Sunday, 11 July 2010

Who...

...the feck are those new red-link users? And why the hellk are they making huge random articles that link to Wikipedia? Also, where am I? Who am I? And why the feck am I chained up and wearing a thong?

Er, nevermind about that, let's just get this show on the road. Now, we have a few sneaky sneakers scoping around the site writing crap without bothering to make it look nice. Creating such articles as Wallace Intrubé, The Snickets and others, should these anons editors be considered subtle threats or a gleam of hope in a slow wiki? The creepers themselves:

1. Specsy1: A cheap chump who was the first to join. More than likely associated with following counterpart.
2. Sammy12345: Do I have a fan club? Copying the name. More than likely partner in crime of above.
3. Shitload of IP's: Mindless zombie henchmen of the two schemers above. Watch out for full on wiki domination by the cohorts.

Testes, Seppy: arm the banhammers: if these guys invade the forums you know what to do.

But the other obvious question lingers: What if they're just innocent bystanders, trying to write and have fun? Well, in that case, we make them snap into shape by throwing death threats to them on their talk pages. They need to learn how to link and make some userpages. And if they don't cooperate? Well, I already mentioned the solution one paragraph above.

But enough about me. Let's get into the fun stuff: The wiki is horribly inactive, no one is editing, blah blah blah . But, let's face it, these red link arseholes are the only ones giving the site some value. Maybe they're not evil schemers, but silent heroes? Ah, forget it. I need some more cocaine.

7 comments:

  1. Congratulations specsy, sammy and all the others who have contributed in their own way to these pages.
    What started as a idea amongst friends has finally come to fruition.
    I'll push others who contributed to make formal accounts so we know who has done what and I'll continue my work on the balafalafa page.

    ReplyDelete