Talk:Red Hot Pawn

Well, creator's butt-hurt rant, and his vanity Uncyclopedia article, languished here for six whole years--his original talk page lambasting the "hypocracy" of Wikipedia for not wanting its own vanity article on Red Hot Pawn--until new user FMF2 came along to update the humorless account of who's cool and who's not over at Red Hot Pawn, leaving in a huff when PuppyOnTheRadio and I told him that vanity contributions are not welcome here.

We took turns turning this article into actual comedy, and we are indebted to the original contributors for providing the fodder--now quoted almost verbatim in the article--although I fictionalized the name of creator's clique into Queens of Pawnage and totally spoiled his goal, shameless self-promotion. D-oh!!! Spıke Ѧ 19:50 24-Feb-13

Conversation formerly on User talk:SPIKE

While I agree with stripping the vanity out of the article, I'd actually be tempted to add back that talk page rant, and even add in links to the site there. The nature of that site suggests it'd have a number of intelligent, articulate writers with a sense of humour. If we stop them from doing any pimping of their site we limit their reason to visit here. We have articles that pimp our other sites - look at Above Top Secret. If they can come here, pimp their site, but in a way we can control, they may stick around to look at other facets. Given I started writing here due to my work on a forum elsewhere relating to lateral thinking puzzles (which led directly to Lateral thinking and Lateral thinking puzzle directly, and then to Six Hats and Psyché indirectly, and possibly a few others), encouraging n00bs to stick around and enjoy the tea and biscuits may bring on board a better writer. User:FMF2 is no great loss, given his refusal to listen. That article originally was written by someone who can actually write though. Once the UN:CM was taken out of it, it left behind a much shorter but actually decent article.                                • Puppy's talk page • 11:26 24 Feb 2013

I don't like links to send people away from here to other sites, not even on the unlikely rationale that they will meet good writers and, having done so, will guide them back here. It is like installing a second fire exit at the club thinking you are thereby going to boost admission. We are what we are; and if we are visited by people from Red Hot Pawn, they will stay on the basis that they want to read or write humor, not on the basis that we flattered their chess personas. Spıke Ѧ 00:00 25-Feb-13

I wouldn't include them in the article proper, but on talk page I have no issue with.                                • Puppy's talk page • 12:03 25 Feb 2013

But, again, the original "talk page rant" does live on, in Section 3 of the article. Minus the actual clan handle. Spıke Ѧ 00:06 25-Feb-13

Oh - I missed that. Looked at the talk page exclusion and not the article inclusion. Too busy trying to remove the UN:CM from the article. Although I don't mind a clan name being mentioned myself - as long as it's part of an accessible joke, and not just an in-joke, or UN:CB                                • Puppy's talk page • 12:11 25 Feb 2013

The original clan name was part of a joke that was plenty accessible. But, of course, the reason that both of us spent hours there was that, partly because of the use of that name, Anon tried to bring the article up to date with all the current clans. That follow-on effort that was vanity for the players and no one else. Spıke Ѧ 00:15 25-Feb-13

Admittedly that clan name wasn't a very good joke.                                • Puppy's talk page • 12:26 25 Feb 2013

I guess; I didn't get it but thought it was a real clan name that needed fictionalizing, to the Queens of Pawnage. But "your to stupid" was supposed to be a joke too. Is it unbelievable? I mean, we are talking about chess players, but we are also talking about trolls. Spıke Ѧ 13:00 25-Feb-13