Uncyclopedia:Behavior

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Blue check.svg This page is considered a policy on Uncyclopedia.

It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that everyone should follow, unless they don't want to, in which case they are free to ignore it so long as they're not being a dick. Please make use of the standing on one knee position to propose to this policy.

Beginner's Guide
Basic mechanics of a wiki

How pages work
Your userspace
How talk pages work
How to edit pages
How to search the wiki

Good writing

How to be funny
(Funny images)
(Funny choice of words)

Style

Style Guide
Writing Lists
Quotations
Grammar and spelling

Good behavior

Be civil
Don't do cyberbullying
Coexist with the Admins

See also...

Help Contents
What Uncyclopedia is not

Laugh6.jpg

Civility on Uncyclopedia is maintained through strict desocialization, re-education and obedience programs, and reinforced with three primary rules:

1. Treat others the way you would want to be treated.

Behind a username and IP is a human that needs love. With edits, assume that they were in good faith, except in obvious situations where a person is a blatant vandal, spammer, or dick (see below). Everybody has a different sense of humor. Being insulting or having a belligerent attitude towards users is nonconstructive and will create avoidable drama. Instead, show users love, red hot burning love so that Uncyclopedia can become a den of hot saucy dripping love.

2. Don't be a dick.

"Dick" behaviour needs no explanation. Two users' idea of dick behaviour is 99.9% the same. That's why you'll know you're being a "dick" when someone tells you to stop being one. If you are currently blocked for being a dick, then you definitely were being a dick. The best thing about dick behaviour is that it is almost always forgotten and forgiven if one stops being a dick and moves on.

3. Dance.

Dance, my friend. Dance like you've never danced before.

Communication is key[edit]

Communication on Uncyclopedia is vital. Most of the problems between users stem from misunderstandings or a lack of communication. Consider these tips when posting:

How to contact others[edit]

Please communicate with users through talk pages, the chatroom, or with the entire community through the Village Dump. Spamming crap on the Village Dump will get you into trouble, so make it count. If the issue is not directly related to the website's operations, use BHOP. If there's a technical problem with the website use Uncyclopedia:Report a problem. If you want to write an article with another user, or make changes to an article in another user's userspace, use their talk page. If you do not like something someone posted on your talk page, an article talk page, or the forums, unless it is spam or obvious vandalism, do not edit other's posts. If you believe you are the victim of trolling, report it on an admin's talk page.

When finishing articles[edit]

Worried that an admin might nuke your page? Let us know in the edit summary (this is not the same as the article text) or leave a construction template on it. Need someone else to help you? Let us know on the talk page by adding the {{help}} template, or start a topic in the Village Dump. Communicating with the admins and other users as to your intentions will let us know that you're not an Evil IP of Doom (i.e. blanking, spamming, crap, and/or other vandalism). These comments will appear in Special:Recentchanges; pay attention to this page too, as admin comments will often appear here. If you don't tell us anything, don't be upset if we destroy a page because it only has a few lines.

Note that communication will only get you so far. If you tell us you're gonna finish an article, do it sometime soon. If you will need more than a week to finish an article, begin the article in your userspace, or use Uncyclopedia:Request for move to request it be moved to your userspace.

Tag your trash with QVFD[edit]

Many Uncyclopedians experience a moment of brilliance, in which we conceive "The Best Article Ever," only to find that, after writing the first paragraph, we have no way to actually turn our award-winning concept into a complete article! Here are the wrong things to do:

  1. Abandon it and leave yet another unfinished stub of an article in the main encyclopedia, to convince the chance reader that the whole place is a pile of junk.
  2. Empty out its text. When a new Uncyclopedian blanks articles in the encyclopedia, it sets off alarms in delicate Admin brains. They might not even check to see that you are only blanking your own work.

Instead, list the article on QVFD. This lets the Admin on duty know that it needs to go down in a blaze of glory.

When uploading a new photo that is an improvement on what an article had, click on the old photo and go to its page in the File: space. That page lists the articles that use the photo. If your replacement eliminates the last use of the photo, list it on QVFD. (Putting a colon before the filename, such as [[:File:AwfulShoop.jpg]], makes sure that the name, rather than the photo itself, appears on QVFD.)

Don't take ICU tags personally[edit]

Admins are the frontline for quality assurance. If it is immediately obvious to users that an article is of significantly low quality, they will add an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) tag, indicating that "as it currently stands, the article is not good enough to be kept and requires improvement". It is not a political statement on the part of the user, nor is it an insult to you or your kin. It simply means that the article warrants significant improvement.

Note: Do not take the liberty to remove this tag without adding a noticeable amount of material to an article. Repeatedly doing so is grounds for a block. For more information, see Uncyclopedia:Intensive Care Unit.

Disagreements are inevitable[edit]

Creative people often disagree in any project, band, or team. But they need not lead to edit wars,[1] revert wars, insults and flames. To keep disagreements agreeable, please abide by our policies on consensus, civility, and common sense.

When disagreements happen, be open and calm. Listen, even if the other user is acting like a total jackass. If nothing seems to work, contact an administrator or note it at our Complaints Department. Don't resort to personal attacks or other unacceptable behavior (such as blanking their userpage) when disagreements arise. Administrators are here to help you (but not only you). Ideally, administrators will take an independent look at the material in dispute and will suggest a neutral compromise. When the ideal doesn't happen and you don't get your way, don't make a fuss; having escalated the dispute, the administrator's decision should be final.[2] Maybe move on to a different article; there is plenty else here that needs doing.

  1. Edit wars are when two editors go back and forth undoing each other's edits, not counting vandalism. See the satirical take Edit War#The Battle of Fries versus Chips that, unfortunately, is grounded in reality.
  2. A corporate Vice President had a stock warning to subordinates that escalating a disagreement to a level where people are less familiar with the detailed issues was essentially flipping a coin, and they should be prepared for the issue to be resolved that way.

For the copy-editor[edit]

Copy-editors take what has already been written and improve grammar, spelling, clarity, or presentation. They may take a vague idea and make it material, rewrite an already good joke to be funnier, or simply fix someone else's bad writing. Kind of like the Special Effects crew behind The Matrix, they don't get major billing like the stars do but we appreciate Uncyclopedians whether they provide comedy, correction, or improve the coding that holds everything together. You all refine the overall quality of writing here.

The task of changing what others have written raises the possibity of hurt feelings:

The good copyeditor is a rare creature: an intelligent reader and a tactful and sensitive critic; someone who cares enough about perfection of detail to spend time checking small points of consistency in someone else's work but has the good judgement not to waste time or antagonize the author by making unnecessary changes.

Butcher's Copy-editing, cited by Wikipedia:Basic copyediting § Etiquette

Do post-edit someone else if you can do any of the following:

  • Correct spelling or grammatical errors, or remove ambiguity.
  • Improve the consistency and readability of an article, such as applying a consistent variety of English, so the page's content appears to be a single narrator speaking coherently.
  • Improve the formatting (such as whitespace in template parameters to make them easier to edit.
  • Make it funnier.

Do not post-edit someone else when it merely involves replacing that person's style with your own, on issues where our Style Guide is silent, such as spacing between sentences, varieties of English, and punctuation.

There are no hard-and-fast rules for people as there are with grammar, but respect, common sense, and feedback go a long way. Correcting spelling and grammar is almost always appreciated — except correcting posts on talk pages.

See also[edit]