The page can be satirical even if the examples are sincere. It's the concept itself that makes the thing funny, and the fact that the examples are sincere only makes it funnier.
edit: ninja'd
edited 22nd May '12 10:23:51 PM by Xtifr
Speaking words of fandom: let it squee, let it squee.Wait 30 days. If the list steadily begins to look like its former self, then leave it alone, if it looks more like the way you want it too, count it as a victory for yourselves.
Alternatively, you could request a removal of all first person(even though Darth Wiki isn't the main wiki so someone may call foul. Still request, not demand, and see what happens).
Modified Ura-nage, Torture RackPersonally I don't think there is anything wrong with this page. It is Darth Wiki and Just for Fun and works as such.
Also, 199 inbounds is a pretty fair amount of inbounds for a page of this nature with so few wicks. Clearly there are people out there that find this amusing enough to link.
edited 23rd May '12 4:18:22 PM by Catbert
Crowner attached to thread.
Waiting on a TRS slot? Finishing off one of these cleaning efforts will usually open one up.From the page's discussion page: "It's meant to mock the notion of crowning moments pages, which is what Darth Wiki does."
On a related note, what do we do with the /Main/ redirect? Looking at the wicks it seems to be used as an indifference trope.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanCalling in favor of removing non-fictional examples.
I went through and deleted most examples that didn't have anything to do with fiction. Someone may check if I did it right, of course.
Also, do we need the Crowning Moment Of Indifference redirect?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanLooks done. Lock time.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
Crown Description:
What would be the best way to fix the page?
"The sincere ones aren't satiric so don't belong in the article. The satiric non-media ones have nothing to do with media so don't belong on the site."
Well that just says cut the bad examples, not the whole page.
I'm on the internet. My arguments are invalid.