Uncyclopedia talk:Top10 07/Jan
FYI, Third Epistle to the Thessalonians and UnBooks:Third Epistle to the Thessalonians are two separate articles. The former was the featured one. I admit this is very confusing.--Procopius 16:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks and for your vote, was the unbooks one a follow up article? —Braydie at 16:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think so: The Humbled Master adapted it in what I thought was a funny work. He's been especially enchanted with Church of God the Wholly Incompetent, and I've had to start reverting changes that get the article away from its purpose.--Procopius 17:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you should allow only three votes instead of ten.---Asteroid B612
(aka Rataube) - Ñ 16:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, I was discussing this a while ago.. but I think the outcome that it was kept at ten. It does make sense, but next month there will be 30 or so articles and people having only 3 votes (bearing in mind that this will not be on the front page) might result in getting a lot more than 3 articles to the end of year vote. If most people think it should be 3 however, it will probably be changed. —Braydie at 16:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- I haven't thought of it that way, maybe you are right.---Asteroid B612
(aka Rataube) - Ñ 17:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
- The problem with 10 is that articles can get in the top 3, by being consistently viewed as "good, but not great". The 10th best article out of 30 is quite average, yet the 10th vote gets the same weight as the 1st. 5 or 6 would be better. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 22:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- The "good but not great" pages should've been filtered out on VFH, in theory.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Make that "Great, but not super-duper-best-of-the-month great". -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 23:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- The "good but not great" pages should've been filtered out on VFH, in theory.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- The problem with 10 is that articles can get in the top 3, by being consistently viewed as "good, but not great". The 10th best article out of 30 is quite average, yet the 10th vote gets the same weight as the 1st. 5 or 6 would be better. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 22:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I haven't thought of it that way, maybe you are right.---Asteroid B612
There should be a top 10 for each month, instead of just bringing three to the year's top 10. Hypothetically, suppose all 10 of the year's best articles were featured in the same month. Only three would be eligible for the year's top 10. While it's an unlikely situation, it's possible we could have 4-5 or so annual top 10-quality articles in one month. --User:Missingno/sig 22:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- The reason for only 3 articles going through is that people were complaining about having to read 365 articles (one is featured everyday) at the end of the year. This way we'll get the best articles of the year as the best ones will knock the others out, and the minimum we will get at the end of the year is 36. If there are draws from this voting stage then more will go through. If there is a top 10 for each month then there will be 120 articles at the end of the year, this is a bit much in my opinion. —Braydie at 22:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if maybe we could vote against stuff. I really don't feel too strongly about most of the articles and the ones I did I voted for, but I really want to use my remaining 8 votes to vote against The Wicker Man because it's junky junky junk. --Anyone 16:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)