User talk:Radrigosan

everyone shut the fuck up, I'm just trying to crush some articles that shouldn't be on wikipedia at all.

just to set the record straight
Don't condescend to me, I know how to use wikipedia and I assure you, it is my most genuine opinion that the "internet phenomenon known as the rickroll" shouldn't have a wiki article dedicated to it. I think my old article "removal from principalship" which made no sense whatsoever and was of no use to anyone is about as worthy of a wiki article. You get a bunch of people repeating the same joke and it WILL gain popularity but that certainly doesn't mean it's funny. It's like the "cool" machine of high school where you were expected to adopt a certain style just to fit in. Certainly what gets to me most is that rickroll has an article and yet it was created on the same 10 pages where on 420 hitler is photoshopped to have a party hat and a kazoo (OVER and OVER) and the 4chan scum are so busy aspiring towards a second holocaust that a perfectly harmless celebration around drugs is neglected. My edits were more constructive than the article itself and I'll admit, that must be a first. I've done so much research and my opinions are so ethically and logically valid that I AM an authority on this group, but on this wacky site any idiot with Rick Astley's face ironed on his shirt is an authority on anything. By the way the 4chan article is locked and the article about ancient egypt could be erased in a second, how far have we come that we now regard stupid cults more highly than ancient civilizations.

Barnstars galore
you have been awarded a number of barnstars indefinitely

the surreal barnstar for being a maverick and attacking the biggest group of assholes ever and for clever use of sarcasm

The deletionists barnstar for deleting an entire article that is entirely useless, The big mama, The Rick Roooooollll!

definitely this one for you cause I mean, c'mon who the hell else is going to get it? We don't really appreciate humor around here too much anyway and your talk page has got me rolling (or should I say rickrolling ;-) nah just kidding lol ) in the aisles.

The anti-vandalism barnstar for stepping up to the plate, recognizing that there were 5 or 6 articles that constituted vandalism and doing what you could to get them off of wiki.

Thanks
I couldn't be happier

June 2008
Please do not continue to make disruptive edits to your talk page, such as adding offensive content or personal attacks. Please respond with civil communication if you believe notices are in error, or visit the sandbox to experiment. Thank you.

Please don't supplant the identity of other users to say that they make "lame ass comments" to your talk page like you did here or to make it look as if that user awarded you barnstars like you did here. That's uncivil to other editors.

Please notice that the existance of articles is decided by compliance with the notability guidelines of wikipedia, not by the inherent worth, nor by how many times Hitler is mentioned on the same website as the article's subject. If you go at the top of Talk:Encyclopedia_Dramatica and look for the book whose text starts with "This page was previously nominated for deletion", you can click on "show" and see the discussions on the existance of this article. You should attempt to address the issues raised on those discussions, altought it's really unlikely that the article gets deleted since the last AFD decided that it had enough notability, and notability doesn't decrease with times. The only real possibility for deleting this article would be the notability threshold to be raised.

Finally, notice that Encyclopedia Dramatica is actually semi-protected, so there was no need to remove the semi-protected template. I have restored it already. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. De728631 (talk) 03:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

fool, goatse IS vandalism.


 * goatse is vandalism, but Goatse.cx is an article about vandalism, and it's not vandalism in itself. As an article, it has different rules than vandalism. IF you think that goatse is a good thing and should be more famous, then either go to other websites to troll it around, or find reliable sources that can be added to the article and suggest them on the talk page. --Enric Naval (talk) 09:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)