User talk:Rcmurphy/archive3

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


RC, I wanted to apologize for voting twice on Rocky Mountain Oysters. I honestly didn't remember
DAMMIT! You KNEW he'd catch you! And you did it anyway! DUMB, DUMB, DUMB.
having voted on it before, and of course my ID is so generic, it's not surprising that I'd just
Now what's he gonna think? Cheater. Ooooh yeah, you've really put your foot in it now. That's just great.
completely miss it! Anyway, would you mind if I just deleted the spurious entry completely?
--Some user 04:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC) Way to go, sooper genius.

I removed it. --—rc (t) 04:56, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
And I'll remove your face too if it happens again...


I was kicking around ideas for Uncyclopedia: namespace logo with Algo, and we had a thought: Image:Puzzlemeta.png (since it is a namespace about uncyc). Then I had a thought that he hated, Uncyclopedia_talk: namespace -> Image:Puzzlemetameta.png. These are just 'demo' images at 5am and they suck. If you liked the idea you could make them better and not so suck. Also aglo likes waffles. --Splaka 12:43, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me, except the talk: one might be a bit too subtle. With the new namespaces (I don't know if we'd want to make logos for them, but we might) I decided to start a potential logo page so that people can add their own for consideration. --—rc (t) 19:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


The only thing left to make Tx: ready to go is to substitute in the most recent "Recent Articles". I have done most of them and I left two spots for new ones, which can be either filled or just deleted if I am not around whe you want to put it up. ---QuillRev. Isra (talk) 00:16, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

As the Template:Recent itself is meta data, couldn't you just incorporate it? Reformatting the code in Template:Recent_meta to plain text? --Splaka 00:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

IRC'd --—rc (t) 03:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)


Psycho Warrior

This user is completely insane
and is a notable member of the Uncyclopedia Psychobabble Club.

For your psychobabble skillz, and

Newcookie Savethemooses has awarded you a cookie!
Now go play in traffic.

For excellent Uncyclopedia trivia knowledge.


I hope I'm not being a pest, but if it's not too much trouble, could you please restore the edit history of Woof as BobBobBob did with Meow? Thanks again for restoring the article.--Naughtyned 20:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely not.
Er, I mean sure. I should have done that in the first place, I just wasn't thinking. --—rc (t) 20:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks again and I get what you mean about Todd "not [being] around right now." 1 Who'd have thought that one of those silly templates at the top of a page would actually have valuable information? :-) --Naughtyned 03:42, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
No problem. When I left that message on your talk page I actually didn't even know about Todd's...acquisition. I just found out about it a few minutes ago myself. It's good to know he has a good reason for shirking his Uncyc duty! --—rc (t) 04:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC)


<rcmurphy> Later fellows.
* rcmurphy ( has left #uncyclopedia
<miss> adios
<miss> I can't stand that admin anyways
<miss> I can say that since no one's listening anyway
<miss> fucking asshole

--Splaka 06:31, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, good. I was beginning to get a reputation as a friendly admin. --—rc (t) 15:08, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
No one wants that. They're hard to shake... not that I'm giving up. I think Keitei's starting to dislike me, despite my giving her too many awards and talk page messages. I just need to branch out more.  :) --T. (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

css reskin movement

Hello, your reskin has been moved to facilitate a reorganization of the reskin process and to make your life generally more complicated. This is a form letter. -Splaka --Splaka 12:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

-_- why me?

People are fucking with my articles again, I checked the VFD and QVFD, and the Category "sandwhich wars", keeps getting deleted, it happened twice today.

If you've noticed, there's been an effort to scale down the number of useless categories lately. Your articles are already plentifully categorized without you making a special vanity category for them. Truth be told, I was close to deleting Mayonkaizer as NNP, and wasn't too impressed with your linkbacks to your deleted articles under your user page (e.g. User:Jack_Cain/Hattori_Hanzo), but i left that alone. Your persecution complex makes me wonder why I bothered. --T. (talk) 01:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the site has been cluttered with limited-use categories. Only a few article series (serieses?) warrant their own category (see category:Bloodbath or category:Wheeling Jesuit University for examples). Also, please note that I'm not going to try to circumvent other admins without a very good reason, and there isn't one here. --—rc (t) 01:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Okay then, somtimes its very hard to tell between somone fucking with me, and the admins doing there job. Jack Cain 03:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Caternest You have been cited in Uncyclopedian Bios.
Apparently you are "notable".
Don't ask me why; I think you're lame.


Totally! - Nonymous 01:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Say what now? --—rc (t) 01:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 :( IRC'd --—rc (t) 16:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Mohammed Picture!

Okay, fine. I swear on a stack of Qu'rans that the picture is original and if it ain't may Allah struck me dead within 24 for hours.--Mrasdfghjkl 03:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

You're going to have to prove it to me. You realize that, right? I mean, I'm rather skeptical by now. --—rc (t) 03:59, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
By still being here in 24 hours is the most I can do. Sorry.--Mrasdfghjkl 04:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately for you, I am not Islamic! Though if you are dead a day from now I may well convert out of fear. --—rc (t) 04:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
But if I don't die, and you go on to later prove the picture was unoriginal, you'll get to go down in history as the guy who debunked Islam as monolithic rubbbish.--Mrasdfghjkl 04:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
But then I'd probably get fatwa'd and die. --—rc (t) 05:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Everybody dies.--Mrasdfghjkl 12:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Update: I am still alive.--Mrasdfghjkl 12:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Update: I'm not dead.--Mrasdfghjkl 01:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
You still have two hours. --—rc (t) 01:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Update: Ooh! Ooh! Breath... short. Left arm... numb! Can't go on... describing symptoms much longer!--Mrasdfghjkl 03:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Update: I made it!--Mrasdfghjkl 04:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations. However, in that case, I must revert to the previous statement that I'm not Islamic. I'm afraid your 24 hours of fear were unproductive. --—rc (t) 04:62, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
You're afraid?! --Mrasdfghjkl 06:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
An ill-considered choice of words on my part. --—rc (t) 06:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, actually Allah has has very little to do with Islam, he is more of an excuse. And other religions have Allah too, they just call him... God, Ychch, Homer, etc.--Mrasdfghjkl 06:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
And Grover. --—rc (t) 07:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Grover is more of an incon for an Anti-Christ.--Mrasdfghjkl 07:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

A friendly nooblet who called me a "potato face"


I find the site amusing and i am a stranger dont add me to msn stranger danger also why can we add things and alter them on the site ?

Because it's a wiki. Since you're new here I recommend the Beginner's Guide and How to Be Funny. --—rc (t) 01:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

To be sure to be sure to be sure would y alike some potato,

So potato face what country are you from i am from australia the land of well umm vewgimite and that isnt even made here anymore

I am from a mystical land far, far away from your prison state. We don't have vewgimite here. --—rc (t) 01:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Well you see if there was a flea that landed on a pea the flea would fall in love with the pea and all would be right in the world a friend wants to know why his explanation of bogans didnt come up it said no body likes no body likes nobody likes a bogan ?

Flea-pea relationships don't work out. Just think of the biological complications. --—rc (t) 04:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

It dosent matter about the complications if they love each other thats all that matters and i have registered

I see you've chosen a username to reflect your belief in trans-kingdom romance. It's sweet but I don't think it's realistic. I am sorry. --—rc (t) 05:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

They said that a black man and a white woman would never work and visa versa but they came threw the flea and pea are being wed as we speak

All I'm saying is that I think they need to think it through. Passion runs quick and hot, but a steady flame lasts longer. --—rc (t) 05:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I care about You

{{Icare}} --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN3 NotM BLK |_LG8+::: 06:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

testy westy

This is a requested tested. --Splaka 08:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Test successful. Will report new findings at 0900 hours. --—rc (t) 07:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Nobody cares --Splaka 07:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


<Emmanuel_Chanel> Hello!
<keitei> Hello!
<keitei> how cruel of you to speak when rc isn't here...

I weep for you. --KATIE!! 12:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure he knew what he was my heart. Actually, he did say something once when I was in the room - I said something to him and he was like "yeah right." And that was it. Emmanuel Chanel is an enigma. --—rc (t) 19:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

A Bother

(cc: from User_talk:Angela#A_Bother at user's request)

That's me, a bother, and I'm sorry about it, but I've edited a couple of pages and while I thought I had some idea of what Uncyclopedia is about, I've had some differences of opinion with a sysop and I'd like some larger confirmation of his actions, simply, I guess, because I'm an arrogant new editor, the kind I despise over at Wikipedia but can't help becoming when you give me a new wiki to edit. It's not really my fault is it? Anyway, after considering the Uncyclopedic style guide and checking out some pretty horrendous pages that make a lot of squirrel jokes (Where did the squirrel joke come from, I mean, it's getting to the level of a mid-90's alien joke both in terms of abominable overuse and sheer stupidity...I guess no different from excessive ellipsis dots, but that's my own hang-up) I don't see how my edits are revert material or how this article is somehow a left-wing critique that negates my edits. I've left a comment on Rangeley's talk page, but as he was the reverter in the first place I thought I'd try higher up as well, not to go over anyone's head, but to get a better understanding of the place (as a new Wikipedia transplant, this seems like some perverse wild west to me, with sysops [not talking about Rangeley, but generally] and admins being rare and articles that run recursively wild). Thanks, --TheGrza 08:48, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

See also: User_talk:Rangeley#Iraq_War, User_talk:TheGrza
I guess the thing is that I more or less, actually entirely, wrote the Iraq War article, and intended it to be a specific sort of article. There are a lot of articles from a left wing point of view, critiquing the right (George W. Bush for instance) and a relative lack of ones critiquing the left. So I pondered the possibilities, and surprise-surprise, there wasnt an article on the Iraq War. So I jumped on the opportunity and wrote it out one day in a form close to its current form. There is no need for an article to be fair and balanced, and it is 'legal' for one to be entirely from one point of view. Your different perspective is appreciated at Uncyclopedia, ofcourse. It just doesnt jive with the article at hand. Articles are good when they are coherent, and not choppilly slapped together. I try to keep my articles coherent, in one way or another, and give them a flow so that from start to finish it feels like one article, and not a cut and paste job of several trains of thought. As such, your edits adding a different perspective dont really add to the continuity or humor of this specific article. ~Sir Rangeley Icons-flag-us GUN WotM UotM EGA +S (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Though this is a wiki site and collaboration is encouraged, there are some cases in which an article has a very specific tone/POV, and breaking that tone can weaken the overall article (even if what is added is generally funny). Obviously this is different from Wikipedia, where the important thing is to not have a POV at all. So it's not necessarily that your edits were bad, it's just that, as Rangeley said, they sort of subvert the purpose of the page. Also, you're completely right that Uncyc has a ton of garbage. Unfortunately that pretty much comes with the territory (but I actually think things have been getting better the past couple months). --—rc (t) 17:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Mohammed revisited


Mohammad's younger lego figure.

Here. I was determined to find the source(s) of that pic. No luck...though. I pride myself in google image search skills but that one is a mystery. The only other thing to do was a broad search through way too many pics. I am giving up on this one.

Anyway, other than the face (which i can't find), here's a reproducion.

It's a combo of Maharaja Lallu (brown body, could be anybodies), Scorpion Palace Guard (head), and Count Dooku (cape and chest). If you care you can go hereand find the face and I will reproduce that same figure. There's a lot of figures to sort through. I have probably spent a few hours of research already over this stupid event. You busted him in a lie but you couldn't prove it. OH well. -- – Mahroww a.k.a. Paddington D. Shufflebotham  23:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

NM. Tompkins already took care of that. -- – Mahroww a.k.a. Paddington D. Shufflebotham  23:53, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Heh. I figured, hey, if it was original, he'd have said that from the beginning. Very suspicious. --—rc (t) 04:35, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
You will no doubt be rewarded for your work to keep the VFP honest! In the mean time...
Hooray--Mrasdfghjkl 01:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Personal tools