Shouldn't the personal image policies from Scribblewiki be reinstated? People are already using Adriels for hosting purposes, and we don't want the whole image crap issue to start again. YellowYoshi398 22:38, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Had I remembered that the server host was in New Zealand, rather than the US, I would have never questioned the copyright policy. Sorry for causing an inconvenience. Stooben Rooben 02:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Seriously. What. The. Waffles? Peachycakes 3.14 If I have to explain what is wrong with this rule, there is something wrong with you.
- That rule was made just for you :) -- Xpike the hedgehog 20:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- You may NOT create a city or town for yourself.
- If a new town to be created, the majority of the sysops and all of the bureaucrats must agree.
Any user can put what they want in fanon. I understand the point of this rule, but it's not really fair. Why not just make a size limit for cities? Katana(talk) - Join the Maintenance Committee! Help revive Userpedia!
Yeah, that rule is stupid. Why are we limiting the creative possibilities of our users? I mean, why stop there, if this keeps going, then soon people won't be able to create their own islands, or castles. It's not like anyone else is going to live there. Peachycakes 3.14 On that note, WHY DOES 1337 GET HIS OWN ****ING MOUNTAIN?!!!!! ONE THAT HE DIDN'T EVEN CREATE!!! The thing is several thousand miles tall, but he won't let anyone else live there. :(
Peachycakes 3.14 is right. He's overreacting a bit, tho. Also, who cares if it was before the rule? If you ask me, 1337 is abusing his power a bit. (No offence, 1337) Katana(talk) - Join the Maintenance Committee! Help revive Userpedia!
Well, the rule was created because of Hyper Guy making a whole city devoted to himself. I'll slacken on the second part, but the real point of the rule is, you can't make a town just for yourself and solely revolving around you, which Hyper Guy did. If someone can suggest a better way to put this rule, I'll gladly change it. omg its Bahamut http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n159/YYXJKQJ/1337yoshidb9chez-1.gif ...
Why can't he have his own town? If he doesn't want to live in any of the existing ones, shouldn't he be allowed to make his own? Being able to make your own areas is one of the fundamentals of userhood. Peachycakes 3.14
An entire self-centric city is just needless narcissism. As Stooby put it, "It's completely asinine and unnecessary for one user to have an entire town dedicated to him." A city denotes an area for multiple users to live in, and an area that is therefore not dedicated to one user. Stuff like mountains (which I rightfully acquired long after the people who originally held claims to it retired) and islands and fortresses of doom are fine. (As long as the fortresses of doom don't have the ability to like destroy the whole universe, since that crosses over into godmodding) omg its Bahamut http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n159/YYXJKQJ/1337yoshidb9chez-1.gif ...
Only if the Sysops/Bearaucrats/Stewards agree on it. Otherwise, it gets deleted. Master Lucario
Again, that's stupid. We shouldn't need permission to create cities for ourselves. And do you realize what that means? It means that it is a city for that person, and that person only, noone else is going to live there, unless they ask of course, and typicly these kinds of places are inhabited by non-users. There is nothing different from these cities than other locals, and they should not be banned. Peachycakes 3.14 Also, Mt. Leet used to be public domain before 1337 took it over, no one person owned it. And just because he has a cave in it, doesn't mean he automatically owns the entire thing. The place is big enough for several hundered users, and a couple towns.
Peachy: Calm down.
1337: It's not fair to not let users have minor towns that aren't self-centric...
Peachy plz stop getting so mad. Is this really worth fighting about? I think users should have to ask 1337 before making a city- otherwise, there would be millions of cities within a few days. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n
What SvS said. Are you already forgetting about Rule #19, Peachy? And 1337 already has another user living with him, damn it. :| --The Blue Dragon 12:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
No. No sorry is needed. Sadly, that's actually right. There's only like, three active Sysops and one active 'Crat. :( --The Blue Dragon 12:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
oh god damn it im here KA :( --The Blue Dragon 12:37, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
- shifty: That is true. Maybe I should get approval ahead of time in case I ever want to make a town... Katana(talk) - Join the Maintenance Committee! Help revive Userpedia!
Well, the only con is waiting for St00ben. Who knows when he'll come back. --The Blue Dragon 12:44, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
True. And waiting for St00bs is gonna take awhile. ...And how many Sysops are needed to approve it, anyways? It says 'majority', but ...how much is majority? :| --The Blue Dragon 12:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
...o_0 Well, that's gonna take awhile then. --The Blue Dragon 12:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Steuben: Millions of cities in a few days? WTW? This rule was only implemented a week ago. What about the several years before that? There were no millions of cities or towns, there were only a few. As you can see, there was no problem with this before, but now our rights as users are being taken away on meerly a whim. >:( Peachycakes 3.14 Having to get permission to make your own city is the hight of folly.
Like I said, you can't make a narcissistic city revolving around you and you alone. You're allowed to make minor-ish cities and towns, as long as they're not devoted to a single user. I might just drop the rule, since there was really only one offender. :\ omg its Bahamut http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n159/YYXJKQJ/1337yoshidb9chez-1.gif ...
- I posted this on Ultima's talk, but here too since I noticed it: The rule shouldnt exist, but now all the noobs are gonna make their own towns anyway, which destroys the point of having a main wiki town... probably, at least.Toadbert101
What if we make cities for our own islands? Is that breaking the rules?
"No severe swearing in mainspace articles or talk pages."
So, cursing on userpages is fine? Sweet. --Black Hole Sun 13:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, that's just something I forgot to add. omg its Bahamut http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n159/YYXJKQJ/1337yoshidb9chez-1.gif ...
I'm afraid Rule #21 is a bunch of *bleep*. It's practicly testimant to power abusing. Peachycakes 3.14
If it is used for the abuse of power, said sysop will recieve a warning. Tumaha Bamiltu
I must agree with 3.14 and BHS. It's just an excuse for the sysops to do whatever the hell they want. It gives them too much power. Rule 21 must go, full stop. Master Lucario
I don't have the power to remove it; if you want it to go, talk to Ultima about it. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n In Soviet Russia, Userpedia edits YOU!
Our sysops are chosen for a reason, we trust they'll make the right choices, if they don't, they should get a little warning, and i'll bring out the belt *cracks*
GUYS RULE 20 :O
Rule 10 & 15
- I guess I was right.
Uniju wants me to tell you that said rule is impossible to break and should be removed, and that you guys using the slang term "legit" makes you look like idiots. He also wants me to tell you that there's no "more severe punishment" than being banned on a website. I stand by his beliefs! --Crocodile Dippy
- And I should care what Uniju thinks why? - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n In Soviet Russia, Userpedia edits YOU!
Because he's pointing out a flaw in the rules that you guys should pay attention to? Honestly, it's no wonder this is one of the worst sites ever; You sysops are so up yourselves that you won't pay attention to the good advice of smart guys that you absolutely hate cuz you're so frickin' biased. --Crocodile Dippy
That sentance made me laugh. Worst sites ever? If it's really that bad, why the hell did Uniju stay here, other than to whine about it? XD And what exactly is Uniju suggesting? If it's a good idea, we'll consider it. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n In Soviet Russia, Userpedia edits YOU! And how is rule twelve impossible to break?
...That was MY comment, dude. Uniju just asked me to tell you the rule is horribly flawed, and he's suggesting you remove the rule. Ya know, that's a good question; You should ask Uni yourself. Or are you too scared of him to be mature and take this chance to possibly improve the Wiki? --Crocodile Dippy
The rule is indeed stupid, as Uniju said, there's no punishment more severe than being banned. Unless you guys gain the power to hax0r a knife through the screen, it needs to be removed. Lucario Saluting Registeel since 2007...
If you sockpuppet, you don't get banned permanently, just for two weeks. However, perhaps two weeks is too long. I'll discuss with the other sysops. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n(HEY MAN! Aw, leave me alone, you know. HEY MAN! Henry, get off the phone!)
How are you gonna prove you have a "legit" reason anyway?
- Because having a literally useless rule sitting there makes us look like total morons. Hence why it's not there anymore. — Stooben Rooben 11:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
Ideas and crap like that
K. There's been a lot of criticism of Userpedia and its rules recently, and I would simply like to know what rules you want added or removed, and be sure to give a good reason. If you have a good reason, we'll listen to you. I know we seem like humorless jerks a lot, and I have been increasingly sympathetic with your point of view- this wiki could use some humor and lightening up. I'd like some specific ideas on how we can improve the rules. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n(C)
Wait til BHS gets here. I think the "X-rated" thing should be changed to "18+" for something, cause I've never heard of stuff like that referred to as "X".Mature themes are unknown.
I'm too old to do that.
"No Cyberbullying" Rule
wait, what flood, it says "before the flood came", does this mean before people discovered how to make wiki's on wiki farms, so then there was a flood of wikis? or was it some fiction thing from the golden age -- Hemu the Ultimate Cookie Lord (Trading Card Game) 21:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
- There was a "flood" of wiki articles on the Scribblewiki userpedia, fictional or otherwise. --Mr. Isotope(T|C) 00:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey, about one of the rules.
'Retard' being used as a flame is my pet peeve. It's a f-cking mental disorder, and I've always found it very sad that people use it as an insult. It's like using 'aspergers syndrome' or 'cancer patient' as a flame. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n(C)
- You shut up, you Pillock. - KP Blue There, I used it.
- I like how you didn't answer me, KP. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n(C)
- I was too busy responding to some pillock insulting you. Oh, and can we use "Bollocks"? - KP Blue
- I like how you didn't answer me, KP. - S_ar_c__w v_n St_ub_n(C)
22:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's weird how people take words that most people wouldn't use normally and try and say they're flames. 愛子ダム
Hey, Is the rule about swearing disbanded? Because on DP's article, he left the F word uncensored.
Then i think it should be erased. :3
23:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Some questions about cusswords
- What the hell is a cuss word? o_o -- Kill Joys! Make Some Noise! - Dr. Death Defying The future is bulletproof!