Difference between revisions of "Talk:An article that contains nothing but a full stop"

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Comment)
(It doesn't even contain a full stop.: new section)
Line 147: Line 147:
  
 
. --{{User:The fatgoat/sig}} 05:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 
. --{{User:The fatgoat/sig}} 05:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 +
 +
== It doesn't even contain a full stop. ==
 +
 +
It does, however, contain a period. The only way for an article to contain a full stop is if the article has an intersection with cars making full stops in it. --{{User:Crazyswordsman/sig}} 03:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:50, 5 March 2008


See also: The obligatory retrospective

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the An article that contains nothing but a full stop article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about what you did last night. We have the Village Dump for things like that.
For a listing of unused images related to this topic, please see the image subpage.

Article policies


Bloink1 solid.png
This article was nominated for deletion on February 7, 2008.
The result of the discussion was Keep.

“Yay! My favourite punctuation has an article of its own!”

~ Oscar Wilde on An article that contains nothing but a full stop

“I wonder what this article contains?”

~ Captain Oblivious on An article that contains nothing but a full stop

Comment

Well, it delivers what it promises... Icons-flag-au.png Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 03:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm suprised it hasn't been deleted yet lol 80.3.0.8 07:31, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Can't be described as a one-liner, I suppose. A one-pointer? RabbiTechno 19:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It'll probably be deleted soon, I bet. There was one called the word parakeet written exactly two hundred and fourty three times; that one was CVP'd. If you're going to do avant-garde, make it funny. User:Wehpudicabok/sig 19:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Well it's been here for almost 2 days now and hasn't been deleted. Perhaps I should put it on pee review lol Randomator 19:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
3 days now, maybe this is the new most pointless article on unyc! (Assuming that there is a point to AAAAAAAAA! and all that)Randomator 22:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
5 days...what is Uncyc coming to? HATE HAET HAT! —– Sir Hv » | Talk | Contribs | KUN | UotM | RotM | VFH | Kidney | 9/04 11:50
Hey, come on! I maed a yuky doody is funny! (If you like that sort of humor...) User:Wehpudicabok/sig 22:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Nah, toilet humour's crap, as is childish humour. —– Sir Hv » | Talk | Contribs | KUN | UotM | RotM | VFH | Kidney | 12/04 00:08

Actually, I rather think there is a point to this article. (You all had better get that pun)

If this gets deleted

You can always recreate it at Illogicopedia where it would be welcomed. -- Hindleyite Converse 12:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Er, that's not to say it will be deleted here... <_< >_> -- Hindleyite Converse 12:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add any catergories or templates to the article, as if you do, it will contain more than just a full stop!

Add them to this talk page instead!Randomator 14:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

WTF?

Zerotrousers, what the heck are you doing? —– Sir Hv » | Talk | Contribs | KUN | UotM | RotM | VFH | Kidney | 11/04 22:20

Looks better this way. You can revert it if you like.--User:Zerotrousers/sig 05:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Reverted - it's the pure simplicity of it that makes it funny. --Strange.PNG (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

(Tickling myself)Ha.................ha....................ha. Oh, children of this generation!!! O tempora o mores! -- herr doktor needsAcell Rocket.gif [scream!] 09:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

From Pee Review

Well, it's just that I guess lol Randomator 21:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Humour: 1 I've seen funnier dots.
Concept: 10 Who can argue with a 1x1 article?
Prose and formatting: 10 Excellently punctuated.
Images: 1 Needs fewer pictures.
Miscellaneous: 5 Edit out the weaker sections.
Final Score: 27 ,
Reviewer: Alksubsig.gifAlksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 22:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)


Otoh, if you place it in the Self-referenced page category, and then start a literary discussion on the talk page, perhaps you could equal or top Fisher_Price -- di Mario 20:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Title

What should we do about the title. Does it even count? --sp unit 262 03:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too worried about the title, but if anyone knows if theres a way to get rid of it (like on Nihilism), please do get rid of the title. Randomator 17:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
This could get too far out of hand. The title is fine. Assuming "article" means "stuff you see in the box when you edit", it's all perfectly accurate. And we don't need another Nihilism. --Strange.PNG (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 19:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Best. Pointless. Article. Ever.

I've seen my share of pointless semi-retarded articles on Uncyclopeda (Haven't we all?), but this is the funniest pointless page ever! Along with the talk page, I actually laughed out loud for several minutes!! -- Kip > Talk Works Sophia Commander of the Order USA!

It's not pointless! Actually, the only thing the article has is a point! --Ye Olde Luke 10:29, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Beautifully terrible puns like this are what's so great about this article. --Strange.PNG (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 10:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Can this article be protected?

It does get vandalised quite often, and theres no reason why it should be changed Randomator 19:55, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I already requested Olipro, but he had to be a chicken crap about it. Kip the Dip 06:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I probably wouldn't have gone to Olipro about protecting an article like this one. Try someone who likes this kind of thing instead. --Strange.PNG (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
As I recall, Olipro was the one that made the edit button "penis" Kip the Dip 07:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Ah, but I don't see any penises around here, do you? (/me realises I probably just insulted both Olipro and every guy who's posted on this talk page, and shuts up.) --Strange.PNG (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 01:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

A Retrospective

Yo! It's BOBOFTHEDEAD in all his radiant mightyness. I've just uploaded a retrospective about this. Please read it... It's the fruit of the labour of many weeks...Bobofthedead 19:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Not bad, although nothing'll ever beat the retrospective for Fisher Price! --Strange.PNG (but) Untrue  Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, cool, I'll chuck a link at the top of this talk page so people can see it. Icons-flag-au.png Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 14:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Shit, someone beat me to it. Great minds think alike, eh SbU? Well, I ain't a great mind, so I guess that doesn't really apply here. Icons-flag-au.png Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 14:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Very good, though nothing beats the Fisher Price Retrospective as SbU said--Sir Manforman CUN.png 21:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki

Please add [[es:Punto]]---Asteroid B612B612.jpg (aka Rataube) - Ñ 23:23, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Bigger DOT

MAKE THE FULL STOP BIGGER

No. Screw you. -- Kip > Talk Works Sophia Commander of the Order USA! 10:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I apologize for that fit of rage. The thing is, there is nothing in the edit box but: . To make it bigger we would have to put: <big>.</big> and it would contain something other than a full stop. -- Kip > Talk Works Sophia Commander of the Order USA! 10:12, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Forty-nine edits

Call me eccentric if you want, but I think one of the funniest and most telling things on this site is the fact that someone writes a full stop and it gets subjected to 49 edits. The article's history page deserves a VFH. SmackBot 07:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Well you have to understand, a lot of effort was put in to get that full stop just right. Spang talk 07:49, 27 Oct 2007
But it's the same now as it was when it was first written, so what you mean is, a lot of effort went into getting it wrong, which is my point. SmackBot 07:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
It was a joke. -- Kip > Talk Works Sophia Commander of the Order USA! 07:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, was it? Thanks for putting me in the picture. And please don't post disappearing edits on my watch pages; it's very confusing. SmackBot 08:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, it does seem that some people turned it into their personal "my friend is gay" space for a while. But I think the point here is, is probably has the lowest effort-to-content ratio on all of uncyclopedia. There must be some kind of award for that. Spang talk 08:00, 27 Oct 2007
I think you mean, it has the highest effort-to-content ratio, but yes, I agree, it deserves some attention for that. SmackBot 08:07, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles about articles?

Why is this in the articles about articles category? I see no reason for it to be there... Randomator 19:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Because all articles come to a full stop! *cricket, cricket* Okay, I have no clue. --YeOldeLuke 05:40, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Whoever added it probably meant to add it to the retrospective, or something. That or it's part of the vast lizard conspiracy. Somehow. Spang talk 05:49, 28 Nov 2007

Would it be a good idea?

As this article is a dead end, could we make the "." link to Pointless Paradox? MrN Icons-flag-gb.png HalIcon.png WhoreMrn.png Fork you! 20:47, Jan 13

No, because it would contain a link then, wouldn't it?  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 20:53 Jan 13, 2008

Erm...

Don't we add categories to the talk page? Why's that category stuck in there?  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 02:26 Jan 20, 2008

I dunno. The category is taking up characters in the article (shouldn't it only be one character?)--Æ 02:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree, that's why all the categories are on the talk page. Regardless of if the category is hidden or not, the article itself still contains more than a full stop. One byte only, people!  Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize  writings  SU&W) 02:29 Jan 20, 2008
*sigh* And here I was only trying to help... -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 16:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

My Opinion on the Article

. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 05:46, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't even contain a full stop.

It does, however, contain a period. The only way for an article to contain a full stop is if the article has an intersection with cars making full stops in it. --Crazyswordsman...With SAVINGS!!!! (T/C) 03:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)