so you can type the # to start your vote at the start of the blank line. Not butted up against the = sign. That makes it easier to count # signs. Spıke Radiomicrophone18:20 15-Oct-15


I recreated this article from scratch. The article this used to link to was deleted at VFD. The new version is a straight-faced misinterpretation of the Wikipedia article. Your injection of a two-paragraph ranty parade of stereotypes from "the deleted version" (gotten from another website, presumably) does not fit. I know you have to have your fingerprints on everything, but you are vandalizing this article. Spıke Radiomicrophone23:06 20-Oct-15

Amy Rose

In my opinion, your new section Reception needs work. All-capital-letters breaks the encyclopedia frame and adds nothing; likewise the use of the first person. Separately, "Gender representation" a-k-a feminist hypocrisy has been played to death. Spıke Radiomicrophone01:55 22-Oct-15

Can you unlock Template:Sonic so I can add links to the new article?--EpicWinner (talk) 03:01, October 22, 2015 (UTC)

Reading my memo on the template, I have just done it myself. By the way, do you listen, or just talk? Spıke Radiomicrophone03:07 22-Oct-15

Listen. I'll remove the Tumblr part and the all-caps.--EpicWinner (talk) 03:08, October 22, 2015 (UTC)
I also created the article Miles "Tails" Prower; could you add that as well?--EpicWinner (talk) 03:16, October 22, 2015 (UTC)

Guess that answers that. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:22 22-Oct-15

I would also request that you change the header "Sonic the Hedgehog characters" to "Sonic the Hedgehog series", since this article goes beyond the concept of the series' characters.--EpicWinner (talk) 03:31, October 22, 2015 (UTC)

Rouge The Bat

I see you like doing Sonic the Hedgehog stuff, so maybe an idea for you is to create a Rouge The Bat article. It's listed on the first page of Special:Wantedpages and could fix a lot of red links. Just a suggestion. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 04:04, November 8, 2015 (UTC)

In fact, you have one in your userspace. Lowercase "the", please. Spıke Radiomicrophone04:18 8-Nov-15


EpicWinner. I have restored you back to active service BUT BUT BUT PLEASE LEAVE ALONE FEATURED ARTICLES!!!! I don't know how many times I have said this and others have reminded you also. I know you hate some of the featured stuff here - and I agree, some of it is pretty awful. But that is how the site works. Those who were active then liked it and that is part of the history of this website. If you want to bring up a discussion as regards a particular featured article - run it via Village Dump. Comprende? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 09:01, November 12, 2015 (UTC)

Revert war, you lose

Whether it is Robin Williams, Tails the Gay, or Sailor Jupiter, some of your edits have not improved articles but sanitized them to avoid disparagement of your personal cartoon heroes. Romartus resurrected you in order to play-act about his exasperation. I am not exasperated. You are not adding humor. 03:13 PS--To be clear: replacing "a barrage of insults and sex jokes" with a coherent comedy strategy is a way forward. Replacing them with a matter-of-fact presentation with no comedy strategy at all is not. ConCass2 made the same complaint last night regarding pages he was working on. Part of the problem is that you seem to be keying off RecentChanges and thus not attacking pages most in need of help but pages most with a live editor on the other end (as with editing Feature Articles), which if it is not trolling or attention-seeking looks curiously the same. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:38 16-Nov-15

I see what you're saying, but he's actually not my hero and not trying to "preserve his good name" or something like that. The humor of the article, to me, comes from the fact that people will worship, glorify, and idolize any average celebrity after their deaths.--EpicWinner (talk) 05:36, November 16, 2015 (UTC)

No, the suggestion that the way to understand your contribution is that it is through the eyes of a hypothetical alternative fan-boy voice, rather than that you are that voice trying to sanitize this article of other authors' humor, is lost on me. Spıke Radiomicrophone05:55 16-Nov-15

Fair enough. Would it be okay if I at least cut down on the unfunny/random cruft jokes (ones about him eating babies or being married to Fonzie)?--EpicWinner (talk) 06:06, November 16, 2015 (UTC)

Samus Aran

I brought back the infobox, because it helps make the article look more encyclopedic (which is a good thing because we're a Wikipedia parody). Rather than being so quick to indiscriminately rip out stuff just because you don't like it, perhaps look into improving it, which would be a better use of your time than rewriting and re-rewriting and re-re-rewriting other parts of the article for change's sake.
(P.S. I also brought back the Zero Suit picture for the second time now, because a simple "I don't like this picture" is not a sufficient reason to kill a caption joke corroborating what's in the text. I'll be honest, I'm patient to a fault, but I'm starting to get tired of fighting with you over things like this.) Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 14:54, November 20, 2015 (UTC)

(Replying here because I don't want to keep bouncing between talk pages.) As for the video game history you sporked from a foreign Uncyclopedia, I'm not willing to re-add it. One reason is that we already have a history of the games at the main Metroid article, a second is that it didn't add much in terms of humor (as you admitted, it was quite "unfinished" in quality), and a third is that I can't be bothered to finish fleshing out material for you upon request. If you're not willing to put in the effort yourself to make a quality contribution to the article on your own, then don't add it and expect someone else to clean up your mess. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 15:10, November 20, 2015 (UTC)
Re-adding the sporked material a third time was not a correct response. You are costing us effort from our featured writers. Please take the weekend off. Spıke Radiomicrophone15:39 20-Nov-15

8-hour ban

I banned you for the weekend for seriously annoying a good and funny writer. You returned and immediately resumed editing right under people's noses, including a couple newbies who might not have appreciated it. Some of your edits convert to house style, some of them break it (as in stacking illustrations and using non-standard quotation templates), and some of them simply suck the humor out of articles. No one is coming here to read Whoopi Goldberg because they want to know her birth name, or because they want an accurate description of her acting roles. Perhaps, as with Tails, Sailor Jupiter, and other cartoon characters, you simply believe no one should make sport of Whoopi Goldberg at all. Unfortunately, this is a humor wiki, which also means a group writing project. A humble beginning would be to contact the authors of the articles you intend to chop up and see if they want your help, unless you don't want to collaborate but merely to have everyone pay attention to you. Spıke Radiomicrophone04:07 24-Nov-15

I note with dispair that before the day is out you are barred again. Having given every good reason not to edit a fearutred article, one of your first actions on return is to edit a nominated article right under the editor, who is an admin. It is not a good sign when bureaucrats start to question your motive. Looking at the history of your talk page, the thread throughout is a mix of good copyediting and cruft removal and requests to leave the humor alone and not touch featured articles. The freedom of editing here is on the basis that everyone understands their limitations and fits into the community through that and an implied amount of respect. By your own admission you are not a funny writer, therefore that is not a stregnth, therefore you should not be looking to change funny writing. I am not a detail person so a crap copy-editor, that is why I do not copy-edit or proof read.
There has to be an understanding and respect that other people are taking their own time to do this. There work is precious to them, or they would not be taking up their spare time doing it. Good editors will be pleased at an improvement such fixing links, spelling and punctuation, but will get pissed pretty quickly if every time they log on, their articles have been played with and not in a good way. Courtesy dictates if an editor is working on an article, leave them to it unless it is obvious cruft, in which case you discuss it on their talk page. Likewise if you see something you think could be better, it gets people communicating.
Please apply your skills where they are needed! Removing cruft, crufty articles and improvement work on articles that are not being edited is the best help. Almost all of the editors at the moment are working on such articles. If you want to copy-edit "active" articles, ask first and keep it to formatting. You are no help if people have to take time to revert you, it neutralises all the good work you do before hand.  EStop Easy button 11:56, November 24, 2015 (UTC)

Okay, back into the brig for another shift. Your first edit back is to go back to the current work of the author you annoyed, though he was nice enough not to express his annoyance except as relief after I banned you. And your edit, apart from rearranging a photo, on which Chunkles is perfectly able to get the layout the way he wants it (and might have different screen dimensions from yours) is to change one of his British spellings to American. You can make the case that Bradbury is an American so American spelling is appropriate here, but it's not crucial, not distracting to the reader as would be British spelling in, say, U.S. Constitution. So the fallback rule is to make the work hang together. Chunkles is a Brit and that is the way he is going to write. Changing the style globally would require talking to the author, which you don't seem to feel you have to do. And you can argue that you didn't get around to reading any of the above, but you should have, first. Spıke Radiomicrophone12:30 24-Nov-15

Actually, I'm American. But changing spellings between American and British is just not worth the time. Either way is acceptable, so they should be left alone as originally written (unless the article in question deliberately needs to use one way or the other; this is not one of those times). Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 20:06, November 24, 2015 (UTC)
EpicWinner...sigh....You have racked up one of the longest charge sheets of bans which I am sure will challenge the record held by a former user called Cajek. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:45, November 24, 2015 (UTC)

I have told you elsewhere and I will tell you again here. Another thing that "is just not worth the time" is replacing double spaces after periods with single spaces. It makes no difference in terms of how the page is rendered. Those of us who learned to type on typewriters use double spaces. There is no reason to "correct" this except to be a dick. Spıke Radiomicrophone22:05 25-Nov-15

I know that double-spacing is what some users prefer, but I noticed that parts of the article written by other users used single-spacing. Since single-spacing seems to be more "standard", I wanted to keep the page consistent. Should I have made it all double-spaced?--EpicWinner (talk) 22:08, November 25, 2015 (UTC)

The difference does not matter. The page does not need to be consistent in either direction regarding things that do not appear in the rendering. Spıke Radiomicrophone22:20 25-Nov-15

You are done here

Each of your last two bans you have evaded by posting to my talk page without logging on. As I told you, a ban means you do not participate in the life of the wiki for the duration of the ban. During this last ban, you created the sockpuppet Chip Brown to evade the ban.

You also opened a two-minute hate at another website to whine about your treatment here, another schoolchild move. They indulged you only because you fed their favorite tactic (portraying my attitude as the problem) and their strategy (ruin this website).

Today, after consultation with me, Admin EStop doubled your ban, as called for in UN:BAN, for creating a sockpuppet. You seem to have appealed to Wikia to get your name changed to this one. You are not coming back here, under any name. You will not follow the rules; when told what they are, you offer excuses or devise clever new ways to evade them. You are wasting everyone's time. Spıke Radiomicrophone01:46 13-Dec-15

Personal tools