User talk:The fatgoat
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
[edit] Welcome!
Hello, The fatgoat, and welcome to Uncyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If not, the door's right over there... no, a little more to your left... yeah. Anyway, here are a few good links for nooblets:
If you read anything at all, make it the above two links. If you want to find out more about Uncyclopedia or need more help with something, try these:
- About Uncyclopedia and The five pliers of Uncyclopedia
- How to get started editing on uncyclopedia
- Everything you ever wanted to know, but were afraid to ask
- Help Pages - if you need help with a specific issue
I hope you enjoy editing here and being an Uncyclopedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or use the "sign" button (
) above the edit box. This will automatically produce your name and the date.
If you need help, ask me on my talk page, ask at the Dump, or add the following: {{help}} to this page along with a message and someone will come along and help you if they can. Again, welcome! GOSHZILLaDISGUSTING UNFUNNY NONSENSE 18:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)!
| Member of the Order of Uncyclopedia This person has successfully registered on Uncyclopedia. They should be proud of themselves for making such a smart move. |
[edit] WIP move notice of Unicellular Organisms
Hey, your article that was called Unicellular Organisms has been moved to User:The fatgoat/Unicellular Organisms for further development. Feel free to move it back when you have done. Oh, and if you want to reply to this, please reply on my talk page (I do so many of these, I don't get to check them all). Thanks. —Braydie 22:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sig
Hey, you sig seems to be spilling code. In the nicknames box you need to put "{{SUBST:nosubst|User:The fatgoat/sig}}". Without the ""s. If User:The fatgoat/sig is not where you keep your sig file, replace if appropriate. Then cross the Raw signatures box. If you need any more help ask me on my talk page. —Braydie 21:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes! It works! Thanks. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 21:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Great. :) (I was checking back to see if I had instructed you properly, nice and quick with the response :D ) —Braydie 21:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes! It works! Thanks. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 21:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ta.
| Thanks for voting for Uluru on VFH. Here's a rock. | ||
| And a second one. Don't you feel special? |
--El Zoof 08:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Yay rock! -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 08:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Help
I am in need of help. I need to know what content you are allowed to create articles on and what you're not. (Since it's different to so called mighty wikipedia). Molag bal 16:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Well, you can create articles on almost anything, except for things that have already been written about. It's probably best to see this for a guide on what not to write about. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 16:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Death Camps
I at first came to your user page to let you know that I reviewed ROFLWAFFLES, but then I read your death camp article and just had to let you know that it was the most warped, twisted, evil, and yet strangely, horribly amusing things I've ever seen. I'm torn between congragulating you on writing this horriffically entertaining masterpeice or vandalizing your user page for daring to actually write something so offensive. I guess I'll just do neither...anyway, on to what I originally came here to say: I reviewed ROFLWAFFLES. --THE 22:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- I'm a professional at that, I'm told. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 19:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] You are in a bad mood, ain't you?
I was just waiting to see if you would vote for or against B&W Man. By the way, thank you, it's better having an against vote than seeing you article being ignored. -- herr doktor needsAsample
[scream!] 17:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Does that mean you were watching me? -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 20:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed the same thing as NeedABrain, how come you shoot down everything? And by everything, I mean my article. I don't care about the rest. P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon
(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 22:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I don't remember voting against that article... -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 22:05, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed the same thing as NeedABrain, how come you shoot down everything? And by everything, I mean my article. I don't care about the rest. P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon
- Wow, that's.....kinda creepy.......sleep denying? P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon
(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe... I dunno... it looks sort of familiar. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 05:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Déjà vu
Thanks for your contribs :) 90% of the edits there are people who just take the article and cut&paste it a few times, so it's nice to see someone making useful changes. -- Rei 17:33, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
| Weasel3689 would like to thank you for Lord of the Flies. Remember: Weasels Rule! |
Weasel 3689
05:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Global Cooling
| In recognition of your contribution toward maintaining a humourous atmosphere on Uncyclopedia.
Thank you for keeping Uncyclopedia cool. |
- - Sir Roger 06:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
| HEIL LJLEGO! | ||
|---|---|---|
| Thanks for voting FOR Nazi in VFH. It's good to know where your priorities lie /me steps back and calls the police. |
Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 20:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] thanks
User:THE... |
--THE 12:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Vulva
Thanks (well, sort of) for your vote... anything in particular you didn't like about the article? If you can think of some way to improve it, please let me know! I don't think it's anything even remotely resembling perfect, so any constructive criticism would be great! --El Zoof 21:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Eh, I just don't really like sexual articles that much. They seem too overdone. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 21:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not trying to be rude (I manage that without trying, usually) but did you read the article, or is your abhorrence more directed to the title? If you honestly don't like the article because of it's sexual content, fair enough; I'm just a needy, picky bastard who seeks what little comfort I can from the meaningless admiration of my so-called peers. :) --El Zoof 00:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I did read the article -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Apologies. Hope you find some of my other stuff entertaining! :) --El Zoof 04:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I did read the article -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 00:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not trying to be rude (I manage that without trying, usually) but did you read the article, or is your abhorrence more directed to the title? If you honestly don't like the article because of it's sexual content, fair enough; I'm just a needy, picky bastard who seeks what little comfort I can from the meaningless admiration of my so-called peers. :) --El Zoof 00:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Eh, I just don't really like sexual articles that much. They seem too overdone. -- The fatgoat Talk (to me, obviously) The Crap I've Done 21:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] THANK'D!!
REJOICE!
You have received the
Double-Douser's Award
for exemplary utilization of boiling, scorchingly hot water.
![]()
Why?:Pour Boiling Hot Water Down Your Trousers?
the most strongly favored article in Uncyclopedia history!
Much appreciated!!! :) --THINKER 06:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] A slightly belated thank you
-- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 19:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Belated Thanks!
I'm not really good on making banners, so here's a little gift for voting for A Visit with your Psychopathic Grandmother:
| User:Mr.Vib has awarded you a cookie! Now go play in traffic. |
| User:Mr.Vib has awarded you a cookie! Now go play in traffic. |
Thanks!--Mr.Vib 02:39, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks Man
I'd like to think you for re-writing Fyodor Dostoevsky. I wrote that when I was a noob and it's been a stain on my record ever since, and I've always been too lazy to rework it. Thanks for making so deserving a topic a worthy page. Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 23:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Congradulations on your Article
| Rejoice, The fatgoat! You have been entitled to the Golden Shower Award | ||
| For donating high quality material to the Pee Review. |
For the article Paul Hindemith, Which I reviewed. Congrats!!! --NXWave 11:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
| WARNING! | |
| Since you voted for Blue Screen of Death on VFH, your user talk page has encountered a fatal addition of a template.
| |
| To correct this problem, you must either: 1. Accept SRXT's sincere thanks, or 2. Go and buy a better PC, you cheap bugger. Select an option _ |
[edit] All hail!
| Thank you! For Choosing Diplomacy Cainad is glad that we could reach a diplomatic solution to this issue: you voted for my article, and this guy here didn't diplomatize you. Seriously though, thanks. It's nice to know that after writing over twenty articles, people will eventually feature one just to stop you from whining! (That's about as serious as I get, so please interpret this as a heartfelt expression of gratitude.) |
--The Acceptable
Cainad
(Fnord) 09:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] UN:PR
Hey, dude. I read your reviews, Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Otto Weininger(rewrite) and Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?Knot?. They were very, very, very short and lame. If you don't have anything to say, good or bad, don't review it. If you don't have any advice to give, don't review it. If you don't want to read an article, don't review it. It's obvious from these two reviews that you don't take pee review seriously and that you probably didn't even read the articles you reviewed, much to the annoyance of the writers. Please just don't review anything again, or check with me or MrN9000 before you do. It's that simple. <Apr 12, 2008 [6:03]>



