Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Whoa. This thing is awesome. I'm gonna revamp the article about pirates. Cause I'm sure there is one.

I wanna be a meme...

_________________
[Something cool might go here...?]

If you want to know the reason, it's because it's a vanity page which is wiki speak fo an article about something non-notable. The pages for JohnTheTinyCowboy and The Experimental Film were deleted for the same reason. Sorry, you're not going to be an internet meme.

I'm not listening to you. Ever.

I will be a meme. You just wait and see.

i created the article about Frankenberry a while ago. It sucks, I know. A;though, I think the butt-head explanation was pretty funny....

_________________

Gah. I got dissilusioned with Uncyclopedia, but I guess that was bound to happen sooner or later:

I ran across some articles that're ... yeah.

The articles in question have a lot of stuff that're written by people who are not trying to be funny or satirical, and instead are just trying to sneak in hateful crap. There's a FEW things in each that're pretty witty, but ... gah. It reeks of horridness.

Heck, as an example, the American one has a long list of racial slurs ... pathetic. This link shows the changes I made to that article (but I couldn't think of ways to fix all the bad stuff I saw. I avoided changing the NASA and Alien languages bit, since that was funny ... but honestly, I don't know if I managed to really tone down the bash fest, or make it funnier).

... But, they reverted it pretty quickly. I guess they prefer the bash fest.

Oh well.

_________________

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Charlie_an ... te_Factory
\
BWAH HAH HAH!

_________________

Eh? My page is definitely still up.

Although I still don't know how to get images on the dang thing.

_________________

But the Uncyclopedia guide to being funny and not just stupid advises against just that. Don't let a few articles ruin the whole project for you! There are many more funny, quality articles on Uncyclopedia.

Trev... has it occured to you that the people who made it.. might BE American?

Unfunny one more article and I send Reggie Fils-Aime after you!

Uh ... but those articles weren't funny to begin with, save for certain parts which I thought were brilliant pieces of satire (the NASA and alien language bit in the American article f'instance). They were mostly barely-clothed sentiments.

Unless you find a long list of racial slurs passed off as "American perception of the world" as funny? Because I sure didn't. :/

And yeah, it did occur to me as to whether or not the article editors were Americans, KN--that's why I, out of curosity, checked some of the user profiles and DNSed anonymous IPs.

Many appear to be from other countries other than the U.S. (I saw Mexico, U.K., Canada offhand) ... but I didn't thoroughly check EVERY person's IP or profile that edited the article.

But even then, there ARE Americans who hate their own people. *shrug*

Look, I find a distinct difference between someone trying to be insulting and passing it off as "misinformation" and those who write hilarious, witty parodies. Apparently you didn't find my attempts to remove the former from the American article funny, but I tried. I hoped I would have set an example for further edits.



Yeah, before I attempted to edit the American article, I read the beginner's guidelines and guides to being funny--so I felt vindicated to try.

_________________

Well, you're gonna have to live with it that people find it utterly hilarious.

A lot of other countries are ridiculed in articles, and articles regarding some smaller nations (Latvia and some other country I can't spell) got frequently vandalized by people from these countries who were offended. Some, however, aren't.

Don't take ANYTHING on Uncyclopedia seriously. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. As you remember I did an article on Koreans a little while ago, and I did wonder wheter Koreans would be offended. So I showed it to some people of Korean descent I know, and they found it hilarious.

On the other hand, Trev: even if the article wasn't made by an American, there are lots of them on the wiki. If they really didn't like it it would have been rewrited long ago.

But as Erekrose mentioned, that kind of thing isn't in the spirit of Uncyclopedia. They might find it hilarious to edit an article to say "UHHMURICUNS R STUPID LOL" (and if they do, it shows just how ignorant of Americans they really are), but it doesn't change the fact that Uncyclopedia's help files state that Bias and Sarcasm Do Not Make Good Replacements For Humor.

And you're right. Many of the articles I saw which I mentioned were ill-disguised insults had to do with nationalities or nations themselves. There were things in the Netherlands article that just made me twitch, for example.

The Korean article was different from others I saw for the most part. There were a few parts I found iffy, but others were rather humorous and brilliantly written.



Uncyclopedia still seems kind of small and isolated--many articles do not have long edit histories.

I've talked about this stuff with friends to get opinions and see if I'm just overreacting in the case of the American article, as well as others I found (because I do have my doubts at times). Most come from the U.S., Canada, or the Phillipines, and for the most part they thought the American article in particular was way too insulting to be funny. *shrug* At least I'm not alone with my sentiments.

_________________

I thought that article was total brilliance, so yes, you are overreacting.

Or am I? Given what I said prior, it would appear that my sentiments are at least shared by others, who also made the observation that the other articles are largely the same way. Many of which weren't Americans themselves. You're the only person so far who would say that I am.

As an aside gven your previous posts, I assume that if you saw the same sentiments in those articles by people outside Uncyclopedia you would find them offensive? Anything at Uncyclopedia, therefore, you disregard and try to find humor in because of the site's nature?

I cannot do that as easily because I am aware not everyone has good intentions when they post something malicious to articles. Some people, I suspect, use Uncyclopedia as a soapbox for their opinions, rather than trying to be funny and misinformative, as was mentioned in the guidelines--this happens on Wikipedia itself, too.

_________________

If you are truly concerned with this, try putting something on the talk page for the article.

Perhaps the things you see as 'hidden insults and anti-American sentiments' are intentionally placed edits, which everyone has seen and laughed at.

Perhaps (try imagining it) the entire page is a parody of how people view Americans, and has nothing to do with the author's opinions on Americans.

I might. One of the things that tipped me off over Uncyclopedia being a small community, though, was the fact that few talk pages really have anything going on, and most are blank from what I've seen. HR Wiki and Wikipedia, in contrast, have pretty prolific talk pages on most articles.



Well, keep in mind I'm not just speaking about the American article here, but several including that Netherlands one. I just used the American one as the focus of my example. *shrug*

If I had the ability I would have gone through and done what I could to take the really stinging sentiments out of most articles and re-write them to be more like what Uncyclopedia's guidelines wanted to see.

I thought I had achieved that somewhat. I could have done better, but eh ... moot to try anyway.

What do you mean by intentionally placed? As in, trolls doing that on purpose?



That's good advice, just take it as parody and misinformation even if the editors meant it--I haven't been too successful, but eh ...

_________________