User talk:WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer

Fun Year-end Awards
Yeah, I think that might work, something else to put on the main page to snazzy it up a little. Maybe we could give awards for some negative things too, like most facty article, or least colbert related article that somehow continues to exist here. But then again, that might encourage vandalism.--Lewser 16:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

New Tags
The warning tags are good, the old tags were kinda general, and I think its good to be specific. Im thinking about making a warning tag for the vandals themselves, or people with user pages that look like they might be vandals, but they havent really done anything, like User:A Pissed Off Wikipedian. And I had no idea there was a please edit catagory. Ill go through it and see if I can contribute to anything. I havent really done much writing since my promotion.--Lewser 16:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Voting
Yeah, voter turnout has been very impressive so far. And the way the system has been set up seems to be working, nobody has messed with the Honor System yet. And actually no, you didnt mention Fuzzy was a sysop...you must have left that out of my introductory pamphlet. But thats one of the reasons why I made that list of admins, so i could figure out who else has the power around here. --Lewser 23:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

New Tag and etc
Cool, ive been meaning to make a warning tag for a while, but ive been too lazy. And thanks for the other updates. BTW, congrats on Foreigner.--Lewser 23:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Vanity
No Problem. I didn't realize the vanity was all regarding the same event. I thought he was a repeat offender. That would have been strike two for him.--Lewser 08:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * GoodNight, be sure to dream about truthiness!--Lewser 08:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Steps to nominate/award
I think you forgot what to protect it as. Block Ip users or only allow syscops to edit. And Add to Main Page featured articles. Ive been doing that, Im not sure if I was supposed to, though.--Lewser 00:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, and to remove the bottom entry from the main page so theres only 5 at a time--Lewser 08:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Voting
Wow, that sucked. I dont want to do that again. By the way, another user (User:Matty233) is having problems voting. Maybe we should just unlock the voter page, and watch it carefully for vandalism.
 * Maybe, but other non-admins have been able to vote. I think the problem lies with their account setup, somehow.--Lewser 21:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur.--Lewser 21:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Non-wikiality Hours
Oooo, fun fun, Toys, Computers, Benefits, Salaries, thats got it all! And User:Pro-Lick has been added to the list o' admins--Lewser 20:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Holy Crap
Are you putting the vote template on each registered user's talk page manually?--Lewser 20:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, thats...wow. Okay, i think i have a few hours to kill, sleep is for the week anyway. What list are you working off of, ill help you out.--Lewser 20:22, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Lol, nah, im done with classes for the day, so when the truthiness calls, I come a' runnin'--Lewser 20:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Ill start from Lewser, and work my way down the list--Lewser 20:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Lol, well, that just might happen, but if you turn off the lights and just hide while they peer in through the windows, you should be fine. And my major right now is Music, so I have a lot of free time. (Ive found that the music major has the highest amount of hippie liberals for me to spy on). So how do you spend your non-wikiality hours, anyway (if you don't mind me asking)--Lewser 20:39, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Winner
Sure, thanks, Ill take care of it--Lewser 19:56, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Taken care of. And I removed the winning vote and archived it here:Talk:Featured Articles/Winners--Lewser 20:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Voting Rules
Do you think we should limit the number of Nominations allowed at the same time? I think more nominations spreads out the votes. And maybe add that you can't add an article you would get credit for?--Lewser 19:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Stuffs
Hey, thanks, I have no idea where it would go on the main page, but I agree. All must hear about how Dr. Colbert acknowledged us. And the Stephen Colbert page looks good, I didnt realize it had gotten that long, it might even still need some cutting down. Btw, I edited Wikiality:Administrators so people know who the law is around here; and do you have any idea why User:Whytokay wasn't able to edit the vote page? Maybe that explains the low turnout, people can't seem to vote.--Lewser 18:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Main Page
The main page is looking good. For some reason, i think the flags call more attention to the Vote link, as well as the others.--Lewser 07:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Voting reqs
I just thought three would work because I was anticipating a low voter turnout. Do you think 5 will work better?--Lewser 05:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well one of the rules I think I added, is that you have to be a contributing member to wikiality for your votes to be counted, but you may be right. Especially with some of the kids who seem to mistake this for the uncyclopedia. Maybe we should limit voting to sysops and admins only, or maybe we just have the power of veto. But then we would have to agree on the veto.
 * I don't think we have that many admins...maybe we can have a seperate vote for admins after the Users vote? Kinda like your veto, but more like a runoff election?  We gotta figure out  way to tell more Users about the voting...--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 05:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, the voting so far seems to be mostly admins. Maybe we could put a banner at the top of the user page. Or, if possible, a link in the navigation box to the left?--Lewser 05:34, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I was sworn in on the 19th, so I believe it was the 18th, when "The Mention" occurred. And I think voter turnout would increase if we has it more prominently placed than a line under the Featured Articles box. One person contacted me who couldnt figure out how to vote, so that might be a problem too. Ill write a little something on the vote page.--Lewser 06:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks spiffy, very professional. But if you have the power to send a mass form letter thing, I think that would guarantee more voters. --Lewser 06:20, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I was thinking about that, like having the first week of each month to vote. Thing thing with that is, if it works, it will work well, but if it doesn't work, it will fail horribly.--Lewser 06:31, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Lol, its not a bad idea, just as long as we can get the turnout. Hell, I could be wrong, I seem to hold a record for doing that around here.--Lewser 06:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Hockey Category
Do you think that articles marked with the Hockey tag should have their own category, rather than be simply lumped in with all of the articles in the Un-American category? There are enough hockey articles to do this. Just wondering. --DeagleSteagle
 * RE: your idea to put them in both, sounds OK with me. --DS
 * Thanks. You rock.  --DS

Featured Removed
Aww.. Ok, I took it down. Idk, I might have, but again thanks for your confidence in me. 10/23/06 8:06am EDT

Featured Articles
Yeah, I stumbled across the nomination thing, good idea. But how many votes should they need before becoming features? I would think three or five. --Lewser 04:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but I made the "Rules" section editable so people can add stuff I forgot. FYI, I nominated 2 articles from 2 new people, but the articles contained red links, so I told them to fix the red links.  They did, and those articles are damn good too!  I really like some of these new people, they are adding some really good stuff.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:52, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, some of the new people are awesome, we should have some way of acknowledging their good work, like a template, or a Featured Author section. --Lewser 05:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, there I go again, being Mr. Observant. --Lewser 05:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, um, since you are on the Honor Roll, technically you are Mrs. Observant...(cough, cough)--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 05:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I know this is totally a facepalm moment, but I can't figure out for the life of me how to vote. I know you put the plus 1 and tildes under Yes, but how do you edit that page to get to do that? I don't see an edit tab or a + tab. --Whytokay 09:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, I unlocked the page so Whytokay can vote, but theres something wrong here. The page is set to Block unregistered voters. But Whytokay was logged in and still locked out of the page. Screenshot Maybe there is something wrong with the way his account is set up or something. Im going to add a line for users to write something on Talk:Main_Page if they cant vote. Hopefully, we can get this figured out quickly though.--Lewser 11:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Request
Could you revert Michigan back to my last version? The most recent change was mostly a bunch of unnecessary cosmetic edits. It is already a featured article as it is, it doesn't need useless stuff like capitalizing the word Bears, etc. I'd go back and manually fix all the edits myself, but I'm too lazy. Besides, the Tigers are on TV right now. --DeagleSteagle

Protection
Hey, I just protected articles 1 thru 6 on Special:Mostrevisions so ip users can't edit them. Just giving you a heads up. --Lewser 00:32, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Smaller pages? Alright, I think that works for most articles, but some of the more Colbertian articles, such as the one about Dr. Colbert himself, should probably be long.--Lewser 00:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Can You Do Me A Favor?
I've put in an entry for Red State Anthems (plural), but on another page, I had to use Red State Anthem (singular), Could you redirect the the singular to the plural. computer language isn't my thing. thanx.

The plural Red State Anthems should live.

template
Thanks, I'm doing my best in the name of truthiness! 10/22/06 5:39 EDT

New User Templates
Thnaks for the FYI. I'll take a look at them.--Pro-Lick 08:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Template:hello
Wow, thats a lot, but for some reason, i thought there would be more...--Lewser 10:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Cable
That sucks, I was wondering what happened to you. Well, its been pretty slow today, so no rush...i think.--Lewser 00:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Template
Good, I hope I'm going the way you think Im going.And if not, feel free to edit to thine heart's content. --Lewser 23:10, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, change whatever you want, I just figured we needed a template like Template:NWTF, but for extreme cases.
 * Wow. That is absolutely brilliant, but I havent the slightest idea how to do it.--Lewser 23:28, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Alright, will do. By the way, is there a religion template floating around somewhere in this internets tube, or am I just hallucinating again?--Lewser 23:38, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, cult, thats it, thanks.--Lewser 23:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Its done for now, 4 rotating options. Template:wha.--Lewser 00:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, Ill start another one when you upload the image --Lewser 00:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Random Pic Template
Cool, this will come in handy for future random templates --Lewser 00:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh...well then. Um...awkward. So...uh...I guess you can probably tell that now I am very confused. So, youre probably better off just doing it, unless you don't feel like it, because I am lost.--Lewser 01:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you mean, like, random images within the random templates?--Lewser 01:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, wow, thats gunna be a lot of work. What do I do to restrict the template:pic size within the random template?--Lewser 01:30, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it might be easier if we dont use a pic template, and just put the Picture options in each template, that way we can automatically restrict the sizes. Like this:

 "WHERE ARE THE NACHOS? MY CAT REFUSES TO BATHE!" I fear what I don't understand, and I don't understand this. Be less random and don't make stuff up, use your gut.

Archive
Okay, i was wondering what you did to yours. Will do, thanks. --Lewser 21:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

BKAD map
Thanks, actually, I just found that online, but let's say the gold or yellow stands for..... God glory shining on the districts! That's truthy isn't it? 3:45pm EDT 10/20/06

Holy crap! Did I delete eveything?! I'm so sorry. But thanks for fixing the map (I can't believe I screwed up on my first day already!)

-phew!- Thank goodness! I thought I might've hit ctrl+A or something & forgot. -phew- 4:16pm EDT 10/20/06

Some headaches
I NWFT-ed a few pages: Barrie Colts, Oshawa Generals, and Plymouth Whalers. Even if there are indeed teams in the Ontario Hockey League other than the nine that Dr. Colbert has told us about, how do we really know what they are unless we look them up in some sort of facty book (instead of our guts)? These pages should be removed. In addition, I'm not sure if the other teams in the OHL deserve their own pages, other than the Saginaw Spirit and their archenemy, the Owen Sound Attack.

In addition, User:JohnStewart has been getting on my nerves. He has been editing Michigan, Saginaw Spirit, and other pages of mine, causing trouble and spreading his untruthiness, and claiming there are other American teams in the OHL. Dr. Colbert hasn't mentioned any, so how would anyone really know if there were? This user is a fact hugger with a tasteless choice in screen names, and he should be dealt with.

I never got a message back from you on this one, I'm not sure if you saw it. --DeagleSteagle
 * As far as I am concerned, you are the hockey expert here. Pages on Barrie Colts, Oshawa Generals, and Plymouth Whalers will need to be dumped if you say they are not truthy.
 * The fact that he had to look up the names of teams in advance goes against the meaning of truthiness. Whalers site is definitely not truthy.  Colts & Generals sites seem like the guy is jumping the gun on smack for when Colbert eventually gets around to mentioning those teams.  In my opinion, all the teams in the league don't deserve a page of their own.  Just the Spirit (of course) and probably Owen Sound since their mascot is a bear. --DeagleSteagle

Politeness
Now obviously, you're the one with the power, so I accept that your vision and understanding of what is truthy takes precedence, and if you want to revert something of mine, go ahead, however I think you should consider explaining to a new user interested in adding new content how their vision diverges from yours rather than just reverting stuff they do. For one thing, it's just polite, for another it's necessary if you wish to build any sort of community. Maybe you should learn to use the discussion tab? Incidently, I'm going to revert your revert since I wish to follow the wikiality 3 revert rule. Kyb

Ok, since you actually have now explained yourself, there's no need for me to do any reverting (have you actually read the wikiality 3 revert rule?). Of course, I think you're entirely wrong - this wiki has almost nothing in it that is Colbertlike, practically every entry is complete and utter made up random nonsense that doesn't exist even in Colberts head (I don't mind though, of course). Check out Chuck Norris, the current Bill Gates page (which is contradicted by things that Colbert has said on his show if you were really taking notes), Bearism, superpowers, colbear, Bear uprising of 2012, etc, etc. Actually I should acknowledge that your entries are closer to Colbertlike than most. It's exactly after reading many entries that I tried to add something in keeping with the character of the rest of the wiki, although making more references to things that had actually been said and done in the show. Anyway, that's all irrelevant, I accept your authority to make this wiki what you want, but all I am saying to you (and not passively, actively, and only slightly aggressively) is that if you want a specific kind of community you should do a better job of conveying your vision to new users. Since I'm making suggestions, I also suggest that when a frustrated user complains that you remove their stuff without explaining why, there's no need to be insulting. As far as I can tell, the most passive aggressive behaviour possible on a wiki is reverting something without communication. Can I suggest Lewser as a model for you - showing a good way to gently correct and greet a new user.
 * Well now hang on, I thank you, but the whole welcoming a new user thing was WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer's idea, its even his template used for the welcome.--Lewser 21:49, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

It's a good idea. Anyway, I perhaps misunderstood. My first edit was based on a completely different understanding of what this wiki was about, and it was swiftly removed, and I received talk from you that greeted me, was friendly and gave a plausible reason why my edit had been removed, but perhaps that was just chance.

You've been promoted again
Congrats: you're now a bureaucrat. You can sysop the worthy, de-sysop, the, um, unworthy, and generally lord it over people that you're an Admiral of the High Seas of Wikiality. You way deserve it. Liberty 03:51, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Fuzzy wants his own section
What? You have a gang now?? You no need me anymore??? Sniffle???? Sniffle, Sniffle????? --Fuzzy 04:13, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for stroking my ego. I am going to move the "American", "Breaking News" and "Stephen Colbert Experience" links because they mess up the page with Firefox.  --Fuzzy 04:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Sweetness! I shall use them responsibly and prophylacticly (if that is possible) --Fuzzy 16:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
 * LHS=Left Hand Side. I changed it to Top Hand Side and Bottom Hand Side since there were no more left and right columns. You probably don't know this, but my hands are vertical from one another so I actually have a top and bottom hand side. I don't have to vote more than once every other year do I? --Fuzzy 02:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Quit editing things while I'm editing things. It gives me an error and makes me cry. You know how fragile I am. Check with me before you make any changes. What is this, some sort of website anyone can edit willy-nilly? --Fuzzy 16:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Do we have an official "rule" about making it as a featured article? It looks to me like 5 yeses and it is featured. Conversely does five Nos/Not yets make it to the loser bin? I am going with my gut and moving Charlene (I'm Right Behind You Now) to Talk:Featured Articles/Losers. --Fuzzy 19:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * What's the difference between "No" and "Not yet"? --Fuzzy 20:09, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think "No" should count as a full "+1" vote and "Not Yet" should be "+0.5" so the flip-floppers can have their own vote too. --Fuzzy 20:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, agreed. I am writing it into the rules section. --Fuzzy 20:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I am going to have the longest talk page ever! And you can't stop me, Daddy!! --Fuzzy 20:18, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Knights Templar 'Holy Grail' link fixed
Thanks for the nomination. I added a Holy Grail page to make it more complete.

Delaware and John Stossel article
Thanks for that recomendation on my Delaware article, fellow Truth-lover. Hopefully we can get Republicans to recognize and move to my state and paint the town red, if ya know what I mean. Condi's gonna need those 3 big electoral votes in 2008 in case the Supreme Court gets blown up by terrorists. And you can consider the article on John Stossel done, cause I just did it 5 seconds ago, in my gut, then I vomitted on my computer and BAM, the truth on John Stossel traveled down the intertubes and landed here or rather on the John Stossel page. --Laird 05:27, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

North American Man-Bear Love Association
Suggest any improvements to be made. If you think the article is amazing enough, how do I nominate, or even vote, on the Featured Article Nomination discussion page?~Skitchonthedrums

HEY!
If you are in fact a private citizen and do not in fact work closely with Clobert in an ever widening net of comedic conspiracy to shine the light of the stars on Colbert. Would it be possible for you to make 30 second video bumpers for an Intervisionweb talk show hosted by a filthy Canadian immigrant who is seemingly taking good non paid jobs away from Americans and poisoning the youth of our fair country? I should mention to you that it's very possible that you will gain in no way and recieve nothing for having done so. Sounds good huh?--Slanderson 20:37, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I hope a link here is Ok, doesn't seem like it to me though.
Link

It goes live at 10 pm PST, that's 1 am EST. --Slanderson 20:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Specifics
No, the show goes live at 1am EST and plays through that little TV box on the main page. In any case, the show needs some bumpers and whatnot, I thought that since you are soo good at this it'd be a good fit for you. But seeing as I believe you work directly for Colbert, this might not be such a good idea. --Slanderson 20:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Done
But I don't have to like it. --Slanderson 22:43, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the pic
The Thatchers page just wouldn't be the same with a big pair of balls for all to see.

My theory regarding you
I have once again come to the conclusion that you are not an individual, but are in fact several people using the same login. There's no other explanation. I got my eye on you donuts.--Slanderson 07:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Seriously, my personal theory is that you are Dr.Colbert himself. Using the time normal humans would need for sleeping, to spread truthiness, and patrol this tube of the internets.--Lewser 08:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

British Columbia
Hi, know you have lots of stuff to edit, but in the Canada entry British Columbia is spelt wrong and (it is spelt Colombia as in Distrcit of) so of course so now the entry page is spelt wrong

Thanks
Hi. Thanks for the welcome! --CocoaZen 00:33, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the very warm welcome. Clearly it came from the gut, and I appreciate that. I did return and voted for my article. Understand that I am a lunatic and therefore do not always make rational decisions using my brain. I tend to trust my gut. --Ravman29