Uncyclopedia:Village Dump/archive16

A gram of experience is worth a ton of theory

I would like to suggest that Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury be a person for whom quotes are made up.

• I vote against, and would like to suggest you stop adding those damn quotes!!! --⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ign^STFU F@H|UotM|+S 13:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. Cecil comes perilously close to the "nest o' vanity" designation recently applied to Uber-Loki, ToblerONE, The Haskodrome, etc. I wouldn't draw any more attention to it, for just that reason. (In fact, it's now officially too late, isn't it?) You can always write the article and see what happens, but so far none of the other quotes pages are for people made up specifically for Uncyclopedia, unless you count Sir Alec Dow, Anagrammatist, which IMHO is a special case. Also, the "other cabal" keeps the waiting list, and it's a very long list... It would take a very funny article to move it ahead of:

The List: Siddhartha "Da' Buddha" Guatama, Winnie the Pooh and Piglet, Jerry Lewis, George W. Bush, Prince Charles, Number Six, Salvador Dali, William Shakespeare (sonnets), Truman Capote, HAL 9000, Homer Simpson, Bart Simpson, O.J. Simpson, Chairman Mao, Sid Vicious, Kanye West, Jean-Paul Sartre, Nancy Reagan, Noam Chomsky, Friedrich Nietzche, Margaret Thatcher, Rambo, Queen Latifah, Queen Victoria, and Super Milk Chan.

I'm also strongly considering putting the Star Trek and Thomas Jefferson quotes pages up for VFD, and merging what little content is in them into their subject pages, if they continue to look as sorry as they do now. Nevertheless, good luck with that!  c • > • cunwapquc? 14:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

• Who the hell is that Marques. Oh don't bother to explain, if u have to explain then it's not funny. Against.--Rataube 14:01, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

• Ought to write an article on Robert Gascoyne-Cecil first, eh? Wikipedia has one to spork. Not as notable as Winnie the Churchill or Benny Disraeli, but doable.

“I'd do him. On second thought, I'd let him do me.”

~ Oscar Wilde on Robert Gascoyne-Cecil

----OEJ 14:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Copyright Family of Articles

Assuming this issue hasn't come up before, what say ye to collecting all articles on variations of the Copyright symbol (Copyleft, Copywrong, Copyup, Copyrecently, etc) and placing them in one large sorted page? A couple have been recently flagged NRV, but I think they could all be gathered together, allowing for future ones to take root there. --DW ^III 09:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Qua?

Our Spanish brethren have been very busy as of late and I, for one, would like to see them have their own wiki.

Discuss. --KATIE!! 18:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• I agree, half of them don't put their work in the Babel section, and I think Isra's getting pretty annoyed with having to do all of that for them. But it is alot of work, and would require someone that speaks both English and spanish (Ratabube?)   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 19:08, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • It's not all that many moves. But it does seem a bit odd that Spanish doesn't have it's own uncyclopedia. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. It would be a definite advantage, all those Babel:Es/Blah pages would only have to be moved once to the new Wiki and then kablam, no more moves.

The reason why we havent got a spanish uncy yet and we are getting lots of spanish activity lately is the same. As I explained to RC and Isra in IRC, there was another wikipedia parody in spanish called Frikipedia (not hosted by wikicities) that was draging all the attention. It was recently shot down becouse of some slandering scandal, and we are getting all the refugees. I lack both the time and the computer skills to manage an uncyclopedia by myself. However, I'm looking for another victim to do so. Havent found it yet, but I'm still alert. Meanwhile, I've post a message at the top of the spanish version of the mainpage, Babel:Es, explaining articles written in spanish should go in the Babel section.--Rataube 02:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

If you like Rata, I can put up a message in MediaWiki:Sitenotice/es (which in theory should appear to all users who have language set to 'spanish') directing them to a discussion page on who should/could/would found a spanish uncyclopedia. And also my standard "new namespace" note:

Note: Please put all new spanish language pages into the Babel:Es namespace, eg: Babel:Es/Amigo. Also be sure to link to them with the Babel:Es/ prefix, eg: [[Babel:Es/Amigo|Amigo]].

--Splaka 03:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok. The discussion page would be Babel talk:Es and the message transleted: "Nota: Por favor envíe todas las nuevas páginas en español a la sección Babel:Es, ej: Babel:Es/Zanahoria. Asegurece de referirlas con el prefijo "Babel:Es/", ej: [[Babel:Es/Zanahoria|Zanahoria]].

Anyway there are very few registered Spanish speaking users, and most contributions are done by anonymous I.P. I guess that may change if the refugees get involved... I'll also try our luck outside the site, looking for the former administrators of the dead wiki. --Rataube 12:58, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Done. --Splaka 03:38, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

What about Pt:? They're driving me up the wall lately. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c »

Mmkay!

We've created an Admin Discussion Page. This is for things that admins bicker about and users don't care so much about. Also an attempt to segment the Dump, and an attempt to lessen the Cabal Effect. Some things are decided in IRC that aren't really of relevance to the Dump, but since we have to record everything we ever do, we hereby present the Ministry of Love. I propose we move all the bickering about "policy" there for a start. What do you think!?!? --KATIE!! 12:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it's the kind of thing that is good.—Sir Mandaliet ♠ CUN PS VFH GN (talk) 12:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I love the Ministry of Love, but don't you think the page should be at Uncyclopedia:Ministry of Love and have UN:MINILUV as a shortcut or something? --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 12:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Sweet. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 13:31, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I support Miniluv of my own free will. Also, maybe this will keep me from commenting on stuff that has nothing to do with me (not likely).--<<>> 17:43, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Blah blah blah blah?

Blah blah, blah blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah Image talk:Blah blah blah.jpg, blah blah blah blah Blah blah blah. Blah blah — blah blah blah blah — blah blah blah blah blah! Blah blah blah?! BLAH! BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH! Blah blah blah blah blah? Seahen 22:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• For. Strongly against. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 22:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Can you ban him for that? If so, I would strongly suggest doing it.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 22:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• A+++++ Would buy from them again!--<<>> 23:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I must confess that I started the Blah thing. It was an experiment in wiki formatting that I started on Wiki42. (my own personal 1 person Mediawiki installation on my PC) But when that was over with, I had several pages full of Blah which was the beginning of this whole "Blah" universe and I thought, "hey, Uncyclopedia could use more junk like this" and vwala! Edits would be appreciated. A speed-reader should not be able to tell the difference between a Blah article and a en.Wikipedia article, because there is no difference. --Nerd42Talk 02:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

• "hey, Uncyclopedia could use more junk like this"...?? Bah. Bah. Bah-bah bah.----OEJ 14:05, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• "Vwala"? --Some user 14:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• I think that's the vampiric version of the Australian airline mascot, the "kwala." Why he mentioned it is anyone's guess, though. ;) --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 17:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Forum format

I find the DUMP kind of difficult to navigate and nearly impossible to see what's new. This may be a sensitive issue, but it seems to me that it should really be in some sort of forum layout. Perhaps... a... wiki-forum. Opinions? --Chronarion 20:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan to me. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

What's a "wiki-forum" ? ---Rev. Isra (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that would be a vast improvement toward our goal of making the world's information accessable and searchable to everyone. --Syndrome 20:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm thinking of a page managed by a bot or something such that instead of all these headings, it automatically divides it into topic subpages, and archives those when they're done for. Such a page might also keep people's text in some kind of order? I'm thinking more of a super-wiki-page rather than a seperate forum for the DUMP. --Chronarion 20:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

This should be mostly acheivable using DynamicPageList and InputBox, although DPL will probably need to be hacked with a bit so it displays the last time each page was edited. --Algorithm (talk) 18:27, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you need to check out the Forum. It offers a great deal of stunning conversation, without all the problems caused by users actually posting there or reading it. I recommend this page 100%. A+++ Would buy from them again. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

A forum? I don't know anything about a Wiki-forum because I am an incompetent gibbon with PHP, however I could very easily get an InvisionFree forum free of charge for the simple reason that I've been working with iF software for almost a year. It could easily handle the amount of members and posts Uncyc would use, just look at this for an example of how much the servers can take. If that could work as opposed to a Super-Wiki, then that would be great too... --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 10:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

<3 Invisionfree. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 18:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

An off-site forum would create the same problems that IRC has. First, not many people would use it (even now the IRC channels are often busy, but they only represent a small number compared to the number of people that use the dump). Second, users that wouldn't use it would lose out and we would have the same problems we have had with IRC lately. Paulgb 01:44, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Or, you know, we could host the forum on the domain. If we want to look into that option, then you could go with phpBB (open-source, and customizable, but somewhat limited) or with Invision Power Boards (which have a lot of admin options, but cost money and can't be modded as easily). --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 03:02, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Just a quick note: Using domains with InvisionFree is free, so a subdomain like forums.uncyclopedia.wikia.com would be possible. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 07:53, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

But would I automagically have the same username on the phpBB board forum? And would the new posts show up on my watchlist? ---Rev. Isra (talk) 07:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Just another quick note, no, they aren't integrated but you can register on the forum and there is an option for topic watchlists. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 15:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I believe there's a sort-of watchlist for both phpBB and IPB. What it does is notify you by e-mail when someone posts in a topic you are watching. Also, if we have the server space, why don't we just host the forums here, Lugiatm? phpBB is free, and it wouldn't be too much of a pain to a pain to install it (unless you absolutely can't add another SQL database... --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 18:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, Wikicities only normally hosts Wikis, and if the servers run slow or a splode, a trait becoming more and more frequent, then coupled with IRC there's always at least one way of reaching the admins with an offsite forum. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 20:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Point taken. I'd still prefer to have it independent of IF, though. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 04:55, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

My thoughts:

• Archive the forum, and create a new page called Forum:
• Create several pages in the Forum: namespace, by topic. For example, Forum:Articles for discussing articles, Forum:Code for CSS, templates, mediawiki formatting help etc., Forums:News for discussing uncyclopedia-related news, Forum:Vote for topics that need voting... The idea would be to bring things together in a few forums. The forums should be general, not specific. Any more than 4 or 5 forums would defeat the purpose. The examples I mentioned are just examples and we would need to think more about what topics we need forums for.
• Optionally, Move the VD to Forum:VD, and any other Forum-like pages could be either moved to the Forum: namespace, or a link could be added at Forum:

--Paulgb 01:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Or we could just do Village Dump subpages. --Algorithm (talk) 02:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Question

What the heck does "binna tellyneck bendosack" mean? - User:Guest/sig 18:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• Wait... WHAT? Where the hell did you hear that?!?!? --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 22:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• It's from an old Wilde quote on Mozilla Firefox that was there for a long time.

“Firefox binna tellyneck bendosack, thats for friggin sure.”

~ Oscar Wilde on Mozilla Firefox

- User:Guest/sig 01:18, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Don't worry - Alec says it's only a simple anagram for "Becky Lenk's Nintendo cabal." Probably nothing to worry about. Personally, I'd just forget the whole thing ever happened. --Some user 01:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

First Semi-Annual Wikipedia Week

This week is Wikipedia Week! Stay tuned for more information on festivities and be sure to stop by this page! You don't want to miss the parade! --KATIE!! 21:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Signatures

My extravagant signature has immolated itself in protest. I shall now lead a life of ascetic signation. For the sake of your own eyes, and those of your fellows, I urge you to follow my lead in casting off those superfluous and compensatory symbols of vanity. --Spin 05:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• See? The world is soooo out to get me... Sure, wait until I finally take the plunge (i.e.,  c • > • cunwapquc?), just two days ago, then start the backlash. Oh well, I guess it's back to good ol' Some user 05:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)...
  • Don't give in. The day we can't have our sigs is the day the terrorists win. You don't want the terrorists to win, do you Spinnie? ---Rev. Isra (talk) 05:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Never! --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 06:04, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Sigs are fine with me as long as they aren't gay (we'll make an exception in the cases of Keitei and IMBJR because IMBJR only hangs out in the complaints department and Keitei's a girl) --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 11:10, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Yes, please keep yours normal, people. Here's a good rule of thumb: If it has more than 3 distinct colors, or has any images in it, you need to tone it down. Talk pages are not intended to

{{seizure}}

--[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 22:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have to agree with the "nowiki"-ers on this one. Please leave it as it is. --Spin 00:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Who nowiki'd that template? Confess, you vile perpetrator! --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 19:44, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

01:15, 9 February 2006 Isra1337 m (→Signatures - it burns our eyeses, we had to destroy it precious) ---Rev. Isra (talk) 20:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. And I am going to do it again if you don't take it off.

It's there to prove a point. It's no more annoying than these sigs. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 00:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

It is large, animated and purposely jarring. That makes is a hundred times more annoying than even the most annoying sig. And there are sigs annoy the crap out of me. Looking at it literally gives me a headache. No sig has ever done that. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 00:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Volte? Keitei? Spintherism? Etc? --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 16:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• mines plain and simple like they all used to be back in the day when it was just me and Elvis and Splaka.. you kids these days and your fancy sparkling signatures DAMN it makes me sick --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere | Talk | Rate 00:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Heck, I haven't changed mine in years. --Carlb 17:20, 26 October 1966 (UTC)

• I like colors, pretty colors. But not pictures, at least in my signature. Other people have pictures in their signatures, and sometimes pretty colors. Sometimes both. I like that, I really do. Let us not fear pretty colors, or little pictures, or cat shows. On second thought, let us fear cat shows. That's just too much pussy for anyone to handle safely. — WILD WEASEL 11:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

• i hate colors --Nerd42Talk 14:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• All right, all right. Everyone settle down, or I'm gonna bring back the eye-searing Yellow... --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 18:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Why Policy and Rules aren't just words

Looking at the discussion of whether or not policy and rules will do anything to prevent people from screwing up uncyclopedia, there seems to be some confusion as to why such a thing is worthwhile. Sure such policies are likely to be ignored by new users and people in general but that's not why I want them. I want policies and guidelines so that when I block someone for being a fuck or revert a page that's been editted stupid and someone comes to me and complains, I can point them at the rule and be done. I am sick and tired of having to explain why an action was taken over and over again and I don't much like having to reinterpret past precedent all the time. I want them to helpe me guide and justify my actions. --Sir gwax (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Ask Cthulhu

UnNews has recently acquired an advice column! You can email Cthulhu with your questions and select questions will be posted here. Happy... somethings! --KATIE!! 08:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Dear Cthulhu... it's been a while, I know, but I was looking through those pics of us at the dance marathon (I still can't believe you wore that beret!) and it got me thinking... do you still have my bike pump? I kinda need it. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 21:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Uh-Oes

Well well well, I wasn't aware that Wikipedia was getting a new Main Page, why didn't anyone tell me and why aren't we getting one? We need to make a decision on this, or we could lose 500 parody points soon. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 19:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Drafts

Since wikipedia is doing it all fancy-like I'll do it too:

• Draft 6A - Straight ripoff
  • Draft 6A.2 - more like current en.wp draft
• Draft 6B - hybrid version
  • Draft 6B.2 -carl's hybrid version
• Draft 6C - hybrid 2 that keeps the old picture format.
• Draft 6D - Tompkins' hybrid (un's header, but wiki's feature image format)

---Rev. Isra (talk) 06:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

j00 r teh r0x0r, and personally I prefer the ripped off version more. When we get all the entries in, we can have a vote on it. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 15:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I think adopting the "straight ripoff" would be the best solution, especially since Template:Featuredimage isn't very hard to convert to the new format. - User:Guest/sig 10:54, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• Draft 6E - obsoletes all other versions 71.126.150.183 20:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

State of the Wiki Address

Hello, Lady, and Gentlemen. Tonight, I shall present a speech covering such diverse topics as the State of the Wiki. Each and every year, when I feel like it, I present a short, terse, and PR filtered speech regarding the state of our community to well, the same people that already know what's going on and don't really care. Nonetheless, both because I have nothing to do and that I wish to test my keyboard, it shall be given.

The State of the Wiki, lads... (dramatic pause) is rather good.

Now, this isn't the sort of good that causes Jesus to smile upon us, nor is this the very good that Gandhi was talking about when he was a sort of a hungry chap back in India, but, this is "A" good. Over the past year or so, we've gone through lawsuits, strange odors, numerous reskinnings, and lots of bannings. What we've come to now is a situation in which we're growing semi-rapidly, and growth possibly outpacing control.

My original vision when setting up this site was a very freeflowing community without alot of hard rules, based upon the premise that people would respect one another, and sort of have telepathic psychic links. Unfortunately, I went blind and no longer have vision. Actually, i'm just kidding. We're okay. But we have alot of things to decide now that we've run to mass.

In the following year, I expect to introduce a number of things to help our growth break free from the asymptotic state that it seems to be in. We currently have an issue with "signal to noise". Firstly, I will get around to introducing that rating system. The concept of this system is like that of bash.org, and in fact, if I could rip it from them straight off, I probably would. This rating system, if properly implemented, would assist greatly in filtering out the gold in our site from the sand. By allowing users to pick out the best articles without having to nominate it directly in some obscure fashion, they would be able to score an article with +1 or -1 point. With this rating system installed, we would be able to take off a great load from our admins.

Secondly, it may be time to move from a mess of arbitrary and strange rules to a clearer set of streamlined arbitrary and strange rules. By that, the previously mentioned repository of policy might seem to make a good deal of sense. What I wish to do is to cleanup the existing policy pages and merge it into a very clear statement, of funnyness, and non-dickery.

Thirdly, I hope to clarify and perhaps assist in better tools for community communication. I have heard mentions of "the IRC cabal", arbitrary decisions, and other strange noises. This is true. However, in my understanding, it is a matter of communication, and effectiveness of execution. If we can provide superior tools (perhaps an actual forum software?), perhaps we can have better cooperation. I want to try to bring the admin/regular user bridge closer together. I think that if the rating system were installed, this would be much easier, as admins could cite bad ratings as evidence, as well as vice versa.

Finally, what everyone should remember tonight is that this site is intended to be fun. It's a break away from the heedy weirdness of daily life, and a window into the bizzare. If it ever ceases to be that way for *anyone*, then something has gone wrong, and I, as well as the admin staff (bribes are in the backseat), will work to fix it.

That's all for tonight folks. We may have some surprises in store for this year...

Yours in Sophia, --70.107.129.226 03:24, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Things that weren't in this speech: elections - democracy - Homeland - ethics - Jack Abramoff - evil doers I contemplated using those keywords, but I was lazy :)

PPS. For Sophia's sake, I forgot to sign in on my own wiki. --Chronarion 03:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Just an FYI: He did not literally mean we should reduce our dependency on Admins by 75%, it was just a figure of speech. --Secretary of Oil 03:36, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

They have admins in Poland. We should invade. - David Gerard 04:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

(Stands up and applauds) God bless Uncyclopedia! -- » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 04:41, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You pre-empted my Seinfeld reruns for this?!? I am writing an angry letter right now seriously. You are going to be so sorry. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 04:45, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You all look simply radiant! God bless Uncyclopedia! Unfunny crap and dick jokes for all! --KATIE!! 05:07, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

(Golf Claps) Long live uncyclopedia! » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 06:42, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

All Hail the Leader!!!! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

WOOT, THIS IS GREAT! Now for the drinking game.... User:Anidnmeno/sig 02:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

BRAVO--Rataube 01:36, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

what is this wiki everyone keeps babbling about? is it cheese? it sounds like cheese. mmmm, cheese.... --KrUNk 08:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I like cheese! I support the motion for a public forum for cheese discussion and enjoyment! --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 14:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

A rating system and forum would rock. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 16:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Official Minority Party Response to the State of the Wiki

As you all know, it is my official, self-designated duty, to give the official response to President Chronarion's speech. While you President assures you that the Wiki is doing fine, and that all minor conflicts are being resolved. It is my grave responsibility to inform you that everything is not all "fine and dandy."

So I Speak to you tonight, not as Tompkins, but as a fellow Human Being, and Uncyclopedian. As your president said, Uncyclopedia is going through a period of massive growth, but with new growth comes new responsibility. As Uncyclopedia's population reaches new heights, so does the current n00b population. And as we all know, the higher the n00b count becomes, the lower our Word:Article ratio becomes. Personally, I can no longer stand for this anymore, and I've been forced to take matters into my own hands.

For instance, earlier tonight I took it upon myself to NRV nearly 200 articles. All of this while Mr. Chronarion was busy working on his "rating system." His rating system which has still not been put into effect! JUST STEAL THE DUMB THING!!! NO ONE CARES!!!

*Ahem...* Anyway, as I was saying, the quality of Uncyclopedia is declining at alarming rates, and I as one man, can not do everything by myself. That is why I am speaking to you tonight, to propose a hostile takeover of Uncyclopedia. I've assembled an elite task-force of Users and Administrators, together we can win this battle! WE SHALL PREVAIL!!! Godspeed.

--  t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 06:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Yeah, either that or you know... just stop creating crap, and get active in Uncyclopedia's current deletion programs. But hey, I'm gonna leave it up to you. If you're still interested in a hostile takeover, just leave me a message on my talk page, and I'll try to get back to you as soon as I can.

Meet me in the alleyway at midnight.....come alone. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I preferred the old regime system. If you need a forum system though, I'm your guy. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 10:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You NRV'ed Merkin you spaz. I not saying it's a great article, but it certainly wasn't doing any harm. Are you Hitler in disguise? --Commander Jameson 16:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm Hitler... Look all you have to do is add one paragraph and you can take the NRV off.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 16:12, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Got a better plan. I'll substitute the NRV thingy with a stub and go back to sleep. If merkin ends up in the gas chamber so be it. --Commander Jameson 16:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Added two paragraphs of scientifically sounding nonsense, as per request. The threatened extinction of a whole (sub-)species is not to be taken lightly! --dimario.

Hmm, this is a tough call... Cheese or juicy vigilante justice. Well, I do like cheese... but most of my time is spent on UBP & QVFD... hmm, I needs must ponder... --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.)

I say vigilante justice and juicy cheese go together like eggs and spam! Like liver n' onions! Furry hats and Canadians! --KrUNk 03:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't know who you people are, or what you're doing, but this is some fucking good cereal. *crunch* *crunch* *crunch* — WILD WEASEL 11:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

GIMME! --KrUNk 04:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Response from Insertwackynamehere

As an admin I feel I should say something here. And I also kind of want to say some stuff too. So here goes.

I've been on Uncyclopedia since around last February or March (for simplicity we'll call it a year). Since then a lot of things on Uncyclopedia and in my life have changed. A lot. Seriously, I feel so weird thinking about this time last year. I remember when Uncyclopedia was not hosted on Wikicities and the Main Page resembled Wikipedia's Main Page in the way that raw hamburger meat resembles a living cow (no offense Main Page of the past <3). I remember looking at Uncyclopedia in computer class which resulted in me doing my final project the lunch period before it was due (I ended up with a 96 in the class). Of course, CandyStand.com and Kingdom Of Loathing may have also contributed to my lack of work ethic, but I'll always remember how one of the procrastination inducers of that era of my life was Uncyclopedia. Of course, this was all before I even had an account and I admit me and my friends did some stupid things which I would probably punish in the form of a 3 year ban (actually my friends did it, not me). Things such as creating slandanity articles and vandalizing each others (remember these were my friends not me!) Finally I did register an account and I started off working on stuff. I already had some experience working on the Doom Wiki, but I fear that my first (if not all) of my attempts at humor were fairly pathetic. I turned to image editing, and learned to make funny images. I made Canadian Idiot and I it became a featured image making me a Commander. Getting wrapped up in the whole awards thing created by Elvis, I began working with the awards and signatures. I am proud to say I am one of the original long-and-acronym-infested-signature whores. Shortly afterwords I became an administrator of Uncyclopedia. Fast forward a few months and here I am. But this speech isn't about that time, it's about my time on Uncyclopedia around the Winter and Spring (and early Summer) of 2005 where a lot of stuff changed in my life, resulting in how I feel so weird thinking about myself one year ago, around now.
I suppose it could be just the regular feeling of ending a school year that starts (slowly) as early as February and starts to peak around May. It could be that it was one of the craziest year endings ever, on top of that. For example, there was a girl (obviously.. what's a longwinded memoire without [attempted] romance?), there was the excitement of summer (Live 8 in Philly, need I say more), and there was the bittersweetness of saying goodbye to everyone for the summer. And then, in June after finals (which I failed, throwing depression into my mix of already confusing and conflicting emotions), some kids cut school, got drunk and one of them died attempting to climb down a cliff near the highway, when he was finally hit with the 12 shots of hard liquor he'd drank. Now, our school is fairly small so everyone was affected by this and I was too especially, because I had known the kid very well in 8th grade (I was in 10th at the time). This added to the whole feeling of the time. Now the bittersweetness of saying goodbye to everyone for the summer had been devolved into the depression of saying goodbye. Luckily for me, and a lot of other people I talked to, it was one of the closest summers we'd had and in the end it felt like we never said goodbye at all and that it was just an extension of the school year minus the work. Anyway all this stuff at once was pretty crazy and a lot of stuff changed for me girl-wise and social-wise also. No longer was I a geek with social problems. I was now just a geek. A big step after 16 years for me :) So yeah confusing times.

I guess my point is, Uncyclopedia was there as one of those things you automatically associate with a certain era of your life. Uncyclopedia has successfully made it into my head as an era-defining object (it gets to share this era with Trident mint gum, a particular girl IRCers have heard me talk to myself about more than once, Where Is My Mind - Pixies, We Built This City - Starship, Life On Mars? - David Bowie, Live 8, various teachers and school stuff, and other things I haven't mentioned). So now that I've just explained what Uncyclopedia means to me personally as if I was just assigned a 5th grade writing prompt, I'd like to say thanks to Chronarion and my fellow admins and wretched peasants members for this awesome site. I'm proud to be associated with it. Now in an attempt to awkwardly make this speech less heart-wrenching, tear-jerking and touching, I leave you with a great big "Go crazy and have fun!" --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere | Talk | Rate 00:22, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

That's it. I'm making a KoL template, as soon as I get done applauding your speech, sir. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 04:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Heh thanks, and I KoL template would be cool :) --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere | Talk | Rate 04:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Bravo, Wacky. :) It takes guts to be emotive in front of a room this size. I was bracing myself for a big goodbye speech. I'm glad this wasn't one. ~ T. (talk) 05:07, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Response from Rcmurphy

As an admin I feel I am transgressing some sort of rule by editing at the Dump, but I figure nobody will care read this anyway, so here goes.

I came here in March 2005. I was a happy, bright-eyed 19-year old with a promising future ahead of me. Uncyclopedia changed all that. In the past eleven months I have become bitter, angry and depressed. When I see people nowadays in real life I always hope I can find a [ban] button somewhere so that I don't have to deal with them. I can no longer see an iPod as merely a neat tech toy - it means something more to me, and I fear I will never be able to shake that albatross from my neck. Around midsummer I began psychiatric sessions to deal with my obsession with Uncyclopedia. I will only say that they went poorly and that my psychiatrist switched careers after that. I still have not resolved my psychological and emotion problems. I am a time bomb waiting to go off, and let's face it, when I do you guys will be the first ones I'll have to deal with.

In eleven months I've gone through a lot of changes in my non-Uncyc life as well. When I joined the project I was merely a college freshman. Now I'm a...college sophomore. And with that extra year comes all the extra responsibilities. You know the ones. When I think that, another year from now, I'll be a college junior, and a year after that I'll be getting ready to graduate and then probably go on to more school, well, I just want to shoot myself get all teary-eyed. Snif. Excuse me.

I've seen thousands of users come and go. I've seen admins and friends leave the project to pursue interests elsewhere (for some reason). I've seen scandal, I've seen suffering, I've seen hearts and minds brutally murdered through VFD and VFS. I've seen ERTW not do a danged thing after his sysopping. In eleven months, I've seen two new members of the Uncyc family emerge. There may still be hope for them, but I am not optimistic. Oh yeah, and this happened, which wasn't so cool.

I guess what I'm saying is that the past almost-year has had a big impact on my life, and Uncyc has been a big part of that big impact, or at least a big part of a small bit of that big impact. I still don't have a potato mug on my desk, but you know what, I don't need a potato mug to remind me of an internet site, though it would be nice. And I don't need material objects to remind me of the people I've met and interacted with in the past year, because I'm getting those memories erased anyway as soon as the technology is available.

What I'm building up to is...

I'm sorry. This is difficult for me.

After spending so many countless hours here, making this announcement now...it feels like when Michael Jordan limped out of the NBA. It feels like when Nancy Kerrigan got her knee clubbed. It feels like the end of a lifetime.

May I have a moment to compose myself? Thank you...

A lot of you may not understand why I'm choosing to do this now, and you may never understand. Most of you will rejoice. But if there's one anonymous IP user who I've made an impact on, then the past eleven months have been worth every second in a sad, illogical way. That's not even true but it sounds good.

So here it goes. After over 300 days, thousands of edits and deletions, hundreds of bannings...

I'm retiring.

Not really. --—rc (t) 05:46, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Damn... so close, yet so far away.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 05:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Response from Village Dump

I know, I know, I'm supposed to just be a project page for discussion, but occasionally I've got something to say too. I've been on Uncyclopedia for a while now (since 11:57, 9 March 2005 to be exact) and ever since Chronarion first created me I must say every day has been a blast. Sure, I'm occasionally vandalized but I have trusty admins to revert me. And maybe I've hosted a few flamewars as well, but I've housed more than enough intellectual discussion to make up for it. I've also produced 15 little Village Dumps with more on the way, and that makes me proud. I know as a wiki style messageboard, I'm just thought of as another page, but I hope you enjoy reading my thanks. Everyday I remember you guys and I gladly will house your discussions about various topics for hopefully years to come. I love you guys! --Village Dump 00:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

awww how sweet! thanks, dump :) --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere | Talk | Rate 00:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah Dump, you ROCK! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 02:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Best inanimate response EVER!!!!--<<>> 05:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Inlined external images?!

Inlined external images are considered harmful, almost as harmful as "considered harmful" essays. Check Natasha Henstridge, particularly this old edit. I'm amazed the site isn't a sea of goatse already.

However, I mentioned this on #wikicities (going "wtf") and apparently some people on some wikis got upset at inlined external images being switched off. So I said I'd run it past the Dump rather than ask for it unilaterally or anything - David Gerard 22:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

If this feature can be blocked while still allowing internal images to be linked elsewhere (Uoods being a good example of this) I'd be entirely for this proposition. Can image inclusions be whitelisted? --Algorithm (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Have to agree with algo on this one.--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 01:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, while those pictures are indeed, um... beautiful, it would be nice to have some kind of control over the incrap and whatnot.<<>>01:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The awards are ugly as hell

I was trying to redesign my userpage with them on there but I simply couldn't. Some of them are huge and some of them are tiny, and some of them are automatically centered and some aren't. Some don't even work inside tables, and I can't figure out why. It's impossible to make a list of awards look anything but eye-gougingly bad, so I've been forced to move them off my userpage onto a self-contained HAZMAT page so that it doesn't contaminate my articles or something. What I'm trying to say is, I think we need to make one boilerplate that will always remain exactly the same size (same width, at least) but is versatile enough that it can work with any award that is imaginable. I would guess it should have a "titlebar", a description, an image with a standard image size, a place for the awarder's name, and possibly a place for a small comment. It might make some of the awards a little bigger, but they will stack for easy storage. Any comments on starting some sort of award redesign initiative? --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 16:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

yeah a redesign would be nice.. i was too busy organizing stuff and a lot of the stuff I through together is kinda crappy --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere | Talk | Rate 20:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok. But don't reduce ALL of them to a SINGLE format. Make about 4 categories. Ninjastars, Regular Awards, Personal Awards (Like Carlos's and Zombie's), another category i'm probably forgeting. All the categories may have common attributes like the authomatical centering, but may also keep specific category attributes like size.

BTW, I made a new award. I may still change the picture, but I post it here in case anyone wants to use it.

THIS USER VOTES WISELY They voted for me. And I didn't even have to bribe them. explanation -- giver

--Rataube 02:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't particularly see any reason to separate Ninjastars from the other awards, and I don't know what you mean by "regular" awards, since all awards are regular awards. All the ninjastars should have a common look, but I don't see any reason to make them a different template, since the same information applies. Personal awards I don't really care about since they are, as you say, personal. They don't have to follow any particular scheme in my opinion (although I really recommend against making them huge and unwieldly). --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 04:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The reason to make categories is to keep at least some of the variety. Variety is good in my eyes. I propose categories as a middle point between your vision and the current mess. And the reason to standarize the personal awards is to make them suitable for the userpages.--Rataube 11:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, very cool reskinning today

Nicely done. Quite funny, and AMERICAN-CENTRIC!!!! THAT'S THE WAY THE INTERNET SHOULD BE!!! But seriously, it's very clever, and before any Europeans get upset, keep in mind that if anything important ever happened there we'd honoUr it with a reskinning. -- » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 16:10, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

What? One of the categories says, "Other gay American sports"... that's making FUN of football... so kinda making fun of Ameri-centricism... maybe...<<>>17:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

No. I see a lot more making fun of Peyton Manning for choking in the playoffs. It's not a parody of American-centricism so much as just a reskinning in honor of a major (and fairly worldwide) event.

I feel like banning you. -- » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 18:38, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh please dear God no. Don't ban me!!!1!1! I was just one instance of Manning-on-Manning front page pr0n! What's wrong with that?<<>>03:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Statement of Intent/Purpose

While we're talking about reworking our policies and rules could we also discuss putting up a statement of intent or purpose. Something that says that we're a community driven encyclopedia, something that says we focus on satire and comedy and something that says we're about the real world. --Sir gwax (talk) 16:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

"We are a community driven encyclopedia about the real world that focuses on satire and comedy." --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 19:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering what the reference to the "real world" is aiming at in terms of what is or isn't Uncyclopedia content. What is meant by the expression "real world" and what type of articles are intended to be excluded through the use of that requirement? Thanks. --Ogopogo 19:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

It's meant so that the next time someone posts an article about a fantasy world and I put it up on VFD saying that it's about a fantasy world, I'll have something to back me up (this happens semi-regularly). --Sir gwax (talk) 19:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

"While recognizing that any statement of purpose will be disemboweled, beheaded, burned, and drowned before being run over by Bulldozers of Contentiousness, we aim to write parody articles." Oh, never mind. It'll never go.----OEJ 20:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

What, the "misinformation and utter lies" line isn't enough? Granted, it's kinda buried in the About page right now, but I think it sums us up as good as any. --Algorithm (talk) 23:27, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

fantasy worlds can be funny too if it's done well. --Nerd42Talk 02:13, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Are our admins out of control?

I have decided to cut my project short, and I am pleased to announce that they do not abuse their power or make n00bs feel unwelcome. Even en.wp has treated my few recent edits nicely, leaving the correct ones and copyediting one since I no know english.

I posted two poor-quality articles on this site, one was not touched, the other was NRV'd (with good reason, being 3 lines long).

I may do this sometime in the future with another stupid article idea or three. If anyone still thinks admins abuse their power and treat n00bs unreasonably, please rate them on RYA - that's what it's there for. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 09:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Posted by anon Ogopogo vandal, mid Dawg paragraph:

We do need to find our good friend Ogopogo a companion of some form, aqueous or otherwise. He spends entirely too much time policing *his* entries for actual humor non-content. Otherwise, the project might live up to "anybody can edit it", and he will remain "content".

Not sure why you feel like you do, but vandalizing articles always warrents a ban. Enjoy, and if you return, why not discuss civily what your issues with Ogopogo's edits are. I'm sure he'd be willing to explain his motivations. And as pretentious blowhards, we'd definitely add our opinions in. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 16:14, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, as part of my insanity, I posted a message and conversed with three admins on the subject of the NRV (in the same way many users do). They were all civil, professional, helpful, and one was even humorously uncyclopedic in their comment. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 00:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Proposal: The complete rules

Here is my proposal for The Complete Rules of Uncyclopedia:

• Rule 1: Be funny and not just stupid. Rule 2: don't be a dick.
• Write good, funny stuff. At least amusing. Humour is very subjective, but if you're really clueless about it you'll learn quickly by cattleprod.
• To delete crap, mark stuff with {{NRV}} (where it has a week to live) or list it on QVFD (if it should die right now). Only send it to VFD if it's really marginal, and even then fix it instead if you think you can.
• The admins' job is to keep the site not shit.
  • Admins zap the truly crappy on sight and NRV the eminently deletable that needs to explain itself fast. If you are sure your work was genius, (1) ask the admin why they zapped it (errors happen and are reversible) and (2) make it better.
  • There are various procedural rules set out on some voting pages. They were each put there to keep the site not shit. If you have a serious argument that they keep you from being funny and not just stupid, discuss it rather than messing with them.
  • If you pull questionable shit, you are likely to be blocked per "keep the site not shit." If you rules-lawyer what is "questionable shit," you're probably being an unfunny dick. If you need "don't be a dick" or "be funny and not just stupid" explained to you, you lose.
  • Admins sometimes get hotheaded because they deal with more stupid shit than you ever thought existed. Please forgive their flawed humanity.
• "Don't be a dick" is second to "Be funny and not just stupid", but it's not third to anything else. And if you do want to get away with being a dick, you'd better prove frequently you're the funniest bastard on the wiki.

That's how I see it. As far as I can tell, it all follows from that lot.

Is there anything important I've left out there? Is there anything too redundant in the above that could be cut?

What makes the above short is that it is fundamentally aimed at the clueful. In my experience, instruction creep happens when you try to explain clues to the clueless. That's why WP has so much policy it's routinely ignored. That and it attracts borderline aspergics like moths to a flame - David Gerard 03:08, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

But part of the reason we feel we need to explain to the cluless is that they bitch and whine, and we sometimes look like assholes for simply banning them. If we set an official policy which states that it's ok to ban people for being clueless, I'll be good with showing them the door. Then we can trim down on the rules, and streamline everything. But I think that there needs to be a discussion as to the magnitude of cluefullness someone needs in order to participate on this site.

More clearly stated: If we can blanket-ban anyone not cluefull enough to follow the simple rules, we can have simple rules. If we're expected to try and coach the clueless along, and show them The Uncyclopedia Way, we're not going to be able to have simple rules. Simple rules will help us cut down on the signal-to-noise ratio. However, kicking all the clueless out will help tremendously. And I really think they rely on each other. I'm hoping that it's not any surprise that I vote for simple rules. ;) Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 14:38, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Ugh, not enough coffee. To make sure my point is clear, the reson for lots of words is that the clueless are...clueless. They raise a big stink when admins do their jobs, and delete/revert their crap. It's far easier to say "Read HTBFANJS" then just argue with the clueless. They don't understand what the admin's jobs are. They don't understand why their 3-line article got deleted. If we have simple rules, (like we once did), we end up spending a lot of time explaining to the clueless. If we have massive, detailed rules, we just point them there, and save our time for more important things, like deleting the crap they just posted, instead of reading the rules.

Regardless of whether the rules are short and sweet or long and detailed, the cluless won't get them. If they are detailed enough to spell out what the cluless have done wrong, we can at least point them there in the hopes they get it. If they are short and sweet, we either ignore their whining and look like uncaring, distant pricks, or we waste a lot of our time explaining our actions. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 14:47, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Bah, tell them rules 1 and 2, then refer them to HowTo:Get Banned if they have any further questions. <<>>16:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Despite the fact that we've been fairly free-form about it in the past, I would like it if we could set up some real rules as regard copyright. Creating a derivative work from a factual source to add funny should be fine. Photoshopping copyrighted images to add funny should be fine. Copying other people's jokes/comedy should be unacceptable unless they are public domain. Posting other people's images without modifying them yourself should be unacceptable unless they are public domain. --Sir gwax (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

You're still trying to solve cluelessness with words. When I say this doesn't work, I'm speaking from bitter experience on Wikipedia. What actually happens is that if there are only a few words, the clueless assume it's a cabal conspiracy; if there's lots of words, they quibble and become querulous and rules-lawyer and try to rewrite them and generally make COMPLETE FUCKING PAINS IN THE ARSE of themselves. Then you eventually have to ban them for a year. Then because they're clueless they keep trying to come back, then you spot them because they're being clueless fuckheads in the exact same way, then you kick them off, then they assume conspiracy. Lots of words means so many rules that the clueful just ignore them, and more stuff for the clueless not to understand - David Gerard 01:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'm getting your solution - is it 2 rules, and if you break them you get banned? No justification required on the part of the admins? Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Nah, the one block rule above is: If you pull questionable shit, you are likely to be blocked per "keep the site not shit." If you rules-lawyer what is "questionable shit," you're probably being an unfunny dick. If you need "don't be a dick" or "be funny and not just stupid" explained to you, you lose. If they're too clueless or obtuse to understand that repeat page blanking is bad, that vandalism is bad, that long shitty flamewarring is bad, etc., etc., we probably don't want them. Is that any clearer? For both the newbie and the admin - David Gerard 12:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I mulled this over, and I have to say, I think it has promise. I too have been a little irritated by our rules creep, even though I helped author some of it. Pointing people to a streamlined guide, and basing bans on those two guidelines might make life easier for all involved. I threw together a test page with a few more words than you have above. My one concern is that we'll have to be very viligant at keeping it simple.

And I think I'm finally starting to get your whole point - adding "Don't be a Dick" as Rule #2 pretty much fixes any problems people might have with Rule #1. Because if they have an issue and are civil about it, all is well. If they have an issue and are a dick about it, the door hits their ass on the way out. I throw my full weight behind this plan of action. For. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 15:08, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I like it. Could probably do with shortening. But yeah, everything above after the first line is essentially commentary and hence endlessly malleable or dispensible - David Gerard 16:27, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm liking the Famine rules. For^for. --KATIE!! 16:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I, too, am for Famine's rules. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 00:10, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Both of you are banned for lack of reading comprehension - that's my formatting - those are David Gerard's suggested rules. Please check the top of this section again. While I'm all for glory and honor, you at least need to try to get it right... Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 03:04, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

You, sir, are banned for inability to read in between the lines. User:Famine/Rules --> "the Famine rules." Also, your version is a bit more explicit. So I'm for the bastard child of David Gerard and Famine, if that makes it any clearer. --KATIE!! 03:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I far from rule - that was just me running with a modest proposal - nothing to shout about. (or butcher children over.) Anyway, this kid's got my good looks and his smarts, so what's not to like? Besides the fact that he can't inherit the kingdom until he kills off all the other heirs. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 03:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I really like DavidGerard's rules. I like Famine's re-editing of them somewhat less, but they work and I would support them. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 03:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Conversation continued at Uncyclopedia:Miniluv. --KATIE!! 06:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)