Difference between revisions of "Talk:Djw0071"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCkYw3cRwLo Check and indeed mate!] It seems you are missing out on a lot. [[User:Dvergne|Dvergne]] 09:36, 27 December 2012 (EST) | :::[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCkYw3cRwLo Check and indeed mate!] It seems you are missing out on a lot. [[User:Dvergne|Dvergne]] 09:36, 27 December 2012 (EST) | ||
::::Well, that made me feel a little bit dumber. I'll stick to books, I think. If things like that represent the "Best of the Public," I despair. [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 10:34, 27 December 2012 (EST) | ::::Well, that made me feel a little bit dumber. I'll stick to books, I think. If things like that represent the "Best of the Public," I despair. [[User:MattyD|MattyD]] 10:34, 27 December 2012 (EST) | ||
| + | ::::: Two of the things that come to mind: a) no matter how interested I may be in the subject I would not bother watching a video the title of which includes ''"Devistation"'' or ''"Lybia"'' because, if this person (whose name would have him immediately blocked as a spammer if he tried to get onto Conservapedia without "patronage") can't even get the title right, can he be trusted with the video itself? - and b) I find it ironic that this article, as it stands, was not created but ''evolved'', edit by edit from the original single phrase of its conception. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] 14:59, 27 December 2012 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 19:59, December 27, 2012
video makers via video making
You've got the rhythm! Will we get an article on every anonymous fan of the Question evolution! campaign? --AugustO 06:00, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- This wiki has about 40,000 content pages. Since the QEC will no doubt have a robust 2013, may your talk page comment be prophetic! :) This article is a pretty robust article in terms of its length. May the Djw0071 article greatly expand! :)
- Djw0071! Djw0071! Djw0071! Faster! Stronger! Higher! Conservative 08:32, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Do smart people actually watch YouTube videos? I've seen a few, mostly of boring ugly people talking at a webcam or talking over stock footage/images that I've seen a thousand times before. I don't get why people would bother with such things. MattyD 09:25, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Check and indeed mate! It seems you are missing out on a lot. Dvergne 09:36, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Well, that made me feel a little bit dumber. I'll stick to books, I think. If things like that represent the "Best of the Public," I despair. MattyD 10:34, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Two of the things that come to mind: a) no matter how interested I may be in the subject I would not bother watching a video the title of which includes "Devistation" or "Lybia" because, if this person (whose name would have him immediately blocked as a spammer if he tried to get onto Conservapedia without "patronage") can't even get the title right, can he be trusted with the video itself? - and b) I find it ironic that this article, as it stands, was not created but evolved, edit by edit from the original single phrase of its conception. AlanE 14:59, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Well, that made me feel a little bit dumber. I'll stick to books, I think. If things like that represent the "Best of the Public," I despair. MattyD 10:34, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Check and indeed mate! It seems you are missing out on a lot. Dvergne 09:36, 27 December 2012 (EST)
- Do smart people actually watch YouTube videos? I've seen a few, mostly of boring ugly people talking at a webcam or talking over stock footage/images that I've seen a thousand times before. I don't get why people would bother with such things. MattyD 09:25, 27 December 2012 (EST)