User talk:SPIKE

New stuff at the end, please; I'll make it fit into the section organization after the topic dies down.

Is this about UnNews or UnNews audio? If so, talk to me here.

I don't routinely put a Watch on other people's talk pages. Nothing personal! I endorse keeping a conversation together on a single talk page, but a few days after the conversation ends, I will Unwatch you--the alternative being endless false alarms.

---

Anything typed here I may post-edit clerically. Typically, I combine parts of dialogues that took place on the other guy's talk page. Some conversations that pertain to the text of an article are moved to that article's talk page.

Archives

• Ceremonial greetings and cookies received in '09 from Thekillerfroggy, MrN9000, Romartus, Pelargonium, and Hyperbole.
• Forum threads I created in '09-'10 on multiple articles on the same theme, my proposal for the style guide on encyclopedia clichés, articles written from an uncyclopedic point of view, background-image in CSS, and suggested changes to {{Q}}.
• My entries in the 8th Poo Lit Surprise: Clip-on tie, Rules of baseball (a winner), and FORTRAN.
• Pee reviews I did in '09-'10: ITSCON, MGMT, Third-wave feminism, Hyphenation, Hard disk drive, Ozzy Osborne.
• Technical issues in '09-'10: Changing my user name; specifying a custom signature in a file; specifying a background color for data-entry windows; putting in for Redirect rights.
• Conversations in '10 that are done.
• Conversations in '10 about the Islam article.
• Conversations in '11.
• Discussions of civics and politics in '12.
• Discussions with user Kamek98.
• Other conversations in '12.
• Conversations in '13 before Oppage. After oppage: 2 3
• RFCs received in 2013 of no enduring interest except to those studying the requestors.

Meganew polices Aimsplode's personal pages

Wanna do something about this?

Meganew shouldn't be reverting peoples' edits to their own user pages. I think a ban is in order. --anonymous —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.198.163.168 (talk • contribs)

(For "edits" above, read "blanking.") Check the ban log, Aimsplode; I gave him a full two hours. Then check his user page, where I expressed regret about having to decide in favor of either of you. Spıke ¬ 10:08 16-May-13

Joke comment on User talk:Llwy-ar-lawr

SPIKE, I thought we were on good terms now. If I make a joke comment and you realise that, can you repond with a joke instead of a serious comment please? (Refering to Llwy's talk page). Thanks. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 13:28, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

Sure. If you will stop interpreting my retaliatory poke as a "serious comment" and stop obsessing about whether it indicates a sea change in my opinion of you. Spıke ¬ 13:36 16-May-13

Make it a good joke and maybe I'll get it. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 13:38, May 16, 2013 (UTC)

ScottPat's Forum

Just to let you know Spike that the reason I set up the forum was to find out whether there were any other active users on at the time of the attack when I first got on. Thanks for deleting it. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 06:00, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. If you see from the variety of names used in his automated change summaries by now, it is not a personal vendetta but a quest for attention from anyone. That forum would have been his ultimate reward. We changed the parameters to make the attack less notorious; also got help from Wikia. Spıke ¬ 11:00 17-May-13

I never thought of it as a personal vendetta. He/she changed who he attacked simply on the basis of which person last edited pages on the website. I was talking to Romartus about getting Wikia to do something about it so thanks.

Thanks to everyone who reverted during that night (well night for me anyway). It was a real team effort and when the Americans and Aussies were going to bed the Brits had just woke up to continue the reverts. I still think there is more to be reverted though. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 11:10, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

I put in a new rule that Anon gets only two edits per minute and the vandal seemed to lose interest. Later on Wikia came in and put in another rule trying to pattern-match the exact edits, but the guy will quickly see what's being filtered and adapt. Spıke ¬ 11:13 17-May-13

On further repair, view Special:RecentChanges and click "Hide patrolled edits". Spıke ¬ 11:14 17-May-13

---

Scott, at your current privileges, do you see when reviewing single edits, "Newer edit -> [Mark edit as patrolled]"? If so, then when undoing vandalism, you must walk back to the start of the vandalism and mark each edit. Otherwise the page will come back up in the report as needing patrolling, once we work through the (as of last night) at least 1800 edits. Although you corrected the page, someone will have to look inside to verify that this is the case; that is the most time-consuming thing about this repair. Spıke ¬ 11:13 17-May-13

Yes I do see mark as patrol however only on IP edits not on user ones and also if I revert something I can't mark it as patrol after only before. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 11:15, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Edits from users with Autopatrolled do not require patrolling; so your observation on "user ones" applies only to trusted users. Revert (versus Undo) automatically patrols the reverted edit, but doesn't let you provide explanation. Undo should be used to explain to user names and then you must manually patrol the undone edit. Each Admin here has been scolded on occasional lapses. Correcting the page is only half the job; you must record that you did, by clearing the patrol flag, so that others aren't led there only to verify that you already fixed it.

There is a JavaScript thingie on RecentChanges that patrols all edits. The problem is that the current list of vandal edits extends past the end of a RecentChanges listing. Spıke ¬ 11:23 17-May-13

I know that was quite annoying. Talking of vandals we seem to have one who is subtly writing absolute nonsence on IP pages and even made an article that Snippy put on QVFD. He/she writes half of the article in German. He/she seems to use multiple IP addresses. You can see his/her edits on Recent Changes as his summaries are random numbers and letters. Thought I'd let you know. Thanks. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 11:28, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

I'm still working through correspondence, but I'll review this now. Spıke ¬ 11:32 17-May-13

PS--http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Special:RecentChanges?hidepatrolled=1&limit=2500 may be amusing if you have a faster connection than I do. Spıke ¬ 11:40 17-May-13

Terms-of-Use ban of Multiliteralist

PS--Undo me at Forum:I'm leaving, and it's your fault‎ at your discretion. The author has been banned for putting his recommendation into practice last night. Spıke ¬ 11:32 17-May-13

Don't understand what you mean by the last PS bit. Undo what part??? Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 11:35, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

If you wish to answer his rant rather than just excise it as I did, feel free. Spıke ¬ 11:40 17-May-13

So you want me to answer a guy's rant because you don't want to do it yourself. (I'm sure that's not what you mean it's just I find it hard to understand why you want me to undo your undo). What's more is that you are encouraging me to respond to a vandal which you always warn me not to. Is this a joke in which you anticipate that I might want to reply to him? Confused still. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 11:45, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

PS Thanks for the 2500 one. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 11:45, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

This is not a joke. I would like a second pair of eyes on it (though Romartus has already seen and endorsed my one-month ban). I don't necessarily want you to answer his rant; I would like your opinion on whether my solution is the best. Spıke ¬ 11:48 17-May-13

Oh sorry, simpleton over here understands now. My misunderstanding. I will take a good look and post my opinion to you on this page in a few minutes. Thanks. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 12:24, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

I like to think of myself as quite a just man and I hate to say it but I'm probably biased here but I'll try not to be.

• Firstly saying that they are not cherry-picking editors is wrong. One of the editors from the other site tried to make me come to their site on another forum (can't remember what the forum was called but it was about everyone giving reasons to stay on Wikia) by claiming that you had brainwashed me even though I stated reasons as to why I was staying.
• People on his site may go over there "without help" however the good writers' talents are wasted on that site's type of comedy. Instead of writing articles that have clever comedy in that you feel really pleased about writing at the end because it took a lot of work and now that has been payed off, they write a swear word and put in a picture of something sex related and call it funny. There minds are not allowed to mature.
• Multiliteralist himself seems a decent writer (by looking on the other site (t.here are some decent writers on that site)) but on his talk page he claims that the point of Uncyclopedia (non-Wikia) is not to parody wikipedia as that aim was achieved a few years ago. As far as I was aware Uncyclopedia is meant to be a parody of wikipedia and if it is not then I wouldn't have joined and I don't see what other point it can have.
• Romartus I don't think is biased here as he is not on that site at all so he seems to be in the same position as you and I. He has judged very fairly before although my encounters with him have been short and occasional. I think he thinks that you just went too far with deleting the comment.

To conclude (please do read the bits above, they are important): I think that a response to him would be justified. Perhaps a clever and well thought-out one. Maybe subtly asking him what the purpose of uncyclopedia really is. By deleting his comment you are just showing more tension.

I think Aleister is right that we need to draw the sites together. It reminds me of the Cold War which many people have said. The opposing idealogies are clever humour vs. cheap humour. Apart from that the sites should have the same aims and purpose. Both sides claim that the other site brainwashes their users and so on. By replying to their messages maybe we can start detente.

Please read and think about what I have said Spike. Thanks. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 12:43, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

PS - I think that when you reverted him you should have put a comment in the summary and that is why Romartus has asked you to revert the revert.Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 12:43, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Do you agree with the above. Should we reply to him? Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 13:17, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

I have restored his comment and have replied. Thanks for your input. Spıke ¬ 13:26 17-May-13

No problem any time you need help. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 13:33, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Nice reply. I'll support you if there is any opposition to you replying. What I really want to know is what he thinks the purpose of Uncyclopedia is if it is not to parody wikipedia. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 13:37, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

As an aside, if you were the victim of my brainwashing, one would think I would have done a complete enough job that you would not conclude so often that I must hate you.

Parodying Wikipedia is not our "purpose"--which indeed could have been done with a couple dozen articles--but our motif, a default style in which to write new articles. Thus the job is not done as long as life continues to unfold. This is indeed not a site for unbounded fiction writing or even unbounded comedy writing, but primarily for pages that support the gag that we are a legitimate encyclopedia, a legitimate dictionary, or a legitimate news service. ML has always chafed under this structure and has authored Forums asking for new namespaces that would accommodate his notions, from ranty expressions of personal opinion to descriptions of bowel movements. He is in the right place now; if he would only stop returning to, yes, sabotage this one. Spıke ¬ 13:43 17-May-13

I think we were right about the brainwashing and ML has been tricked himself: [Quotation deleted] Also brainwashing is fine by me as long as it is done in the right way.

By the way Spike, Al and I were wondering what your views are on the content warning and your reason behind those views. Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 14:16, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Brainwashing implies dishonesty, or at least manipulation. (For example, throwing a long quote from Multiliteralist, at his sardonic best, in my face, to try to bias me against him, apart from his conduct? I already have a firm opinion of him, thank you.) The best example was MrN9000's visit to your talk page (for which he received my first Terms-of-Use ban), agreeing with you that the style of humor at the Fork was unacceptably childish, but promising that it would improve, through application of an unspecified process. I do not agree with brainwashing.

Regarding the Content Warning, are you kidding? I have stated my opinion repeatedly in the Forum and on Aleister's talk page. Spıke ¬ 17:17 17-May-13

The quote was a joke Spike. I was being sarcastic. I do believe in brainwahing, it's called education but then I believe in a strong state (American Nightmare!!!!).

The last bit was to confirm that you were against the content warning changing as you think that it is simply another episode that will go nowhere. (Am I correct?). Sir ScottPat CUN VFH UnS (talk) 17:24, May 17, 2013 (UTC)

Managing UnNews

Do we mean to mislead users in this section UnNews:Newsroom#Managing UnNews? Should I replace the links to reflect the Lead Article 2 template? Rev. Zim_ulator (Talk) I am the dirt under your rollers 02:04, May 20, 2013 (UTC)

The Newsroom is not a reference manual but essentially a big talk page. Don't change the record of what was discussed; at the time, those files were how to lay out the Front Page. The current method should be described somewhere, but not in the Newsroom. Right now, the wagon train of UnNews Chiefs just read the documentation in the templates themselves. Spıke ¬ 02:13 20-May-13

You got it, chief. Rev. Zim_ulator (Talk) I am the dirt under your rollers 02:34, May 20, 2013 (UTC)