| Revision as of 21:08, 2 June 2005 editAltenmann (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers219,361 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:08, 2 June 2005 edit undoAltenmann (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers219,361 edits →Speedy deletionNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| :''For the prior VFD discussion of ], now a redirect to this article, see ].'' | :''For the prior VFD discussion of ], now a redirect to this article, see ].'' | ||
| :* The decision was to '''delete''' basing on nonnotability. The page has been recreated without undeletion procedure. No new proof of notability is |
:* The decision was to '''delete''' basing on nonnotability. The page has been recreated without undeletion procedure. No new proof of notability is provided. Therefore the page is ]. ] ] 21:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 21:08, 2 June 2005
I removed this attack from the bottom of this article. Nomination for Vfd should have been enough, without this vandalism of the article. Someone may want to take note and action. I haven't the time right now to judge wether other vandalism has occured, so someone may want to compare historys. I have no dog in this hunt, but if arty's on websites are wikipedia topics, this one deserves fair consideration since it was Wikispawned, if for no other reason. I also wonder whether this is an 'Advert', but I'm too new to have a handle on all the wiki policies extant on this stuff. Fabartus 01:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
What should have been here instead of in Article
The site uses MediaWiki software to mimic Misplaced Pages conventions, such as this disclaimer template:
This article is crap. You can help by completely re-writing it.According to the founders of Encyclopædia Dramatica, the mission of Encyclopædia Dramatica is to provide the ultimate compendium of Internet parody and humor. However, it frequently deviates from this goal, producing somewhat humorous articles on a wide range of topics, most of which are not necessarily classifiable as satire. Humor of all categories enters the wiki, prompting an equally freeflowing response, such as the vandalistic classification of sexual fetishes as relating to "Unhealed Childhood Trauma".
Because of the open nature of Encyclopædia Dramatica, which began as a collection of personal attacks, Encyclopædia Dramatica itself suffers from vandalistic attacks similar to those of other wikis. For example, occasionally people blank entire pages, make legal threats or add messages that insult other users. The creation of humor is not entirely material to random acts of text insertion. Indeed, the effort required to write one article on the Encyclopædia Dramatica of good quality may even exceed the effort required to produce a factual article on Misplaced Pages. Good humor may be more difficult than good information, as there is a correct or publically accepted form of a fact, but not necessarily a universal joke.
That's all for now! Fabartus 01:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- That's actually quite true about ED. I don't see anything I can construed as vandalism. --Tydaj 01:39, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Speedy deletion
- For the prior VFD discussion of Encyclopedia Dramatica, now a redirect to this article, see Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Encyclopedia Dramatica.
- The decision was to delete basing on nonnotability. The page has been recreated without undeletion procedure. No new proof of notability is provided. Therefore the page is candidate for speedy deletion. mikka (t) 21:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)