Talk:Wikipedophiles

get a life tard. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.137.60.229 (talk • contribs)

A constructive comment, if I ever saw one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.179.106.246 (talk • contribs)

Is that like a lifeguard? Like the people you find at the beach or at swimming pools, sitting on those high platform chairs? I've already got two of those. Then again, I guess it's not really my article.  c • > • cunwapquc? 06:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

GAY

GAYGAYGAYGAYGAY —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.107.155.69 (talk • contribs)

I think 24.107.155.69 might be advertising... Rabbi Techno kvetch Contribs FOXES 17:13, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

WikiKissA**es

Maybe there should be an article for that too. Many who accuse others of being Wikipedophiles are just as much a Wikipedophile themselves and are just as boneheaded thinking they know all the rules and undo articles on whims and try to impress with their pseudo-intellect. Who cares anyway. I think Wikipedia is largely a joke. Hate me if you want to Wikipedants. 68.191.46.186 03:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

We don't hate you, we mearly want to eat your young. Hugs! Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 23:22, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

That's assuming they're kosher young, of course. Besides, why qualify the fact that Wikipedia is a joke with a word like "largely"? Why not, say, the far-more-accurate "totally"?  c • > • cunwapquc? 03:50, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

adobe's ready to sue you

for defamation. ill be the atty

• But first, you'll need to master contractions. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 22:28, March 15, 2010 (UTC)