Talk:Roentgenium

		This article was nominated for deletion on February 18, 2010. The result of the discussion was Keep.

That template was put on while I was making this article. Does it still have to be flagged?

As your article stands now, I'd say yes. You still have a week to expand it to make it less short and more funny before it gets huffed. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

This is stupid! I clicked on this for a science project and I get this?? You need to edit this. It has alot of unneeded stuff. That doesn't have to do with science.

Wikipedia:Unununium86.152.150.13 20:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia strikes again! Don't forget to come here often when researching your homework and assignments!--    20:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

And don't forget to cite Uncyclopedia in your paper before you turn it in! Spıke Ѧ  13:50 2-Mar-10

Shadow paragraph

Thanks Spike, I work on a laptop so didn't know the paragraph was overlapping the illustration. What don't you like, the paragraph or the graphic? Fixes? ~   13:15 28 2 2MX

Edited the paragraph, reads a little better. Al in Chains, later that day

Sorry to ignore you. I minimize my watch list and thought you had this under control. (There is also the small matter of the four-day power outage I mentioned on VFD.) I also work on a laptop, so it isn't that; screen sizes differ, and so do the major browsers in some respects, so it can always help to view an article through other people's screens.

Typographically, the final paragraph is ugly, almost unreadable (perhaps intentionally). More fundamentally, it departs from the encyclopedia tone of voice. I don't know if your point is that Unununium causes dementia, even affecting the writer of an encyclopedia article; if so, it needs work to illustrate that. If the paragraph is simply a voice from the afterlife, it's totally off the wall. The start of Section 2 also abandons the encyclopedia format and has the form of an essay or magazine article--not bad, just inconsistent.

Separately, I did one copy-edit of your first batch of changes, a week ago, and at the time thought you should look at User:SPIKE/Cliches-1, an advice to writers that is not an official part of Uncyclopedia style but has earned a link from UN:HTBFANJS. Definitely "ignorable" if you have a reason to; otherwise, wise advice. Spıke Ѧ  13:23 2-Mar-10

Just wanted to check on your main objections, and forgot to ping you on your talk page. The voice is from the future, so it's wavy and out of focus, using shadow, to emphasise that it's from "somewhere else" (too much, I'll look on my large screen later just in case it's unreadable) where unununium is found to be horrendous and they are trying to warn us not to use it in coins. Just a twist to counter the happy ending a bit. Will read your cliche link, thanks. Yesterday I reverted someone on the page who warned others not to read the article, then checked, and this article is the fourth link listed on Google for Unununium. Would be more fun it it was the first, I think Uncy should really do more publicity and outside link work to get the entire site more viewers, but the guy's impassioned plea (check the history) made me laugh. Thanks again, ~   13:35 2 3 mmx

Compare the comment on UN:VFD that Kurvatia dominates Google searches. All that means is that someone here created a clever name for Croatia and we are the only ones using the joke (until throngs on the Internet see fit to steal it). Regarding warnings not to read an article: In my opinion, warnings (with exclamation points) and instructions to the reader (especially templates) also deviate from the encyclopedia-article format, and mostly not for a good reason, but because some Junior-High kid thinks he will be a grown-up if he can nag like his mother does. Articles should claim to dryly present facts unless there is a deliberate humor reason to go with an alternate point of view. On goosing readership, if Uncyclopedia has a Marketing Department, I'm not in it. All I will do is gradually boost Uncyclopedia's reputation as something superior to ED by trying to write good stuff. Spıke Ѧ  13:44 2-Mar-10

PS--I did look in the history and Anon did not make a contribution but perform vandalism and you were right to revert it. Someone's opinion on the overall quality of the article doesn't belong in the article unless there is a clear humor purpose, and even then, the subject of the humor ceases to be Unununium but "me as a humor writer." Spıke Ѧ  13:50 2-Mar-10

I hate these edit conflicts, had written a long note to you. The person yesterday was probably an actual researcher warning people not to use the page. Unununium is a real word, it was the former name of element 111 which was later changed to a vanity name, so scientific papers and even school reports will use google, and since the article is the 4th listed it may flypaper some academics to read it. Read your cliche page, and will take it to heart and hopefully remember it as I write and edit articles. Thanks. Al, a few minutes later

It is simply a speech of mine to write clearly and directly. I was corrected on the real-ness of Unununium in the VFD discussion, but replied that the original article was lacking anyway. Likewise not affecting the old article's humor quotient is the fact that some guy thinks that everything that comes up in a Google search is equally useful for his academic paper--or that he should edit the source to alert passers-by that the article is not what he thought it should be! The World Book Encyclopedia of the 1960s illustrated markings that a beggar would make on a house to show that the resident was an easy mark. Same concept (vandalism).

On edit conflicts: If your edit is all together in a block, it's easy to reassert it. Follow the directions in the Edit Conflict screen, copy your new text from the LOWER edit window, and paste it where it should be in the UPPER edit window. In between you can see what the other guy added to the page and, if you like, revise your comments to address his. Spıke Ѧ  20:23 2-Mar-10

There's more

Al, I just did a light copy edit, correcting some spelling and grammar and rephrasing a few passages, such as the one on devaluation.

Separately, although Kurvatia is now in fair shape, I went back and took a look at Croatia. Heavy English-as-a-Second-Language, and what in hell would you do about that overlong, bilingual poem (parody adaptations of Christmas music/poetry being the least clever form of humor)? Spıke Ѧ  3-Mar-10

haha

it is cool

rhittzer said: It's actually fun putting in nonsense. But I would advise anyone to stay away from this website because the idiocy is contagious. But then I guess it's better because you know that it is nonsensical. Compared to religion. It's the stupidest thing on planet earth but more than half of the world's population believes it. So why not believe this article? Oh, I'd choose to believe this article! Or maybe not. Man this is so stupid!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rhittzer (talk • contribs)

Uncyclopedia has standards, nonsense is not inherently funny. People should avoid this website only when editors think they are funny by writing a bunch of words that are the textual version of fresh manure. And for the record, the top four religions alone encompass well over three quarters of the world's population, the fact that you so grossly underestimate that only proves you are certainly no authority on what exactly the stupidest thing on planet Earth is. ◄► Tephra ◄► 09:58, April 16, 2012 (UTC)

Collaboration to improve Unununium

My preliminary critique: Intro needs to be longer. The storyline sounds like it would be better suited in an article on an unununium alloy (unfortunately, none exist). Message from the future isn't very funny. There is no reference to roentgenium. I will come up with suggestions to remedy these problems in time. ◄► Tephra ◄► 02:31, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

Questions: Chemical Information and Compostition, is Compostition meant to be a joke, or is it unintentionally misspelled? humour uses commonwealth english spelling while Flavor: does not, why is this?

Aye. The alloy is created within the article, when the professor discovers a way to make a solid from it. It is found to take on the properties of complete happiness for mankind, etc., and is then made into currency. Which of course is a tragedy, which the future voice tries to warn us about. The future message just looks cool, imnho, an effect not used much if at all on Uncy. Good thoughts, the intro really does need expansion. This page is the number four hit on Google, heh heh. And those are misspellings. Let's go with humor, always a good choice and valid hope. Al des chains a few minutes later

Well I suppose there is nothing wrong with mentioning an alloy here, but perhaps what you've currently got could be more like a second half, with a new first half making fun of the actual element. And there's nothin' wrong with the shadow effect, but the message just isn't funny. I would suggest maybe making it say something more along the lines of optometrists caution that handling unununium may cause severe vision problems (only longer). ◄► Tephra ◄► 04:16, June 3, 2010 (UTC)

maybe for use on the page. Aleister, 23:31 28-1-'12

I will probably write up a new, longer intro in a few days. To have proper flow, I may have to rearrange some of the preexisting content. If you don't like how it turns out, I will probably be willing to make adjustments, we'll hammer out a compromise in time. Of course, if you like it, then that will be even better. Nevertheless, I will not have the time over the next two days at least, but I have not abandoned this project yet. ◄► Tephra ◄► 16:00, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Well unfortunately I've lost interest in this project. Writing/editing articles for Uncyclopedia has become just too time consuming and I am not coming around much anymore. While I may still do some new articles randomly, it is unlikely I will put much (if any) effort into this in the foreseeable future. I'm afraid you're on your own again... ◄► Tephra ◄► 07:21, July 12, 2010 (UTC)

Nah, that picture isn't interesting enough for this article. Give it a rainbow effect or an eerie radioactive glow or something. Then reupload the image under a name other than "Chromium" so people don't look at it and say, "Hey! This article is a crock, they're totally trying to con me with a chromium crystal and pass it off as unununium! Those sneaky slimeballs! Uncyclopedia has ruined my faith in honesty and humanity, now I have no choice but to end my life my eating forty tubs of butter in one sitting!" Ok, I'll admit, maybe they wouldn't go that far, they'd probably just end it all with poison - suicide via forty tubs of butter is just crazy. Anyway, my small opinion on the pic. ◄► Tephra ◄► 07:29, January 29, 2012 (UTC)

Hello, good to "see" you again. I agree, I was just saving the pic somewhere, because around here if you don't save unused pics they get huffed. I had this one on my user page for awhile, and decided to change it out, so put it somewhere for safekeeping. Hey, this unununium page is actually pretty good now. It's also high up on the google search for unununium, which is why lots of IP's try to change it. They probably think it's real until they get down the page a little. Anyway, good to see you're still here. I'm in and out, and was gone for much of 2011, but am playing here again for awhile. Aleister 9:32 29-1-'12

Perhaps we could replace the burning cross with that image, I never really thought the cross fit this article anyway and it would make the page seem slightly more legit as well, meaning it would take Google-searching dipsticks longer to realize they are on Ucyclopedia. And, yeah, I was gone for most of 2011 too as you can plainly see by the listed dates on the articles I created on my user page. I'd just drop by every once in awhile to see if anyone was messing with my articles. ◄► Tephra ◄► 19:03, January 30, 2012 (UTC)