Forum:Regarding "Niche Articles"

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Ministry of Love > Regarding "Niche Articles"
Note: This topic has been unedited for 4090 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

To help Uncyclopedia grow, I propose we revise Vanity policy to make it a little more lenient. I say that if you live in a town, and you town is notable enough for a Wikipedia article large enough to have a vertical scroll bar (or has at least, say, 2500 characters. Hooray arbitrary number limits), your town is notable enough to count as a "niche article." Still though, it should be funny, but that goes without saying. --Littleboyonly.jpg TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly.jpg 01:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Insert yays, nays, discussions

  • yay Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 02:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Eh? What are you suggesting changing? If it's a 1000 characters article about Twatt,_Shetland? and it's funny enough it's kept now right? Not that I'm being a pussy or anything... MrN Icons-flag-gb.png 02:06, Sep 3
  • Symbol for vote.svg For.   Le Cejak <2:16, 03 Sep 2008>
  • Query. Can we still delete them when they, inevitably, suck? Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 02:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Kerkill This idea sucks. Only cities with over 75,000 people truly deserve articles (excluding cities like Twatt, Shetland, or Fucking, Austria, of course). Otherwise, we could get flooded with articles about little Alaskan cities no one cares about. I'm telling you it'll happen! --Pleb CUN KUN Dexter111344 Complain here Vote now! 02:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Fuck no. Length != funny. In fact, I think someone said once that brevity is the soul of wit. Just because your niche article is x number of characters does not stop it from sucking, and making it humor that the majority of the world wouldn't "get".  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • elk cloner) 03:06 Sep 03, 2008
  • Yes. We've been focused on humour than the majority will get forever, and too often I've seen someone say "make it appeal to people who wouldn't know much about the subject, and it'll be more funny". Maybe it's time to be more lenient with articles with limited audiences. Although they should still be deleted if they suck badly. And we should still stick to the famous/fictional thing for articles about people. Spang talk 03:27, 03 Sep 2008
  • Problem: We delete them if they aren't funny, right? Well, what if they're pants-shittingly hilarious to whoever lives in the town and piss-drinkingly stupid to everyone else? I'm sure I could invent some wonderful comedy about, say, the teachers in my school (which has a wikipedia article with a pretty large amount of characters, btw), but it would make everyone on the site that isn't from my town claw their eyes out in disgust. Are you some kind of eye-hater? Are you!? - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon.gif(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 04:05, Sep 3
    • This is why I suggested that the original town articles should be X long, or the town should be X big, so that there's likely to be a big enough audience for people to get them. If someone knows a town well enough to make an article, and they make it right, they'd know it well enough for the article to be funny, and they'd refer it to their friends. --Littleboyonly.jpg TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly.jpg 11:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
      • Those sound like rules. I don't actually mind towncruft, as long as they get a "towncruft" category, are thoroughly ignored, and you are the one who gets blamed for the entire escapade. Also, Ice Capades. We're going to blame you for those as well. "Best version of Beauty & the Beast ever and fun for the whole family!", my ass! Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 11:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
        • So the plan is to relax our standards for humor so that kids can call their towns gay, thus drawing traffic to the site? Sounds like kind of a bad idea to me. Blaming TKF for the Ice Capades, however, seems like a wonderful idea. Almost as wonderful as that light-up Buzz Lightyear sword I got from Toy Story on Ice. Poor Toy Story, with its meth addiction n' all... - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon.gif(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 19:41, Sep 3
          • If their article sucks, then we'll still give them shit for it. Still though, our current policy frowns down upon any towncruft in general, and I think if we relax that, we could profit substantially. --Littleboyonly.jpg TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly.jpg 19:56, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
            • Exactly, if they're terrible, they can still be deleted - the quality standards won't be going down. Just the "Lots of people should have heard of it" standard. So "I've never heard of it" or "that joke refers to something I don't understand" won't be a reason for deletion (or less of one), and such articles will be judged on their quality alone. Spang talk 23:55, 03 Sep 2008
  • No fucking way. This randomly chosen insignificant Irish town seems to fit the criteria. -- unsophisticated Ape (give) (Riot Porn) 20:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes Per this and Spang SK Sir Orian57Talk Gay flag.jpg RotM 09:19 4 September 2008


What the hell is a "niche", and I say no, No, NO! - Rougethebat.gifAdmiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate SonicLivesPicture.png 19:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Aaaaagh, Amy Winehouse! -- Hindleyite Converse?pedia 16:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Ahhh, I didn't get the joke until you so kindly explained it. *mumbles* Tried to make me go to rehab and I say no, no, no... SK Sir Orian57Talk Gay flag.jpg RotM 16:44 4 September 2008
You would have thought that they would have shut her up before she got to the third no...for everyone's sake. - [16:51 5 September] Sir FSt Don Yettie