sciwki.

should our wiki be serious and moderated?

  • yes, it should be a serious attempt.

    Votes: 9 36.0%
  • no, it's fine the way it is

    Votes: 9 36.0%
  • yes it should be moderated.

    Votes: 11 44.0%
  • no, it shouldn't be moderated.

    Votes: 8 32.0%

  • Total voters
    25
  • Poll closed .
Oh joy!

the [ENC]unofficial encyclopedia team[/ENC] has been created. We are the team that is responsible for most of the content on the encyclopedia (a few exceptions proving the rule). Feel free to join us!

And then I have to make a more negative statement

It is really pissing me off that the self-appointed [ENC]nazi[/ENC]s are trying to get their way with the encyclopedia. To be honest I am quite surprised how our efforts to build something are being dragged through the mud.

I will put a stop to the production of all science entries (by myself) till this issue is resolved.
 
Last edited:
It's a [ENC]democracy[/ENC]...well...anarchy where anyone can edit himself into any position.

Except for the [ENC]nazi[/ENC]s. I predict that they will be edited out by the [ENC]collective [/ENC](not to be confused with [ENC]communism[/ENC].
 
[ENC]unofficial encyclopedia team[/ENC]
this needs to be put on the main page and the word "unofficial" changed to "official".
although i have serious reservations about mattmarr.
that way there will be no doubt as what to expect from the contents.
 
this needs to be put on the main page and the word "unofficial" changed to "official".
although i have serious reservations about mattmarr.

We are not the official encyclopedia team. Unfortunately.

Mattmarr was probably a joke by someone on the [ENC]unofficial encyclopedia team[/ENC].
 
Back
Top