User talk:EpicWinner

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 14:38, April 27, 2014 by ScottPat (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

edit Welcome!

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)

edit 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)

edit 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

edit {{Nicequote}}

Ditto.                               Puppy's talk page01:27 17 Sep

edit Racism

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 ¬ 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 ¬ 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)

edit I keep misreading…

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

edit 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) Uncyclopedia United 19:25, January 26, 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I get it, sorry and never mind! Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 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 ¬ 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 ¬ 19:50 26-Jan-14
Mini-review:
  • 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 ¬ 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 yourewinner.com 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 ¬ 21:44 26-Jan-14

edit 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 ¬ 02:19 1-Feb-14

edit User:EpicWinner/WINNER

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 ¬ 13:31 14-Feb-14

edit 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 ¬ 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)

edit Iraq

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 ¬ 22:25 21-Feb-14

edit Preview

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 ¬ 18:28 15-Mar-14

edit 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 ¬ 18:49 15-Mar-14

edit 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 ¬ 23:49 21-Apr-14

edit 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 ¬ 12:00 27-Apr-14

edit Faggot

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 ¬ 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)
Personal tools
projects