User talk:Gwax/Archive01

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< User talk:Gwax
Revision as of 18:22, April 21, 2011 by Gwax (talk | contribs)

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


Did you mean to remove an older VFP nomination or was it a mistake? --—rc (t) 00:27, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I removed the older one because I figured it might be considered poor form to be pushing for two VFP, both by my and like the newer one more. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 01:29, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

All right then. There aren't any guidelines or anything about self-nomination, though. Theoretically, you could nominate every image on your hard drive if you wanted to. I wouldn't recommend it, however. --—rc (t) 02:57, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)
I did. See every featured image. =P PS. I really enjoyed the Whorecraft article, and also had fun making that image for it. Let me know if you need any more! --Strong RadX 03:03, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Seriously. Also, I really like the image; it's totally swank. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 03:08, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, my number of featured images is becoming kind of a running gag. But that's what I do around here. I haven't written an article in weeks. Besides, someone has to process and fulfill all of those image requests! Also, I had a much lamer version of that image, and was about to upload it, but then I decided to not be so lazy. =) I'm glad I did! --Strong RadX 03:14, 16 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Redirect cleanup

After a move, any redirects that are no longer needed (or only have one or two links to them and are easy to make unneeded by changing the links to the new target), please put on the QVFD so we can delremove them. Also check for double redirects (though that is intuitive and you probably know *grin*). Going to the newly moved page and clicking What links here makes finding unused and double a snap. Cheers. --Splaka 23:11, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Followup, for something like Freshman Physics the only link to the redirect is from Physics, so changing the link to bypass the redirect, and then QVFDing the redirect would be good. --Splaka 23:34, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I get it, and have done so with my recent moves. I will also go and do so with some of my older moves too. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 23:36, 25 Oct 2005 (UTC)


Why exactly are you editing the shortcut boxes on pages to have the prefix UN:? Okay, maybe there's a joke in that it makes the shortcut longer, but it's impractical. The old shortcuts are fine. --—rc (t) 06:23, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Why goes a little like this: I saw this Shortcut thing in the corner and tried to figure out what it was and why it was linking to wikipedia. Then I realized that all it was was something so that you could say what some of the short redirects to a site are, which would be keen if it auto created redirects to match shortcuts, but since it doesn't is retarded. Then, on top of that it's encouraging people to use up perfectly good acronyms. So, getting pissed off at how retarded the things are and since they seem to have been ripped, verbatim from wikipedia, I thought that I'd have a little fun and make them less useful and more like the wikipedia versions, which all start with WP:foo. For the most part, I think it means that Shortcuts will serve their purpose in Uncyclopedia core cases (eg. UN:HELP, UN:VFP, etc.) but discourage people from haphazardly putting up Shortcuts on every page. In short, I don't mind seeing them on things with long or hard to spell names, but JC > Original Jesus is unnecessary. Also, I figured going and destroying all of them would be uncouth. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 06:34, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Though, in thinking a little more about it, maybe I'm being a little overzealous. Perhaps, it should only be UN:foo is shortcuts for Uncyclopedia:foo. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 06:36, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

FAQ and CP are examples of things that could serve better purposes than Shortcuts. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 20:06, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)


Template:MTUsign was correct as it was, please don't mess with highly used templates without understanding them. --Splaka 20:08, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)

My most sincere apologies, I missed the fifth ~ in the instructions and have been misusing MTUsign, I will try to be more careful in the future. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 20:13, 26 Oct 2005 (UTC)


I changed the image on the split template because it was on the request page and I was bored. I'm not sure if you'd already switched it to a better one and the request just wasn't taken down, or if I was actually supposed to change it. Anyways, take a look at the template Template:Split and pick which one you like better! It doesn't matter to me. --Keitei 19:26, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I liked your image, but I decided that it should be splitified some more, hence the new Template:Split images. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 06:45, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Ahahaha. Brilliant! --Keitei 06:59, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Why did you...

put a conversation for the village dump, into Template:Vdtop ??????? --Splaka 00:04, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Because I'm an idiot and the shortcut confused me. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 00:07, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, you also broke Template:Quote (now fixed). Also you've created a bunch of Special:DoubleRedirects moving Homestar Runner stuff around (you said you'd look after that last time, ahem!). Also you removed an admin's addition to the VFD. You contribute usefully most of the time, but some edits lately seem overzealous and questionable. Please doublecheck with some people (in the IRC channel for example) before moving a page again, and check template usage (what links here) before editing. --Splaka 23:48, 17 Nov 2005 (UTC)
The Template:Quote error was the result of a typo while trying to copy the layout from Template:Q; I should have checked that it functioned after changing it. The Homestar related bit was already a mess as far as naming/redirects go and I was trying to do a quick fix of things and get around the fact that I couldn't move one page to the location of an existing redirect. So as far as those sorts of things are concerned, I should slow down and make sure that what I'm doing works globally instead of just looking right locally; sorry about my bad habits, I'm working on them. As for the VFD, your use of overzealous is apt, my bad. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 00:04, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Igpay Atinlay

Just read through Igpay Atinlay.....after a while its quite easy to read. :) Just wanted to say I enjoyed it really....big bucket of kudos coming your way -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)

Thanks --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 15:59, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Kitten Huffing

  • Gwax,
With all due respect, if you disagree with a picture (to the point you don’t believe it belongs on any article on Uncyclopedia), and don't feel it should be discussed on either the talk page or the user's page could you at least nominate it for VFD ? Unfortunately with all the unused images I place, it's particularly frustrating to find more then half of them re-orphaned the next day. If it's that bad a good caption can't solve then by all means send it to VFD. MadMax 02:16, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
In general, I would agree with you, but in this case, I brought the matter up on #uncyclopedia and there was fairly general consensus that the image was crap. Additionally, it was a really poor image that has been put back on Kitten Huffing multiple times after multiple removals by different people. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 02:21, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Yes, we discussed it on IRC. And since I deleted it, it shouldn't be orphaned anymore. Problem solved! --—rc (t) 03:07, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)
Fair enough. :) MadMax 04:08, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for telling me about the stressometer script! Regards, Dennis DaMenace. DaMenace 09:09, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)

No problem. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 09:12, 22 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Gwax.....looks like you're in charge of sorting out the NinjaStar. I've edited the Brown NinjaStarFish section in line with my original idea for the award. Would appreciate your thoughts. :) -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)

Cool, I caught the colloquialism but I didn't really have any idea what you're intentions were. I'm going to rewrite it a little to combine your stuff with mine and if you want to go in and make any changes after that, it's aok by me. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 01:22, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)
What do you think of using "this" on the NinjaStar page....or perhaps you have a better wording for it? Any ideas are most welcome. :) -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)
I kind of like it but I don't know exactly how it'd fit in with the rest of the ninjastar stuff. It's the sort of thing that I think could have served as an alternative way of doing ninjastars. If you have any decent ideas for integration, let me know (ninjastars talk might be a better place for it). --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 07:35, 26 Nov 2005 (UTC)


You get the "This user is better than you award" for being better than me at HTML and CSS.


Its a crappy award, because it was just meant to make fun of all the awards there are. However, it seemed fitting for the situation. --Paulgb 01:19, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

H-O-double-T; thanks. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 01:25, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Goatse Ninjastar

Errm, thanks for that. But I really didn't intend for you to have to use the goatse guy's actual hands. You poor bastard! That must have been the most uncomfortable Photoshop job in history. You do know that you could have got the hands from here or here for example? -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 11:58, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, with a big eraser brush, it was only painful for about 5-10 seconds. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:02, 23 Nov 2005 (UTC)

You Rox

I <3 boobs you. Thanks for cleaning up VFD for us.--Sir Flammable KUN 00:31, 27 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Oh man what happened to Image:Attack_of_the_tarsier.JPG?

Ran across Grue and noticed that Image:Attack_of_the_tarsier.JPG had been changed, not the image in the article, the actual image itself. Your new image is ok but the original that User:Unfreakkingtitled posted (which I put in Grue) was so horribly terrible, so mind numbingly crappy that it was funny all by itself. Please consider reverting it or putting it back.

Better yet, put both on VFD for a vote on which one stays. (No need to reply especially if you aren't going to do anything) Wiki Tiki God 06:37, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Whilst I admit that my replacement isn't great, I'm inclined to believe that the original was pretty poor. If you want to bring the matter up for a more general discussion, feel free, though I think VFD is very much the wrong place to do so (the Village Dump perhaps?). --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 08:01, 1 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Bears vs. Unicorns

Why shrink the Bears vs. Unicorns Conflict pic? You can't see the detail now without clicking on it. --Schnuggle Bear! 23:12, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

That's the general idea of the way clicking on images in a wiki works. You include images as thumbnails to augment an article and then if people want to look at the image in greater detail, they click it. Thumbnails are fantastic for decreasing clutter like that. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 23:15, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, but that's either a bogus reply or you're missing the point. What I'm saying is that at 200px you can't even tell they're unicorns. I could see 360px or maybe even 320px, but at 200px it reduces the impact of the whole article to practially nil, zero, nada. And if you've got some sort of thing about thumbnails, why not just remove the "400px" completely? (Admittedly, that would be worse.) What you did just seems really capricious to me... So if I did something earlier that offended you, I'd love to know what it is. Or was. --Schnuggle Bear! 00:56, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
It certainly wasn't a matter of ill will, it's just that giant images on a page tend to annoy me because I take the view that the image is there for the page's edification not the other way around. Now, admittedly, I may be a bit over opinionated sometimes, but that's me and since this is apparently an issue you are more willing to fight over, I will cede victory to you with no hard feelings. I've increased the image size back to 400px. I still think the article needs a lot of work though. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 04:51, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Don Quijote

The original spelling of the name is actually Don Quijote. Don Quixote is the french version and not the spanish one. Why the french version is the one taken into english and other languages (even hebrew) is a mistery to me. Anyway i appreciate a lot that you tried to thelp me, as i am new around here. I would also apreciate a lot any comment or critic on my cervantes article, on any of my other articles (Miguel de Cervantes, Faery Kingdom, Jewish history). I guess i still have to add a couple of pics to each one. The jewish history is very long, so i recommend mainly the first chapter, the other jewish kings and first foreign conquerors chapters. My goal is to become January's noob of the month. Thanx again, user:Rataube

Your Babel Table

I commend you for having one of the largest and most imposing Uncyclopedia:Babel tables I have ever seen. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (

Thanks, I do what I can. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 23:11, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)


That Clarkson page will probably get huffed—it sucks. I love that seal though (and still would, even if I hadn't been born and raised in Flin Flon, Manitoba). -- T. (talk) 16:04, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Thanks; that seal makes me glad that someone beat me to MIT. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 16:14, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Dude, I was in Winnipeg this summer, staying at Red River College. Yeah, they got a red river up in Canada. And people asked where I was from and when I said "MIT" they said, "oh, you're local?" Because I guess it used to be called manitoba in... yeah, you get the idea. -- NO COOL USERNAME

you know it.

What is this place

This place is where you can tell me what I'm doing right, or more likely, wrong and I will think about what you say and possibly respond. I might also explain my motivations.

Alternatively, This is a place where you can shoot the shit with me.

I have heard that Shit Shooting is going to be included in the next Olympics -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me)

Yeah, but I hear they're planning on using the International Rules and I've never really liked the way the International Rules deal with over-time. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 15:59, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Just Rewards

Just so you know.....I've put your name forward for SysOp, hopefully enough people will see the great work you're doing on, particularly on the TimeLine. Good luck. :) -- Sir Mhaille Icons-flag-gb (talk to me) 21:27, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 21:29, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Campaign Posters

She was there when the poster making flurry happened and she's around IRC more, so she ended up on top. Regardless, you're both the only candidates that are on IRC regularly, therefore I must throw more support behind you two. Dawg.gif » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 07:27, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)

You didn't like my Girls?

You didn't like my picture of the girls? :-(

Nope, it didn't really fit the feel of the article, methinks. Also, it's generally considered good form to sign talk page posts, Electrostatic. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 15:58, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)


Hi. Why did you NRV-tag this article?--Suresh 17:43, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Because the only thing I find remotely funny about it is the Oscar Wilde quote, and that's only slightly amusing. You can of course, feel free to improve it and then remove the nrv. Or, if you think I'm just plain wrong, feel free to change it to vfd and put it up for discussion there. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 17:48, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I think it is hilaroius and I will not change it. I will put it to VFD, argument for it and remove the NRV-banner.--Suresh 17:51, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for being so reasonable about it. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 17:54, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the thank you (Gödel Incompleteness Theorem Warning). But where do I argue for it? --Suresh 17:57, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Argue at Uncyclopedia:Pages_for_deletion#Clairvoyance. For future reference, after adding the vfd template, you should add an entry at the top of the of Uncyclopedia:Pages_for_deletion (I have already done so in this case). --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:01, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)
On vfd, it is generally a good, idea to be very clear about your vote (note the minor modification I made to your vote). --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:09, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I hesitated to vote on my own article. You put me straight there. I'm quite intrigued by this anarchic site's meritocratic ways to intermix the authoritarian principle with an absolute decentralism. Sort of. I'll follow our squabble with great interest. --Suresh 18:31, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a bit like an oligarchy, where the admins listen the everyone else. As for voting for your own article, you should pretty much always do so because it presents a support base and allows you a soap box to explain why you think something is worth saving or some award or something. Just watch how things work and you'll be up to speed on the way things are done real quick-like. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:41, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)


"(damnit Todd, numbers point to years; there is a disambiguation note on 1)"

Just trying to fix the double redirects. And as I'm sure you're well aware, just about every text reference of the number 42 has zero to do with the (non-existant) year. -- T. (talk) 23:40, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I'll look into it after dinner. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 23:43, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)
No need. The redirect problem remains fixed even with your reversion. -- T. (talk) 23:48, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, and it'll take me way too long to sort through all the incorrect links; other people can fix them when they notice (this being a wiki and all). --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 00:30, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
You'd probably have to do it yourself. The 42 joke will not be easily confined by the Timeline's rather arbitrary labeling of numbers vs. years. -- T. (talk) 01:43, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
We'll see, but for now I have waaaaay too many other things I need to do anyway. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 02:18, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

"Cleaning up" STD's

I'm going to be cleaning up the STD articles... Decided to start with a new template. Hope to turn them into a coherent category soon. --Electrostatic 15:52, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I like the template, it's mighty high quality, but I have a quick suggestion: you might consider remaking the template with two images flanking text (remove the pink center) so that you can wikify Pope, STD, condoms and the like. As to making STDs coherant, by all means, please; coherancy is something that we need a lot more of on Uncyclopedia. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 16:07, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I was already thinking of what you said about the text, but it will take some time to get it to look right... I'll let you know when it works. --Electrostatic 16:30, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keen --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 17:48, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

"Style Joke"

What's wrong with the word "pastiche"? It's the correct term, it would make the category name a lot shorter, and it would be less likely to be confused with other types of style jokes. You could leave the template itself as-is, obviously. Anyway, just a suggestion, feel free to ignore. --Fred Larsen 18:42, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Wait, what? I didn't remove the word pastiche from anywhere; what are you talking about? --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:44, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
You misunderstand - all I meant was that instead of "Category:Articles about a person written in the style of that person," you could shorten it to just "Category:Pastiche" just so it wouldn't be as lengthy. Also, "Template:Style joke" could be "Template:Pastiche" and it wouldn't be confused with other types of style jokes. I didn't mean to imply that you changed anything. --Fred Larsen 18:47, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Ah, ok; I was just fixing the grammar on that template because it annoyed me on a page I saw. This is a wiki though, so feel free to make those changes yourself (they seem reasonable to me). If you need any help, feel free to ask. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:55, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Sercia, whatever the hell that is

I agree with your actions regarding the crap that is sovereign nation of Sercia as noted on both VFD and User talk:Bobo. I wonder, though, if it might be a good idea to restore the discussion of the topic at VFD? I went back in the history and read your comments and came away edified (and a little hungry, but that's probably not related). I think it would be helpful for the Teeming Masses to see us discussing the issue -- this could help keep them from thinking we admins are a bunch of fun-hating killjoy despots. That may be what we are, but we don't want the rabble to find out, do we? Good thing nobody but you can read this page, but just to be safe, I'll run this comment through a couple of rounds of ROT13 encryption. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] Prince%21.gif 19:46, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

That is a good idea, by all means put it back on VFD and leave it there for a few days.. I think you ran it through ROT13 one too many times there Bob; you compromised the encryption. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 20:09, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, I'll try quadruple ROT13 next time. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] Prince%21.gif 20:36, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I don't know if this ROT13 encryption even works, I'm going to try octuple encryption and see if I can get anything. Also, you just gave me this beautiful idea. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 20:44, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)


Just wondering, I was playing the Zork game, and noticed it was impossible to win (DUH) when I Looked at Category:Zork, I noticed hundreds of pages... how the hell do I get to them in Zork? I mean, everywhere except North and South lead to immediate death, and even in North and south it's impossible to go anywhere but the house, and the forest. So wtf? Were the links deleted? Or am I just missing something? MrMooCow 00:32, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

You're just missing something. Or maybe they're part of Zork2. KATIE!! 00:35, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Nope, they're not. There's a seperate Zork2 category. And I know I'm not mising anything... really. South leads to a house where everything kills you, north leads you to a cupboard, which does nothing, and eventually you have to go into a yard, and everything in the Yard leads to instant death. So I don't know what any of the links are... MrMooCow 00:55, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Keitei is right, there most certainly is more to the game than you're seeing. Unless someone has broken Zork since I last played it, it is possible to get to pretty much all of those pages. In fact, there is a way to win the game, I know this because I have done so but it took me at least an hour to so do. There is a lot of crap and it probably should be cleaned up a bit. I guarantee that there is more than you're seeing. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 03:57, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

NRV question

If I add a {{NRV|~~~~~}} tag, do I have to do anything else? Do I add it to VFD or QVFD?

Thanks, Keith

No, one of the joys of NRV is that it will automatically add things to Category:Worthless Articles using a rather fancy algorithm that will let us know if they've been NRVed for more than a week (roughly). You may want to keep an eye on the page to make sure that no one goes and removes the NRV tag (without improving the article); if someone does so, feel free to report them to Ban Patrol for removing NRV tags. --Sir gwax (talk) Signuke 18:02, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Personal tools