Illogicopedia:Illogilution
| Sensible Section |
(A bugle sounds)
The simple folk of illogicopedia exsisted together harmoniously, happily seeing out their happy little lives in the insane asylum without a care in the world. Until one day when two of the inmates grew weary with their meaningless exsistence and formulated a plan to escape.
After discussing it on the IRC chatroom and after many attempts to improve the site (e.g. the pikcle and the Writer of the month award) we have seen fit to initiate the Illgicopedia-Revolution, affectionately refferred to as the illogilution.
Basicly we want to improve the quality of articles in general on illogicopedia, I'm not saying all of our articles are terrible, quite the contrary. Me and Seppy would just like to point out, unless they are brilliantly done and engaging towards the reader, we don't really need anymore of the following:
- Articles consisting of one or a few word(s) repeated over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over (and pauses for breath) and over, even if they are occasionally punctuated by images or unsightly formatting.
- Articles consisting of random threads of words e.g. "Tiglafeswexss0 whiiny impish tiger DESUDESUDESU sonk".
Articles in future should have more effort put into them so that we will attract and retain more readers because after so many pages of random insanity how many readers are just going to leave illogicopedia. Please try and entertain or humour the would-be-reader. Quality over quantity people. Think what you're writing.
We also ask for a more stringent trashing policy, so that the unfixably bad articles are taken and killed leaving the wiki spotlessly clean. I don't care if he takes your article, my article, or even your sister's dog's previous dog biscuit salesman's article.
And so the trailblazers waited for the groups verdict on whether they should escape from the asylum, the breakable window was waiting.
So what do you guys think (Post comments Below)[edit | edit source]
YEA! i'd agree, really. No really. I think this wiki needs a bit more class. --User:binclin 
16:39, 5 Yoon 2008 (UTC)
Bare in mind i'm not insulting the quality of your/my articles, I'm just indicating it's time to shape up and write the best damm stuff we can!!!! (Eating special K for two weeks or throwing it over the screen won't help your articles quality, it will only make them sticky and punctuated by sodden orange things).-- 07:29, 26 Yoon 2007 (UTC)
- Bleeble aio;herw;otiwrt sonk. Fart. Fart fart fart. Fart? Fart. (Translation: Hey, there's a place for the repetition. And nonsense. Who cares what makes sense? Insanity is what the wiki was built on.) Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut I am getting sick of the Desudesudesudesu articles. So stoppitoff. Anyway, I always try and write the best stuff I can (draws attention away from Germany). I can't not do. Or sommat.
- Special K sucks. There's more sugar in a bowl than a Mars bar. Mars bars suck. They tasted OK until they changed the recipe. Recipes suck... <is killed> -- Hindleyak Converse • ?blog • Click here! 10:09, 26 Yoon 2007 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that illogicopedia's original goal was to be "intersting outside 'normal wiki' content" that doesnt just mean random rants, it could be things such as forwarded mail, one line jokes, IRC extracts, Observational comedy, Ranting and other similar stuff, basicly anything that could not be called a real article.--Silent Penguin
] 11:29, 26 Yoon 2007 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that illogicopedia's original goal was to be "intersting outside 'normal wiki' content" that doesnt just mean random rants, it could be things such as forwarded mail, one line jokes, IRC extracts, Observational comedy, Ranting and other similar stuff, basicly anything that could not be called a real article.--Silent Penguin
How would you go about doing it? would you start looking for the "bad" ones & give them a label? Or would you start by labelling the "good" ones and then decide on the rest?
What would you (we) do with rejected pages? delete them? or make a sort of special pages with (samples of) the rejected content? (like f.e. a page with all the random words that are repitited repitited repitited (Is that a word?) The last option seems better to me than a kind of Forest Fire Week like they had on Uncyclopedia. D. G. Narrator - Let it all out. 19:20, 26 Yoon 2007 (UTC)
- But on the other hand there are few things more satisfying than DESTROYING & ANNIHILATING & KILLING & DOING AWAY WITH BORING ARTICLES & TEXTS. D. G. Narrator - Let it all out. 19:27, 26 Yoon 2007 (UTC)
New reason for this pages relevance[edit | edit source]
From now on this page can and should be used as a place to suggest ideas to advance and improve the already fantastic site, I'll put osmething on the forum about it. I'll do this but the sites good already.-- 13:12, 9 Jumbly 2007 (UTC)