Good article: Difference between revisions
imported>Unknown Created page with " thumb|There are [[Rule 34|no exceptions.]] thumb|left|Good articles are found everywhere [[Image:Harpoonsgoodarticle.jpg|thumb|[[Man ..." |
m Reverted edit by Edgar181's sock puppet 34 (talk) to last revision by [[User:imported>SkyBlueCat3|imported>SkyBlueCat3]] Tag: Rollback |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Image:GoatseGA.jpg|thumb|There are [[Rule 34|no exceptions]].]] | [[Image:GoatseGA.jpg|thumb|There are [[Rule 34|no exceptions]].]] | ||
[[Image:Trapga.jpg|thumb|left|Good articles are found everywhere]] | [[Image:Trapga.jpg|thumb|left|Good articles are found everywhere]] | ||
| Line 6: | Line 5: | ||
[[Image:Gashitbricks.jpg|thumb|When you see it, you'll [[shit bricks]].]] | [[Image:Gashitbricks.jpg|thumb|When you see it, you'll [[shit bricks]].]] | ||
[[Image:Gafatwomanass.jpg|thumb|left|If you can improve it further, please do.]] | [[Image:Gafatwomanass.jpg|thumb|left|If you can improve it further, please do.]] | ||
When a [[Wikipedophile]] decides to be an [[attention whore]] for their [[buttsecks|hard work]] they put in to make their [[article]] better ( | When a [[Wikipedophile]] decides to be an [[attention whore]] for their [[buttsecks|hard work]] they put in to make their [[article]] better (while also being too [[fucktard]]ed to write a featured article, [[amirite]]?) | ||
Someone comes along and looks at it for 2 minutes, doesn't bother to check the references, and hey, you've got yourself an [[shit nobody cares about|accurate]] enyclopedia entry, [[lies|right]]? | Someone comes along and looks at it for 2 minutes, doesn't bother to check the references, and hey, you've got yourself an [[shit nobody cares about|accurate]] enyclopedia entry, [[lies|right]]? | ||
| Line 34: | Line 33: | ||
*[[Bad Article]] | *[[Bad Article]] | ||
*[[Featured article]] | *[[Featured article]] | ||
*[[:Category:GNA|Good New Article]] | |||
<center>[[Image:MEMEGA.jpg]]</center> | <center>[[Image:MEMEGA.jpg]]</center> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:25, 22 August 2024
When a Wikipedophile decides to be an attention whore for their hard work they put in to make their article better (while also being too fucktarded to write a featured article, amirite?)
Someone comes along and looks at it for 2 minutes, doesn't bother to check the references, and hey, you've got yourself an accurate enyclopedia entry, right?
The faggoty process means that on talk pages on TOW there's always this shit on them that says something like "Article about unfunny non-internet relevant subject has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria, if you can improve it further, please do!!!!1111one".
Actually, it's unfunny as fuck, and I think NPOV is making me cry with how uninteresting this crap is and Jimbo needs to become an hero.
Similar shit beaurocratic processes include the featured article and the vital article which will be were written about on ED (after this article was written; this one came first), for the lulz.
Trolling good articles
Go to the good article nominees page, and create an account, and pass the shit articles and list them as good, and fail the well referenced articles and do not list them as good articles. This will be a form of epic lulz which causes massive disruption and can even turn away editors seeking recognition for their work.
List of things that are, or have been good articles
- Wikipedia
- Jimbo Wales
- Homosexuality
- Goatse
- Uncyclopedia
- Fail
- Fursuit
- Furry convention
- See a pattern emerging?
See Also
|
Good article is part of a series on Visit the Wikipedia Portal for complete coverage. |