User:Nerd42/idea

This is an idea for a new wikia, being proposed by User:Nerd42 and User:Silent Penguin:

Iv gone and added some "improvements" which i have put in italics.--Silent Penguin 19:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

User names: User:Nerd42 and User:Silent Penguin

Your email address: nerd42 at gmail dot com (i hate spam bots) silentpenguin at hotmail dot co dot uk

Name for the wiki (no spaces!): Illogicopedia

Title for the wiki: Illogicopedia: the free Nonsensical encyclopedia that anyone can edit

Default language for this wiki: en

Description of the wiki: A breakaway from Uncyclopedia in that articles do not necessarily have to be funny. Anything clean would be allowed, but the wiki is mostly dedicated to non-humorous, semi-humorous (semi, meaning generating laughs is not the primary goal, articles could be criticized for being "too funny") non-persuasively-motivated satire, especially in the case of self-referential humour, which would win out against anything else(like an infinate loop). Illogical "monkey fish banana tree" streams of text and other forms of "random humour" that are frowned upon at Uncyclopedia are encouraged.

Rules

 * Cyber-bullying would not be tolerated.
 * Overly funny articles would be directed to Uncyclopedia. (rejected Uncyclopedia content that is well-written but doesn't meet the "Funny" standard might be forked)
 * Satire that is intended to persuade people to a specific point of view would be directed to Wikia's politics wikis.
 * Anything else would stay as long as it is clean and interesting.

Difference from Uncyclopedia
Generally, "funny stuff" belongs on Uncyclopedia. Humour isn't the overriding goal here.

Difference from the Encyclopedia Dramatica
ED is a mess. Plus, excessive vanity and spam would be frowned upon here.

Difference from political satire wikis
Political humor belongs on Wikia's politics-related wikis.

Examples (article)
Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example, Example.

Wow, those were alot of examples! From now on, no one can complain that we didn't give any examples in our article because they are just up there, right above this paragraph!

Examples of examples
The best example of an example is Wikipedia's definition of the word "example", which is "a representative of a group or a concept." Unfortunately, it does not list any examples of what that means, so we are left wondering.

Examples of external links

 * Example of an external link

Real examples

 * http://fanstuff.hrwiki.org/index.php/dr460n is a satire of http://www.hrwiki.org/index.php/dragon and is not any funnier than the original but may be considered worth reading. In the original "dragon", the artist makes up the drawing, but in "dr460n", the drawing makes up the artist.
 * The Cursed Wiki Article is an example of non/semi-funny satire that Uncyclopedia rejected.
 * These sorts of pages that exist simply for their own sakes would be some of the kind of content we would consider to be our primary function. Anything witty and clever. Each page might have some basic formula or rule, like AAAAAAAAA! for example has the rules that the only letter that can be visible on the page is "A" and it should look like a normal wiki article in all other respects. Illogicapedia might do the whole alphabet on a page named "ABC" for example. A page called "grammar" would contain bad grammar and a page called "spelling" would consist entirely of mispelled words. The title would literally define the content of the article rather than merely indicate what the article is about. (Think of the many possibilities of what the page called "Music" could say in this context - Uncyclopedia's "music" is a whole different idea) and the page "conversation" could be only one person's part in a conversation, dialogue from anyone else would be omitted.
 * The page "Infinite loop" would say simply " ".
 * Simply illogical random comments would be acceptable content. (many edits made on other wikis that are called "vandalism" would actually make great content here)
 * The article about nothing would say...