Uncyclopedia talk:Imperial Colonization/6

Archives: Before 2009 • Before The Challenge • The Challenge * The Interim

This page presents

The Golden and Silver Ages of Imperial Colonization

(Silver Age: Jew to You (see The Interim). Golden Age: God, Transformers, Creationism, Discordianism, Batman Bruce Wayne, Science fiction, Dinosaur).

Imperial Colonization Buccaneer Admiral Why???

Good citizens and loyal to Her Imperial Majesty all, let it be known hereby that I, Why do I need to provide this?, do make herewith this mine declaration. Be it made known that the Uncyclopedia Imperial Colonization Admiral of the Fleet, being SysRq, has been lost at sea for many months, last being seen on the 14th of July in the Year of Our Lord 2009, in all probability due to some unprovoked provocation by a privateer with no legal letter of marque. Let it be known further that there be neither Admiral nor Vice Admiral nor Rear Admiral of the Uncyclopedian Imperial Navy, all of whom have been lost at sea for many months, in all probability due to some unprovoked provocation by a privateer with no legal letter of marque. Let it further be known that I, by letter of marque by Imperial Administrator MrN9000, do hereby declare myself to be the Imperial Privateer henceforth known as Imperial Colonization Buccaneer Admiral (BAD) WHY??? and shall, until such time I be lost at sea, retire, or other great misfortune befall me, be Admiral in Fact of Imperial Colonization. Signed on 03:13, January 25, 2010 (UTC) by  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems) 

Successful Conquests and Featured Articles

Traditionally, half of a Feature Article (FA) credit has been given to each person who participated in the Imperial Colonization of an article that got featured. As it takes one FA to become a Commander of the Order of Uncyclopedia, participating in two featured colonizations would make an editor a CUN, and would count toward the hallowed Uncyclopedia Hall of Shame. A big part of the idea, according to someone, was to encourage people to participate in IC. Also according to someone, that policy continues to hold for all articles of the past, i.e. every colonization from Al Gore to Transformers, unless the despoiled MIA Fleet Admiral SysRq said otherwise. (I believe Optimuschris and Colin "All your base" Heaney filled in during the most recent colonizations).

But this is a new dawn, a new era, and other impressive talk. I would like to essentially keep that policy; I don't want a battle over whose edits are better than who else's. The idea here is that this is a collaboration; we're all in this together. And in case a previous Imperial Colonization does get featured, I have no intention of diving through its entire history checking edits. If you say you made productive edits, and the history shows your name during the colonization period, that's good enough for me.

But for future projects, I will be checking edits. Don't worry; I don't plan to be a dick about this. If you've legitimately participated, you'll get credit on the big board whether the article's featured or not. And if it is and you're one of the most significant contributors, you'll get one half FA. But if every one of an editor's edits was reverted because it was completely off topic, or if an editor's only edit was changing "a" to "an" or something else really minor, that colonizer won't get credit. At least that's my thinking right now; I'm open to suggestions from any colonizer, and that policy's not official until our next colonization begins on 7 February 2010. In the meantime, I'll be looking through all the IC talk page archives so I'll be familiar with all past discussions. Feel free to post your comments and ideas below. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 03:25, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Ok , I'm temporarily retired atm, but I thought I'd throw a little reminder your way as you take on the daunting task of kitten herding that is IC. Don't forget about those that help guide you along. For instance, during Micheal Jackson, I had very little time to do much writing, but if you look at the history you'll see that I was pretty important in helping to keep the authors on track. Also, very modest. Of course, I personally don't care about templates, but some folks do. Don't leave the guys who give you advice out is all I'm trying to say. A successful collaboration also requires listening to advice from your peers, even if they're too lazy to actually write much. Or something. -OptyC Sucks! CUN00:39, 3 Feb

I see your point--planning is very important. But I also remember "talk is cheap." I'm leaning toward an active "guide" getting the half credit--if he or she contributes at least something to the article. Opinions, colonizers?

As for the MJ talk history, I don't see it. Unfortunately, it appears that the talk page for Michael Jackson wasn't moved by an admin, but was cut and pasted in, which cuts off the history, or something. (I really don't know how it works, but know it required an admin to merge the IC for Transformers with the pre-IC Transformers history). The talk history before colonization concluded on MJ seems to be missing. If you know where it is, please let us know. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:31, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Amendment. It looks like it might still be there, but posts are out of order. It jumps back and forth through time. This is Michael Jackson's article, and not Doctor Who's? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:44, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

You can thank the same IP's who don't get this article for that. :D -OptyC Sucks! CUN18:29, 3 Feb

Notice

How Colonization works" suggestion, Templates, Why not make it a monthly thing?, and the note immediately below were moved here from User talk:Why do I need to provide this?/Imperial Colonization to make it easier to keep track of discussions.

This page is, not surprisingly, for comments, suggestions, discussions, etc. of Imperial Colonization and User:Why do I need to provide this?/Imperial Colonization. What did you think it would be?

"How Colonization works" suggestion

Hey the page looks great! Anyway, the sections kind of run together for the different weeks, is there a way to break that up a bit?  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  27 Jan 2010 ~ 02:07 (UTC)

Good point. I'll check it out. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:09, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

I spaced it out more. What think? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:20, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

Still a little close. I added green to the bottom as a division to see what it looked like (after I forgot where this page was... I'm so lazy). I've got some thoughts on it... but I'm still pondering.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  02 Feb 2010 ~ 05:13 (UTC)

The green looks fine on my screen. How does it look on other people's?

Also I realized I probably shouldn't have ended up with two talk pages for IC. Unless someone sees a problem with it, I'm going to cut and paste this one to Uncyclopedia_talk:Imperial_Colonization in the next 24 hours (probably less). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:26, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Templates

Do we want to update {{VoteCOTW}} & {{CotW}}, or just leave them alone?  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  27 Jan 2010 ~ 02:07 (UTC)

The note on CotW that it will be done on Saturday probably needs to be changed. If anyone has any ideas for changing the templates, post your ideas. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:12, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

I fixed the note! —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 02:17, 27 January 2010

I like it, but what about "soon" instead of "eventually"? I'd like to get away from the idea that these colonizations take forever. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:22, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but three weeks isn't exactly "soon" though. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 02:24, 27 January 2010

Good point. But the expected time would be two weeks; the first week is for nominations and voting. Three weeks writing will, hopefully, be a rare exception. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:31, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

Correction/clarification of my comment above: the expected writing time would be a week and a half; two and a half weeks writing will, hopefully, be a rare exception. If colonizers feel it's ready for Pee Review before the first week and a half is over, so be it. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 04:58, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Why not make it a monthly thing?

Nom & vote 1st two weeks, edits 2nd two+ weeks. That way if the writing process takes too long the next article can be in the que so to speak? (I'm primarily basing this on the premise that some users are ok with working on two things at a time OR may only work on one project at a time if they don't work on the other for some reason (new, don't like other topic, vacation, Armageddon, etc.)  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  02 Feb 2010 ~ 04:30 (UTC)

Thanks for your ideas. I just finished reading through all the IC talk page archives, so have got some ideas from IC editors who've had a lot more experience with this than I have. The original concept was one week per article, but that was expanded. Almost all editors seemed to want a range of somewhere between one and three weeks, but most felt one week was too short for many articles. My general thoughts right now are to keep voting to a short period so that the drive to start writing on an article stays fresh. But some overlap might be good to keep things moving, so there's no gap in between projects. On the other hand, more than one project happening at the same time could split up an already small number of IC editors. What do the rest of you think? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 04:53, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Exactly my thoughts too. I don't think overlap should be a common thing... maybe the goal should be to (re)write the article in 2 weeks (possible 2-4 weeks if it takes longer) but not let it overlap into the next article's writing phase. That is to say, the ABSOLUTE end time for a project is the day before the official start of the next project. That way the overlap is only during the nom & voting phase for the next project. (It would also provide an opportunity to drive interest in IC on (interested) people's talk pages in the form of an update: "Ok, we're wrapping up <project name> right now... don't forget to nom/vote on IC's newest project." or not... whatever.)  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  02 Feb 2010 ~ 05:11 (UTC)

As of this posting, I don't see a problem with nom and voting for the next project beginning when the current project is being finished. Might help keep things moving. Thoughts, Colonizers? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:19, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

All I would say is... Pick a date for when you will finish and stick to it. People need a deadline. If it slips then that should only be a VERY rare case, and is probably a sign that IC is starting to go to the dogs again anyway. If it's not "finished" it's probably better to leave it as is and move onto something which might get more interest from editors anyway. MrN  Fork you! 00:59, Feb 3

At this point, and based on IC's history, I'm tending to agree. As it stands right now, the standard would be half a week discussion and a week and a half writing. Currently, no article would go beyond two and half weeks writing. At that point, it can be moved to anyone's user space who wishes to keep working on it, but will be out of IC's que. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 01:50, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I like that. But to bring this back around to my suggestion (so I feel all superior like & stuff) how about a "target date of (say two weeks out)" and a "final date of (the day before the official start of the next project)." Thoughts?  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  03 Feb 2010 ~ 01:56 (UTC)

(Actually I don't care about the duration of the nom/vote & writing times, but I do think we should start them on the 1st of each month. That way we're on a schedule and possibly free for other things going on too.)  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  03 Feb 2010 ~ 01:58 (UTC)

Your suggestion of a target date and a final date works well with the idea of a week and half writing as a goal and two and half weeks writing only with an extension, but no longer. So yes. It might also work to pin it down to the beginning of a month, which is similiar to when this one started. But for right now, I'd like to avoid a gap in between. If only a third of the signed up colonizers are active, we'll stil have enough people to keep a colonization going while letting people take a break. We'll see how it goes. Any other opinions on beginning a new one at the beginning of each month? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:10, February 4, 2010 (UTC)

New here, but one reason I kept away was the one-a-week concept, way too much imnho. One a month is workable, sounds good to our monkey brains, and would let everyone contribute in a meaningful way. Or go the other way, one a day, which works too. ~   2:18 4.3.2.mx

And this was colonized...When?

If you're looking for something to do to help with IC other than write articles, here goes.

There was a general agreement in archived discussions to add the date and version of a colonization as is done with Featured articles. Currently, a reader might say, "Hey, at some point this was colonized, and that version is somewhere in the long history. Hell if I'm going to search for it, though."

FA's that appear in an article are coded like this:

{{FA|date=18 April 2005|revision=32172}}

To get the date and version on Template:Colonized, it would be a matter of

1. Changing Template:Colonized to be more like Template:FA
2. Adding the date and version number info to the colonization code (for each article), which is:

{{Colonized}}

I plan to start adding the date and version for each colonized article, but wouldn't mind in the slightest if someone wanted to start adding them too (Clarification: This goes for articles before Transformers only). And by the way, if you add the date and version as is show in the FA example, it won't appear on the article until after the template is changed, but it won't hurt anything if it's added now as far as I know. If someone wanted to double check mine to make sure I've got the right version and date on each article, that would also be cool.

As for changing the Template:Colonized, experienced coders only, please (I might be able to fix it without screwing it up, but can't guarantee it).

As Transformers was Pee Reviewed and at least one IC member had made edits on it since then, I think we can leave the date off it for now, as it's still more-or-less being colonized. What think? And any volunteers? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 23:17, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

Yes... but not until next week... got a busy weekend ahead of me.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  06 Feb 2010 ~ 01:59 (UTC)

I don't know code. Sorry! I bet Puppy would help. He's in Colonization right? DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:58, February 6, 2010 (UTC)

Puppy's on the membership list, but I don't know if he's currently active in IC. But he does know code. I'll let him know about this. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:19, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

I'll get it done this evening. I might also prettify it a little while I'm there. Did we want a colonized logo or something like the featured stamp or the ninja star to appear as well? Tell me your wants and desires, and I'll do what I can to pleasure you! Pup

I'd say play with it. Oh, by "it" I mean the template. Obviously. You can see the IC logo on the IC page. Also you might want to look at the related Template:CotW although that one's probably fine as is. But ideas for improvements are welcome. Oh and there's Template:IC Rank which I made. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 03:58, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

The flag on {{CotW}} and the IC logo are different flags. I don't like the flat flag idea and would prefer to do either a curled flag like {{CotW}} or I can create one like on UnNews:Australia says "You just don't understand our humour!" but with the different design. Question is, which design do you prefer? And do you prefer the animated flag, the static one, or do you want both? Pup

Oh, that flag (I looked through the article about three times before I saw it--I was looking in the article itself. My mind tends to ignore flashy stuff on the side because it's usually an ad). Really, I would prefer something simple, in line with the usual templates. I know you're good at making really flashy stuff, but I don't want people getting the idea that us folks at IC think we're better than everyone else (even though we are). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:31, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

I am all but done. Have a look at Al Gore for an example I've tried to reverse work it so thar articles without the revision and date will still work properly. Anything else? Pup 21:24, 8/02/2010

I like it! I would like just two changes, though. I know one of these links was already there, but I'd cut the new link to savages and the already existing link to British. I'd prefer it just link to the colonized version and to IC. Thanks for your work! WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 22:13, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

Both links were there before. Seriously, do you think that native American/savages is really one of the puns I would make? The only native American I've ever met was training to be an accountant! Pup 22:38, 8/02/2010

Yeah, but I know how Aussies are with natives. I learned everything I needed to know about you Australians by watching Monty Python. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 23:35, February 8, 2010 (UTC)

Feature Credit for Creationism

It's possible in the distant past (i.e. Al Gore and Great Britain) that everyone in IC who made any edit whatsoever to a featured colonization got 1/2 feature credit--I don't know, I wasn't there.

To me, that doesn't seem fair--someone could add a period or remove a comma, and get half credit for writing a feature article. (If I got 1/2 feature credit for every article I edited that later got featured, I'd now have credit for 20 or more, instead of 3). But on the other hand, I don't want to not give an IC member any credit if they really tried.

So the way I'm doing it for Creationism is this: I'm giving credit on The Big Board to every colonizer who edited. This will increase your ranking in IC. This also gives you the right to put

on your user page.

However, this does not count for earning 1/2 feature credit as per getting the rank of CUN, or for Uncyclopedia:Hall of Shame. For that, I went through the edits and saw who I thought were those who made the most significant contributions to the colonized version of Creationism, and they got 1/2 feature credit. I'm trying to make this as fair as possible (while frankly still being a little generous).

I should point out that I gave myself 1/2 credit, in much the same way ChiefjusticeDS gives himself credit for writing an in-depth Pee Review. If a consensus of colonizers believes I did not do enough to earn this, I will remove my own credit.

Comments and suggestions on this are welcome. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 04:17, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Who wants to thank the voters for Creationism?

It would be nice if we did a template to thank those who voted for Creationism. If a member of IC wants to do this, please post a note here first so we don't have two people both making templates, then go do it! (If no one picks this up in the next 12 to 24 hours or so (sigh), I'll post a note here and I'll do it. But I wouldn't mind at all if someone else beat me to it). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:53, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

I'm in ten places at once, so if I get the chance I can throw together a template, but not very likely. As to the distribution, I'm leaving that alone. I'm not a fan of voting thank-you templates, especially as voters go with their conscience, rather than in expectation of a template - but this may be a chance to whore potential joinees to IC, so for this case I'm happy to go ahead with it. (Of course the exception to the above is people voting for Tropical cyclone and Game:Alone in the dark.)                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 06:45, 8/03/2010

Just threw this together for the thank you template. I'm trying to determine is it God being created by George, or George created by God. Deep, isn't it?                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 09:47, 8/03/2010

Yeah, that'll work, especially as George was the AMERICAN president. We wouldn't want no queen on there. George God George bless you! (I'll work on a caption). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:26, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Voters have been thanked. And I'm not a big fan of thanking voters individually, either. If one thanks a voter for voting his/her/its conscience, one should thank people who vote against too. But it's the status quo here, so I'm being an unconscionable, self-serving conformist. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 21:05, March 8, 2010 (UTC)

Imperial Colonization Buccaneer Admiral walking the plank!

Actually, I'm looking for a temporary assistant/permanent successor as head of Imperial Colonization. I got put in charge of IC because I kept bugging a certain admin. I'd say, "Why isn't somebody doing this with IC?" and "Why isn't somebody doing that with IC?" So that admin basically said "Why, you're somebody; go do it" (see discussion here). But as you can see, I took on the position planning to update IC, get it moving again, and see it through one colonization. Well, that happened. IC was updated and reactivated and, thanks to some great colonizers, Creationism was recreated in a spirit of cooperation, was rewritten on deadline, was Pee Reviewed and, as a bonus, was voter-chosen as a feature article within about a day of being nommed. Our current project, Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization/Batman is scheduled to be written by 20 March, and then we'll begin another. IC is moving...and I'm looking for someone to keep it moving. If interested, please post a note below--experienced and successful users only need apply. Ability to say "ARRRRR" like a pirate is not required, but would be nice.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  17:00, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

Wait... your planning to leave? Rifting Contribs ... dont fall in....Complain 349 - LOB 18:41, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not planning to leave Uncyclopedia or Imperial Colonization. But I agreed to take it over to get it moving again, and never intended to do it permanently. That's one reason I chose the title "Buccaneer Admiral" instead of "Admiral of the Fleet," which is the official title of the head of IC.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  21:39, March 17, 2010 (UTC)

If someone wants to take it over full-time then great; if not could a different person lead each new campaign? mAttlobster. (hello) 10:12, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

If it hadn't been for my personal experience and that of one-article heads, I might have thought that a good idea. But from my personal point of view, I had intended to head it for one colonization, but learning how IC worked, updating records, checking past discussions and history, etc., took much more work than helping with the article. Now that we're on the second article with me as BAD, it's much easier, so I think it would be a whole lot of work doing it that way. Also the experienced MrN9000 definitely wanted someone to take it over on a long-term basis, and there were a few colonizations where it was one person, and then another. Those colonizations took months with dead time in between, which is why IC virtually died. I really think it needs someone to do it on a long-term basis. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 17:50, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you keep doing it Whyner? Like you said it's been very successful, and Batman looks great. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:53, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

What's the usual reason someone gives when they announce they'll be leaving a position of high authority? "So I can spend more time with my family." WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 03:24, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

I can be your temporary assistant on a weekly basis... that is to say, once a week I'll be your peon. (I kinda-sorta've been doing it in my own weird way anyway).

Here's my first suggestion. See you next weak!  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  19 Mar 2010 ~ 07:28 (UTC)

I appreciate your helpful note and posted a response. Please check and see if I got it right. As for applying to be my assistant, I'm primarily looking for someone who's experienced and able to take over. But I appreciate any assistance you can give me. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 21:04, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

Oh I'm experienced all right, but too lazy to take over. you got any requests for next week or should I just bring coffee & donuts to the office?  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  21 Mar 2010 ~ 07:52 (UTC)

For right now the main thing you can help me with is pointing out my stupid mistakes. You're good at that. Also there was that idea you had about having a disambig page for an article, completely with a page of possible images. That would be great, if you have the time. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 20:55, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I can do both those things. FYI: I didn't do it for Batman for two-fold reasons: 1) there were several years of history and my brain hurt after the first few months worth. 2) Quite frankly I didn't see how the old images would fit into the structure of the article based on the original concept. (It was only WHEN I saw them that I regretted not making the page 'cause they were used pretty successfully.)  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  25 Mar 2010 ~ 00:10 (UTC)

Batman is where?

To make it easier for successors, Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization/Batman. It was copied to mainspace, not moved--see comments below for Why. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 21:00, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Why are we copying articles to mainspace and not moving them?

We decided not to move our version of Batman and future articles and their talk pages to mainspace, but instead to copy and paste them to mainspace. Moving the history involves an admin huffing the original, then somehow combining our version and huffed version and putting that up so it's unhuffed. One problem is it's a hassle for an admin (or so they tell me; I don't know how it's done as it's a secret of the non-existant cabal). But a big problem I can understand is that it screws up the history.

For example, editor A makes an edit on our colonization of an article. Then editor B makes an edit on the article in main space (in spite of the fact we post a clear notice telling people it's being colonized and edits on the main article will have no effect, they do it anyway). Then editor C makes an edit on our colonization.

If our colonized version is moved to mainspace, it combines the histories. It then looks like editor A made an edit, then editor B completely changed the article to something else (the old version), then editor C completely changed it back (to the colonized version). And that's not what happened.

So to preserve the history, we're cutting and pasting. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 21:08, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Shall I nominate Batman for VFH?

I didn't contribute, but really liked it. Is that okay? Nameable • mumble? 22:28, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Too late, I've done it. =) Nameable • mumble? 22:36, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Batman

+ :We should have Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization/Batman locked now that we're done with that portion of the project.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  25 Mar 2010 ~ 00:32 (UTC)

Name of Batman page

Last week I almost suggested this myself, and should have. The objection on the VFH nom is the same as it was with "Hollywood": that the page does not do justice to the entire topic. The replaced Batman page had alot going for it, and could have used some rewrite but not a full scale purge, imnho. How about taking Nach's suggestion and renaming the page "UnBooks:Batman's Psych Exam" or something. I know it wouldn't be an official 'colonization' per se, or la de da (whichever comes first), but it would be a successful creation of a new page along with a request that the same people go in and do some fix-up on the original Batman page to make it presentable. It took awhile for "Hollywood" to become "Hollywood Bus Tour" and this feels like the same name-change movement may have a point. What do people think? (and the age old scientific question "How do people think?") Aleister in Chains 17:53 23 3 2MX

Note: I cut and pasted this here from an archived page. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 18:03, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Usually I like to wait for other colonizers to comment before I add my own, but as Batman has already been colonized, why wait?

1. Personally, I and the other colonizers who both looked over the Batman history and commented on it found little or nothing worth saving (unlike Creationism, where we found good stuff we could use).
2. Remember that the primary goal of IC is taking an article that is less than adequate and will likely get a lot of visits, and turning it into something worth reading. I believe we fully succeeded in doing that. Getting featured is certainly a nice bonus (I was very pleased that Creationism was featured), but is an extra, not our stated goal. Batman could happily stay where he is. Well, he wouldn't be happy about it, even though we might want to keep him in Arkham Asylum.
3. But if we do want to do a name change, I strongly suggest we wait until VFH is over, one way or another. I think changing the name now will likely piss people off. As for Hollywood tour, I actually voted against when it was called Hollywood--in fact if I recall correctly, I'm the one who suggested calling it Hollywood tour, along with a couple other suggestions. Wisely, it was left as was, and after a while was resubmitted under a new name (Hollywood tour) where it now looks destined to be featured (and got my vote for).
4. If this fails to be featured and we really want to go for that, I have a suggestion for a name: Bruce Wayne. The article focuses on Bruce Wayne, I think virtually no one is going to be expecting Bruce Wayne to be the definitive Batman article but a great number of visitors will recognize the name, there's already an article named Bruce Wayne, and I think that article is "less than adequate"--which means it would count as a colonization. We could make Batman a temporary redirect to Bruce Wayne, so if someone wants to write a decent Batman article, they certainly could.
5. As soon as a colonized article moves to mainspace, it's open to the world (technically, non-colonizers could edit it even while it's in IC space; I just consider that a de facto application for membership and say so on their talk page. I can be really annoying about that too). While I think it's wise of Aleister to post a note for colonizer discussion, technically we now have no more say over the article than anyone else (although I'll fight like a rabid cat if someone tries to remove the IC tag).

What think, colonizers? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 18:17, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

Good summary, and you get the point well from your Hollywood experience (I won't tell if you don't). Just looked at "Bruce Wayne", pretty bad and random at most points, but the writer was telling a coherent (to him or her) story, so if it comes to that "Bruce Wayne" can be renamed as well. If we do this long enough then "Fisher Price" will be renamed "Gay Jesus" (which it should have been in the first place) and everyone can go home with a goldfish in a bowl. And you make good points, again, nice work. Al de'chain 18:44 23 3 2MX

Also right now Batman has a positive vote of 6--that's not at all bad for two days, so there's still a fighting chance it will get featured under that name. And you make good points, again, nice work. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:35, March 23, 2010 (UTC)

If the Batman name is kept, something good may have come from this discussion. Why don't we take the old Batman article and move that to "Bruce Wayne", and then move Bruce Wayne wherever. Then some of us can try to tune up the new "Bruce Wayne". And you make good points, again, nice work. Al en'chain 00:41 24 3 mmx

Sorry, I think I answered this elsewhere but should answer it here so the talk page keeps a record of IC discussions. I'd suggest waiting like Hollywood did, which faded out of VFH and then WHAM! Came back as Hollywood tour and got featured. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:11, March 29, 2010 (UTC)

Back to Batman

We discussed that, if Batman didn't pass VFH, we could make it a redirect and copy and paste it to Bruce Wayne. I think Bruce Wayne now is in as bad of shape as Batman was before we completely redid it. Then we could think about seeing it get renommed for VFH. Many people voted against Batman on the basis of the title, and even suggested renaming it Bruce Wayne.

But I looked through Batman, and in retrospect I still think it's well-written, but much of it I didn't find funny. While it's no longer part of IC, as we did it any IC members who are interested might want to think about making small rewrites to add more humour. I don't think major rewriting is called for--frankly, that would probably mess up the article. But minor ones for more humour could help. What think, colonizers? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 04:03, April 16, 2010 (UTC)

Good ideas, both. A move to Bruce Wayne and then a few quality humours thrown about, and the dish will come out of the oven baked. Aleister in Chains 10:51 :05 seconds 16 4 MMX (UTC ASAP)

Discordianism vote needed quickly and member retirement

VOTE DISCORDIAN NOW: We need your vote! On both Creationism and Batman, colonizers who participated came to a consensus on a direction for the article. But on Discordianism, there's been more discord--or at least not a consensus. So we're resorting to (sigh) democracy. Go to Uncyclopedia_talk:Imperial_Colonization/Discordianism#Article_ideas and cast your vote!

You can vote for one or two, comment on as many as you like, but vote quickly--this is an eleventh hour effort, and we will hopefully have a direction in a few hours. I'll be checking the results sometime around 03:00 UTC of 25 March 2010.

ARE YOU RETIRED?: Also note that colonizers who haven't participated in any of the last three colonizations will be moved to the retirement list. Quite frankly, I'm doing this primarily because I have to post each of these notices by hand (I don't have a bot, and sure could use one), and it takes a long time to post to the pages of people who are inactive in IC and even on Uncyclopedia. If you're put on the retirement list and want back on the active list, simply post a request on the IC talk page.

KEEP CHECKING THE IC TALK PAGE: Many important decisions and updates are made and/or described on the IC talk page that are never posted on user talk pages.

POST COMMENTS ON IC TALK. As usual, if you post them on your talk page, I'll likely never see them.

WHY'S REPLACEMENT NEED: A special added reminder that I, Why do I need to provide this? aka  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems) , am only interim director of IC and need a replacement. My intention was to lead IC just long enough to get it revived, which is a major part of the reason I took the title Buccaneer Admiral instead of Admiral of the Fleet, which is the official title of the head of Imperial Colonization. I plan to abandon ship retire shortly after midnight (UTC) on Saturday, 17 April 2010. I would really like someone to work with me on the current colonization, and I will be happy to assist whoever replaces me during the transition--I do not plan to leave IC, only retire as head. If you're interested, post a note at IC Admiral of the Fleet needed.

Happy colonizations! WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 18:15, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

IC Admiral of the Fleet needed

If you're interested in applying, or in just helping out me or my replacement (my last day as head is 17 April 2010), post a note here. I would prefer the new head be selected by consensus, but will consult with experienced colonizers and an admin or two before a final decision is made. (Frankly, I don't even know if I have the right to make the final decision). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:23, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Returning retired members

If you're returning from retirement, please reapply here. I almost missed giving credit to a returning member who wasn't on the active list when that user made edits. Thanks. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 22:57, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

But if retired members dont want to go back they dont need to retire? carrot lol 05:43 April 10

Sorry, I'm not understanding your question. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 04:03, April 11, 2010 (UTC)

Batman to Bruce Wayne

By consensus of IC members, Batman was copied to Bruce Wayne and Batman made a redirect to it. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 01:16, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

By vote of Uncyclopedia members, Bruce Wayne was featured 224 April 2010!

Important note about feature credit

While I'm retired as head of IC, I was given the responsibility of deciding how credit would be given on articles that I headed, being Creationism, Bruce Wayne and Discordianism. Every colonizer who worked on Batman/Bruce Wayne was given credit on Meet our staff/the Big Board. But not everyone who worked on it gets 1/2 feature credit--otherwise someone could add a sentence or two and fix a few spelling errors and get 1/2 credit for writing an article. I will be posting a note on the talk pages of those who get 1/2 credit probably on Monday, 26 April 2010. It might be sooner. I'm sorry for taking so long, but circumstances have gotten in my way. In any case, if you helped with the article you can add the template that says you helped write a featured colonization whether you get 1/2 credit or not! WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:07, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

Buccaneer Admiral retired--sort of

It's now official: I'm retired as Interim Director of Imperial Colonization. My goals were to update old records and get everything current, revive the nearly dead Imperial Colonization and get it alive and kicking, and have one successful colonization. Well, it's current, it's alive, and I was blessed to have some great work done by some very talented colonizers on three successful colonizations. These are Creationism (which was featured), Batman (which got moved to Bruce Wayne), and Discordianism (the colonized version is currently at Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization/Discordianism, which is now up for Pee Review and will be moved to mainspace after post-Pee edits).

However, unless anyone objects, for the time being I plan to retain the title of Buccaneer Admiral as I want to finish the post-Pee Review work on Discordianism. Remember that the official title of the head of Imperial Colonization is Admiral of the Fleet aka Fleet Admiral aka FAD. Because I intended to only be temporary leader, I didn't take that title. I will be happy to assist whoever takes this over if they would like. If they would rather work without an assistant, or want someone else to be their assistant, that's fine too.

Happy Colonizing!  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  06:38, April 18, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting Bruce Wayne--we need a template

Like it or not, but it's a tradition to make a thank you template for those who vote for an article. Anyone want to do this for Bruce Wayne? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:13, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

All Hail PuppyOnTheRadio

The man with a million signatures and almost as many featured articles, PuppyOnTheRadio, has graciously agreed to head Imperial Colonization, at least for the merry month of May! So please give him as much respect as you did me (let's see how he handles being tied to the mast during a hurricane, and being locked in the hull and forced to eat rats). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:21, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

IC credit

As I want to keep IC discussions where they can easily be found by current and future colonizers, I'm copying this from my talk page to here. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:05, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

Hey I want my Bruce Wayne credit! SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 05:11, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

See here. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 06:11, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

But I didn't just "write a sentence or two, or correct a few spelling mistakes". I wrote a whole paragraph, or something. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 06:38, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

The post says nothing about you, personally; it applies to all colonizers. I regret that I probably won't have this done until Monday, as I said in the post. I will consider how much someone edited the article, how much they contributed to the planning and organization of the article, how much they helped with getting images and writing captions, and certainly with how much of what they did ended up in the featured version. Without going into any details, I've looked at previous colonizations where someone made substantial edits that weren't used, and I have to take that into account, among other factors. For a specific example, I was very active in the discussion for Transformers and made several suggestions, and even made seven edits to the article. If it gets featured do I think I deserve 1/2 feature credit? No. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 07:03, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

Dude, initially, the rules said that if someone participated in the discussion without even making a single edit, they'd get half a credit. That's what IC is for, and that's what makes it different from ordinary collabs where only 2 or 3 users earn credits. What you're doing is basically scaring colonizers off. Myself, I'm fucking off IC for good if this is the way things are going to be.SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 11:34, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

First off, I'll address "That's what IC is for." The purpose of IC is not and from what I've researched has never been to give someone 1/2 feature credit for writing a couple of sentences. That may have been your purpose for being in IC, but it's not the stated purpose. The goal isn't even to get articles featured--that's a happy bonus, but not the stated goal. In a nutshell, the purpose of IC is to find articles that are less than adequate and that are likely to be read by many people, and then rewriting them so they're good. By doing that the hope is to improve the wiki, get people coming back, and get talented people to sign up for Uncyclopedia. (See Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization for details). Note that anyone who makes a productive edit to an IC article does get credit on the IC Big Board which can increase your rank in IC. You or any IC member can get a point just for adding a sentence and making a couple spelling corrections. Frankly, I think that's more than fair.

Second, I discussed "who gets 1/2 feature credit" with admins and with colonizers and posted it for discussion on the IC talk page before we even began our first colonization with me as head. You can see the 2 February 2010 post here. That discussion's been there for comments for almost three months, and a decision was made and announced a couple months ago. PuppyOnTheRadio, who's heading IC in May, agrees with not giving out feature credit to everyone. Since the discussion was posted 2 February, no one posted there that they disagreed with giving 1/2 feature only to those who did the most, so that's what we're doing and what we have been doing. Also there hasn't been any featured colonization since Great Britain was featured 25 May 2009, almost a year ago--except for articles featured during my short time as head of IC.

Third, as for me "scaring colonizers off," let's examine that. Between August 2009 and January 2010, before I became head of IC, there was one (1) successful colonization. That's one in six months. As a side note, that one article was put on VFH and failed very quickly. From the end of January to mid April when I was head of IC, there were three (3) successful colonizations. That's three in a little over 2 1/2 months. As a side note, two of them have been featured all ready. Yep, you're right, I screwed up IC.

Fourth, while I think you're a talented user and a benefit to Uncyclopedia, if that's your attitude toward IC perhaps it is best you find something else to do here that you are more enthusiastic about. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:05, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

I've now discussed this issue and the awarding of feature credit on this article with several colonizers, most of them oldtimers but newcomers too, and have come to a decision based on their input. None of them (except the user above) thought everyone should be given 1/2 feature credit. I'll be posting who gets it on each user's talk page probably within the hour. Again, remember everyone who made a worthwhile contribution to the colonization, even if small, gets 1 point in IC. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:17, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Who got 1/2 feature credit for Batman/Bruce Wayne

I awarded 1/2 Feature credit to Aleister in Chains (who did a great number of edits including images that were included in the final version), PuppyOnTheRadio (who's edits to the article itself were few but who developed the entire concept in great detail and much of the article in the talk page), and, yes, Why do I need to provide this? AiC and Puppy's 1/2 credit stand, and will not be removed barring an act of Goddess.

My 1/2 feature credit is up for discussion. While every colonizer who expressed an opinion that I saw said I should get credit, if even a single colonizer disagrees, I (or Puppy or someone else if it happens while I'm on vacation) will put it up for decision by colonizers here and I will go by whatever they decide. I would not choose 1/2 feature credit at the cost of losing whatever credibilty I may have here.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  21:24, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Anyone else getting credit?

Yes. Every colonizer who contributed to the article (assuming your edit wasn't completed reverted, off topic and/or vandalism) has already gotten one (1) full point on the IC Big Board, which can increase your rank. Whether you wrote 80 sentences or 1, you get 1 point.

Second, if you believe strongly that one or, at maximum, two more people should be given 1/2 feature credit in addition to those listed above, post your suggestions below. If you agree or disagree with a suggestion, post that too. THIS IS NOT A VOTE. This is an advisement. I'll look over this when I return on 5 May and see what's here. If Puppy thinks there's a very clear consensus, he may decide this when he takes over for the month of May.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  21:39, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

Why is Why still acting like the boss if he's retired as head of IC?

Good question, even if I did ask it myself. I'm responsible for overseeing the colonization of Creationism, Batman Bruce Wayne and Discordianism. I've been given/accepted responsibility for getting those edited, finalized, put up for Pee Review, edited post-review, and deciding feature credit if they're featured. That's why. Thanks for asking.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  21:45, April 26, 2010 (UTC)

In all seriousness, now.

8===========D~ ~ ~ ~O:

- Not particularly sincere, Sir ColinAYBCUNVFHWhoringMore Whoring at23:03, Monday 26 April 2010 -

Discordianism on VFH: What's happening?

I've been on vacation, but checked in on Discordianism on VFH a couple of times. It had 7 for votes and no against votes, and I thought, "Great! This will likely get featured, and we'll at least have a quasi-feature." A couple or so days later it had picked up a no vote or two, but had a total score of 9, which by the usual pattern is one short of feature level. I thought, "We've got an obvious feature article here!" Now I return and it's got a score of 3. What happened?

If this doesn't get featured, I plan to ask those who voted no if they have suggestions.

You will see no comment from this poster about the anti-first person votes--apparently, a form that's thrived through all of human history and is still found in Pulitizer Prize winning novels and best sellers is now passé here. The person who made this post is refraining from the use of the first person perspective in the remainder of this post. But said person may note that some of the no-voters are talented uncyclopedians and may have some good suggestions for improvement. This person plans, unless there is objection by consensus, to ask said voters for suggestions if the current VFH effort fails. (Remember, Batman failed on first try).

This post was made by the first-person avoiding person known as WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 22:05, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

Well, I haven't voted on it but to me it just drags on a bit and just doesn't hold my interest enough. This is probably the case for most of the against voters. I don't believe anyone mentioning it being in first-person truly doesn't like first-person articles, but it does seem as if they are becoming the only articles that get featured. I think some people are paranoid about this site becoming pigeonholed by first-person articles, so they'll have somewhat tainted tastes for awhile (at least until we start featuring more encyclopedic articles again). But yeah, I think it's just because everyone thinks that it drags on a bit, much like this little statement of mine. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 22:22, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

What can we do to make it better? Really it was going to be featured until two admins voted against and then other people started doing it too. I won't say more or I'll get in trouble. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 22:01, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

I'd say it should be shortened, but I don't know what parts you'd cut. Really, I'm willing to bet if you guys were to wait a week or two and renom it, it'd probably get featured. Also, you can say whatever you want about the stupid admins. They're nothing but cock-suckers. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 22:08, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I think all the sections are needed for the article to hold together. What may have happened is that the article was written by people who know Discordianism, and Discordianism is known for having logical twists and double and triple meanings and self-contradictions, etc. The first time I read Principia Discordia, I thought, "I really like this, but I don't what the hell I just read." Perhaps this article struck some people that way too. I think it would be good, if this doesn't get featured, that a rewrite be done based on the suggestions of people who don't know Discordia. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:57, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

I would have like to have done much more editing, so I take some of the blame (although I did a few spurts, and some of those I had to revert reverts several times). It seemed early on that the funny was missing, it just didn't have the jokes. But by the time I got into it the entire direction, style, storyline, characters, etc. was already laid down and I hesitated to jump in and tear it apart again. My main suggestion is to let someone new go into it and everyone else keep away from the editing for awhile. Al sans chains 3:06 7 5 MMX

I'm not saying that couldn't work, but when I've seen it tried, it hasn't worked. And of course we can't stop people from editing anyway, unless it's on a person's user space. If someone wants to copy the article to their user space, edit it there and then let people see what they think, that might work. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 03:22, May 7, 2010 (UTC)

IC Template: New or Classic?

We have a suggested change to the IC membership template. IC members please vote for which one you prefer. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 02:58, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Classic Version

ICThis user is a member of Imperial Colonization.

New Version

This user is a member of Imperial Colonization.

Classic Version

Score: +0

New Version

Score: +1

• Comment Using a clunky version of IE6 here and the image on the second template doesn't work goodly - as in it doesn't appear. I'd suggest either way having the link of the IC and on the bead to redirect to the IC main page. What can be done as an alternative is changing the template code itself so that if people drop the template on their page with nothing else it comes up as the classic, if they do something like {{ICmember|new}} it comes up with the newer one. (I don't really use userboxes so I don't know what the template is called and I'm not really fussed either way.)                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 Monday, 05:30, Jun 7 2010 UTC

You can upgrade it for free to IE8 from the Microsoft website—my version of IE8 runs smoothly. PersonalEditor6003 _{t e} 14:24, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

It's a work PC, so I can't upgrade. If we were talking about my home PC, then I'm running FF3+, MS8+, Opera, Safari, and Chrome. But I always try and work on the idea of reverse supportability for whatever I do. By the way, I'm PuppyOnTheRadio - pleased to meet you.                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 Tuesday, 07:00, Jun 8 2010 UTC

Um, Puppy, what did you say? "I'd suggest either way having the link of the IC and on the bead to redirect to the IC main page." And changing template so if the new doesn't come up the old does--how do you do that? Remember, most of us aren't Code Monsters like you are. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 17:50, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Something like this:-

{{Template:IC Member}} becomes

ICThis user is a member of Imperial Colonization.

{{Template:IC Member|new}} becomes

This user is a member of Imperial Colonization.

Also sorted out the problem with the image and IE6 - it was actually on my end.                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 Thursday, 01:41, Jun 10 2010 UTC

• For Looks much better imo, and works fine on firefox 3 and IE7 --DougalJabber at me. 15:34, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

• I'm a now randomly using both on my userpage.

ICThis user is a member of Imperial Colonization.

 ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  10 Jun 2010 ~ 02:44 (UTC)

So what happens now?

Might just be me being stupid, but we don't seem to have any articles to vote on for colonisation...anyone got any ideas? or shall I go on a noming spree? DougalJabber at me. 11:07, June 11, 2010 (UTC)

It's complicated, but the short answer is not much until somone decides to take the reigns as head of IC. Why has done his duty as have I, as short as my time was. If someone wanted to try heading this up for a while we could have another colonisation. Any volunteers? (I'm hoping that someone will pick it up in July, so feel free to nom.)                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 Friday, 12:07, Jun 11 2010 UTC

Conservation Week or whatever it's called (it's two weeks) is set to begin very soon, and that focuses on rewriting articles. So it probably won't hurt if IC takes a break for that (although it's not necessary). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 18:20, June 12, 2010 (UTC)

What happens now you ask...?

So here's what happens now...

Come the first week July I will take over as head of IC (provided I'm still employed) and immediately clean out the garage and add on an addition to the mansion. (I figure it will take from now until then to come up with a good title anyway -- proper character generation ALWAYS starts out with a good name BEFORE you roll for stats.) We, will temporarily hold off on writing the new colonization as it would interfere with rewrite contest - Uncyclopedia:Conservation Week, set to start on 00:01 GMT on July 5th. At some point after July 21st we'll begin the next (one-time-only) extra long project set to finish before the end of August. (Just think of it as an extra long Nom & vote session.) This will allow us to:

• Drum up some interest in IC at the end of CW.

• (Not piss off Dexter for taking away contestants from CW.)

• Get a good long list of article suggestions in the cue.

• Bring IC back to the one-a-month concept starting in September.

What do you think?  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  18 Jun 2010 ~ 03:37 (UTC)

Excellent - I knew I should have asked you before now. Speaking of asking Happytimes...                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 Friday, 03:54, Jun 18 2010 UTC

OK by me! WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 17:49, June 19, 2010 (UTC)

Fuck Geah! Dictatorial Regime!

---

  I stealthily commandeered Imperial Colonization (just now) and will be implementing change AFTER Conservation Week 2010.
   Please submit the flotsam of your suggested articles needing rewrites (after CW) here.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  01 Jul 2010 ~ 07:25 (UTC)

Category:Nominated Colonizations

It doesn't really seem like you guys are using this category at all. Would you mind if it was huffed? Saberwolf116 14:58, August 3, 2010 (UTC)

Um, er....  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  04 Aug 2010 ~ 00:21 (UTC)

This is used when voting is taking place. I'm going to revamp the categories soon (and add some explanations to them.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  13 Sep 2010 ~ 06:05 (UTC)

What about The Recruits?

My name has been on the IC conscripts list for over 3 weeks, yet my application hasn't moved forward. Come to think of it, the entire Conscripts list seems to have stagnated. Can anybody look into this, please? --Scofield 09:48, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

IC is currently only semi-active, but is looking to kick up again in the new year. In the meantime the latest article is up for review, and feel free to add nominations to what you feel the next colonisation should be.                                • Puppy's talk page • 00:40, June 5, 2009 Sunday, 09:56, Dec 26 2010 UTC

Speaking of conscription, I plan to return to IC so I can get back to helping out rewriting good articles.--If you're 555 then I'm Talk What's it like to be a heretic? 01:20, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

IMadeThisOnTheComputer

What think for a thank you voting thingy for Science fiction? And if you like it but see something that you think should be tweaked, I can tweak it.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  04:14, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

I likes, but maybe the animated Kirk image - it's been a cause of contention, and ended up dumped, so would be perversely logical to use it for the thank you template. In deference to peoples objection to animated gifs on their talkpage, however, I'd have it as a pop-up. Pup 05:59 07 Mar '11

You can't see Kirk? He's getting animated inside Princess Leia's bikini. (Seriously, I see your irony, but I got very tired of that image about a year ago. I'd have a hard time putting it on anyone's page even as a pop-up). WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 06:26, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

William Shatner, dictating his memoirs, is emotionally shattered as he recalls how he first met Leonard Nimoy

I'm not sure, do you mean this one, with the finest caption ever written under a pic in the English language, or is there another one under discussion? Aleister 11:31 7-3-'11

No, we do not "mean this one, with the finest caption ever written under a pic in the English language." We mean that one. Gag. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:32, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

*hugs Why?*

1234 ~ 19:36, 7 March 2011

That is the only time in the dozens of edit conflicts I've gotten that I was glad to get an edit conflict. Thanks, Lyrithya! Hug back to you! WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 19:39, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

As there's been no objection to the SF collage and as the objectors have neutralized the supporters of the Kirk image, I will post the following to those who voted for SF if there's no objection in 24 hours:

Science Fiction Thanks From the Alien Deviants at Imperial Colonization

Not such a long time ago, in a wiki not so far, far away, you voted for Science fiction. You voted for it to go where Science fiction had not gone before. Never mind logic, or physics, or even common sense. With your vote, and the votes of alien time-and-space travelers like you, you sent the shining, chrome and steel article where it was destined to go:
To Infinity--and Beyond!

 IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  06:20, March 9, 2011 (UTC)

• I like it. Simsilikesims 07:05, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
  • Cool. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:05, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
• I don't. Why is the header in the template? The only reason to do that is if you want people editing the template, normally. In this case, though, put this on someone's talkpage, how will they try to respond? If they actually want to respond, they'll have to edit the section above, which it'll most likely have nothing to do with.

1234 ~ 07:20, 10 March 2011

• • Interestingly enough, neither of you apparently had that problem. But then you're both experienced Wikipedians, and I see your point, Lyrithya. I put the header in the template out of sheer laziness, so I could cut and paste the whole thing at once and be done with it. But I'll fix it, and go post now. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:05, March 12, 2011 (UTC)
    • Yay! Although it could have made for a nice prank. That wasn't your original intention, was it?
    • Also, I'm not an experienced wikipedian. Every time I try listing something for deletion there, I get horribly confused, freak out, and run away.

1234 ~ 05:26, 12 March 2011

• • • • Wait, isn't this Wikipedia? I haven't been wasting my time on some cheap ripoff, have I? WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:50, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

Feature Credit on Science fiction

Discussion here. (Note PuppyOnTheRadio was head of IC for that colonization and can make the final decision, barring admin interference. Except for this month POTR is an admin. Go figure). IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  05:55, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

The Silver Age is Over

In recognition of the End of The Silver Age of Imperial Colonization (Creationism, Discordianism, Batman Bruce Wayne, Science fiction), this page will soon be archived as The Silver Age. Post your final Silver Age comments now. ). IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  05:59, March 12, 2011 (UTC)

Technically, I wasn't here for any of those. o_O I'm such a noob.

1234 ~ 06:07, 12 March 2011

Well, you wouldn't be recruited even if you tried, dear. My name hasn't moved off the conscripts list in months. --Scofield 13:58, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

You're just saying that because you know I'm prettier than you.

1234 ~ 16:42, 14 March 2011

Well if the silver age really is over, we might as well give it a dignified send off.

  _____  ____   ____  _____         ______     ________ 
 / ____|/ __ \ / __ \|  __ \       |  _ \ \   / /  ____|
| |  __| |  | | |  | | |  | |______| |_) \ \_/ /| |__   
| | |_ | |  | | |  | | |  | |______|  _ < \   / |  __|  
| |__| | |__| | |__| | |__| |      | |_) | | |  | |____ 
 \_____|\____/ \____/|_____/       |____/  |_|  |______|
                                                        
                                                        
  _____ _____ _ __      ________ _____             _____ ______ _ 
 / ____|_   _| |\ \    / /  ____|  __ \      /\   / ____|  ____| |
| (___   | | | | \ \  / /| |__  | |__) |    /  \ | |  __| |__  | |
 \___ \  | | | |  \ \/ / |  __| |  _  /    / /\ \| | |_ |  __| | |
 ____) |_| |_| |___\  /  | |____| | \ \   / ____ \ |__| | |____|_|
|_____/|_____|______\/   |______|_|  \_\ /_/    \_\_____|______(_)

-- 17:27, March 14, 2011 (UTC

Bullpuke. If that's the silver age, the Golden Age is here

Those articles were very good, as is Dinosaur (which Why? didn't even mention), and all we have to do is pick our new one (I'd suggest Baseball but keep the Touchdown opening pic for sure) and get back to writing. And Lyrithya did a great job on Science Fiction. Onward! Aleister 17:41 14-3-'11

In term of choosing the next project...Europe is in a pretty bad state. 17:49, March 14, 2011 (UTC)

It certainly is, esp. east of Holland and France. Oh, you mean the page? Haven't read it. Aleister 17:51 14-3-'11

Why didn't mention Dinosaur because after over nine months since the previous colonization still not finished. IC was in ICU for months, then got revived and quickly whipped out Creationism, Batman Bruce Wayne, Discordianism, and Science fiction bang, bang, bang, bang. Then IC faded back to poor condition, and is now back in ICU in critical condition. Also the order is Golden Age, Silver Age, Bronze Age. At least it works that way for comics and civilizations listed in the book of Daniel. Or some book I saw once somewhere.  IC Buccaneer Admiral WHY??? (stratagems)  21:37, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

Moving an IC Article to Mainspace

Before moving an article, one authorized by Imperial Colonization might want to look at the talk page for Batman Bruce Wayne or Science fiction to see how we documented a move for future generations to see our glorious history. http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Science_fiction#IMPERIAL_COLONIZATION:_HISTORY_HAS_BEEN_ALTERED and http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:Bruce_Wayne WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 00:08, March 22, 2011 (UTC)

Please save your wedding night condem, those things are too expensive to only use once

Discussion copied from talk page of User:Why do I need to provide this?.

Since it looks like Dinosaur will rar (?) onto the main page, can you please do your magic and figure out who gets feature credit? Nobody is really heading this colonization up since Happytimes left in the middle of a normal posting day last November (Iz fear the worst), and I think it needs a black-hearted judge to give out half-credits, and thought of you! Thanks! Aleister 21:56 4-4-'11

Well let me say, I think Aleister should get one half of that credit. -- 02:00, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

I never even touched it. Beat that.

1234 ~ 02:16, 5 April 2011

I've never looked at the edit logs, and they always seem to be gone when a page is mainspaced anyway. Magic man, the main contributors always get half-a-credit, so it's just a matter of choosing the main contributors. Lyrithya, you didn't work on it? I thought you did. This may be one of the strangest collabs around, since Happytimes was leading it something like five months ago, then he huffed himself, and it's slowly bumped its way along ever since. So nice work everyone, maybe we can take another half a year to do the next one too. I'm sure we can! Al 3:33 5-4-'11

Well, you were a main contributor, Al. -- 03:47, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

So were you (Magic man and I pat ourselves and each other on the back. pat pat pat. pat pat pat.) Dino Al 3:53 5-4-'11

Pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat pat. -- 03:57, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

I'm copying this discussion to the IC talk page for hysterical purposes. Historical. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 05:16, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

Credit for Dinosaur

1) Every IC member who made at least one useful edit (i.e. not immediately reverted) got credit on the IC Big Board. Whether the article is featured or not doesn't change that.

2) Everyone who got credit on The Big Board can put the approprite IC template for editing the article on their user page. That applies whether it's featured or not (although the template will be different, depending).

3) If the article is featured, the head of IC goes through and decides those few (typically 2 or 3, sometimes more) people who get 1/2 feature credit counted toward the Hall of Shame. As Happytimes who actually headed this was lost at sea, and as Puppy who followed me as head is too busy doing critically important stuff to do this, and as I was asked and am gullible enough to put my head on the chopping block, I'll check if it's featured.  IC WHY??? (stratagems)  05:34, April 5, 2011 (UTC)

Yup, I never made one edit. Strange...

1234 ~ 16:27, 5 April 2011

Wow, an honest Uncyclopedian! I thought they were all extinct. (Thanks for the note; no wonder I married you. I'll check it out).  IC WHY??? (stratagems)  17:02, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

Lyrithya, you did do an edit. http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/index.php?title=Dinosaur&action=historysubmit&diff=4822644&oldid=4822614 Yes, it was just a revert, but by both tradition and consensus, any edit made by an IC member counts for the Big Board unless it's reverted right away.  IC WHY??? (stratagems)  20:36, April 11, 2011 (UTC)

That was to the pre-IC version.

1234 ~ 21:27, 11 April 2011

In a sense, that is correct, or perhaps it's more clear to say that was the non-IC version. The first IC edit that had to do with Dinosaur was in IC space on September 23, 2011. Your edit was made on Dinosaur in mainspace onNovember 3, 2010. If you would like to remove 1 point worth of credit onThe Big Board (going from 2 to 1), you have my permission--provided you correctly identify the last IC article you did edit (otherwise, it will screw up the fancy dancy record keeping I honestly spend many, many hours trying to get straightened out). But you also have IC permission to leave things as they are.  IC WHY??? (stratagems) 06:15, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

2011, eh? Excellent; that solves everything. But seriously, I'm too lazy to change it. You're the one who should change it, since you're the one who got it wrong. Because you did. You got something wrong.

1234 ~ 06:24, 14 April 2011

Wait, you mean 2010 and 2011 are not the same thing? No wonder the goverment keeps insisting I still owe money on my taxes. I'm a time traveler; what's a year between friends? (All right, if you'll keep insisting on being honest GAG, I'll fix it).  IC WHY??? (stratagems)  WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 07:11, April 14, 2011 (UTC)

Good, thank you. Now will you vote for me for UGotM?

1234 ~ 02:03, 15 April 2011

No WHY???| divorces Lyrithya! 15:50, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Why in tarnation not?!

1234 ~ 16:39, 16 April 2011

First, I think it's a silly award that's open to abuse. Second, the past two months I've abused the award by nomming a non-existent person. Third, when I first got nommed for it as I recall I didn't participate because it's too often used as an "I'm really upset with this person but I'll pretend it's a joke by making a nom." Four, I voted for you for admin and would not want to get caught implyingimply that admins are useless. Five, you've already won it a bunch of times and I think it's someone else's turn. Six, because I really have been pretty useless around here for quite a while I might vote for myself. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 17:43, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

But admins are useless! They are! And there was a reason I won it a bunch of times, you know... and... well... do you consistently write crap? *grumbles*

1234 ~ 18:14, 16 April 2011

I think there were more than three. This has been half-a-year in the making, and even IP's probably got into the act. Dinos! Aleister 16:31 5-4-'11

I agree completely with whatever anyone says. Especially the critically important stuff. Pup 02:04 07 Apr '11

So, Why, who get's the credit? -- 02:08, April 7, 2011 (UTC)

I'll be very busy during the next couple days, but will check through this and should post something late on April 11. WHY???^{PuppyOnTheRadio} 16:49, April 9, 2011 (UTC)

By the authority given to me by Her Imperial Majesty and by consensus of active colonizes, the decision for who gets feature credit for Dinosaur has been made. The 1/2 Feature Credit goes to:User:Aleister in Chains, User:Happytimes, and User:Magic man. If any mathematical type points out that 3 * 1/2 Feature Credit does not equal 1 Feature Credit, he or she is perfectly welcome to go to the Imperial Colonization Ministry of Complaints. Remember, every IC member who made at least one useful edit (i.e. not immediately reverted) got credit on theIC Big Board, and can put the following template on his/her/its/their user page:

{{FH Colonization|Identity=entity|Article=Dinosaur}}

If there is overwhelming disagreement about this decision, it will be seriously considered. IC WHY??? (stratagems)  21:12, April 11, 2011 (UTC)