Aleksei Vasiliev posted:

and now somebody wants to delete that so there are ‹See Tfd› everywhere

RZApublican posted:

love-shyness:

the love-shy men of wikipedia, ladies and gentlemen

Aleksei Vasiliev posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bladez636

people like this are the most worthless wikipedia users
even worse than the spergs

edit: gently caress he says he has aspergers my post is undone

RZApublican posted:

She's really hot. Can I have her when you're done with her? 79.71.235.129 (talk) 12:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

JawnV6 posted:

i can't talk to women because of crippling personal issues but OMG THEY SUCK

acker posted:

"Most often, "nice guys" spend a lot of time in the friend zone."

- wikipedia

quote:

Cardcaptor Sakura

I added about Tomoyo's unrequited love for Sakura in the TV section. This might be important since I didn't see it listed.. anyways. 24.129.239.143 06:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

     Hello, guess what? I will eliminate your contribution, because the case of Sakura and Tomoyo is a platonic love, as Sakura never realized that her friend was in love with her. The unrequited love refers to a refused love. Yes, this is cruel, but say good-bye to your text. Happy day. 200.71.186.110 23:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

         Urm, no. Platonic love is a love for a friend in a non physical sense. The way best friends "love" each other. It doesn't mean soemone that secretly loves someone else. So, that should probably be returned. Don't know the show and can't find the removal though so can't do it myself. 172.189.250.22 22:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

             You can go to the history of the article (see beside edit this page). But I insist: Sakura never realized the real intentions of her friend Tomoyo, so it's not strictly correct to say that Sakura "refused" her friend's love. That's the main detail. Confusions like this one come because anyone is fool enough to have wrong and unrealistic impressions about his/her favorite series. That's, by the way, the reason I removed two series from the category yuri (lesbian japanese animated series, for the common terms). Misinterpretations are annoying sometimes, you know. Twicemost (talk) 06:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

quote:

Y DOESNT SHE LOVE ME?

I dont no how this works wif wikipedia so if i stuff it up im sorri to like everyone who reads this. I have loved this girl for eleven years. She is the most beautiful person I have ever met. Not just with her looks ethier but with her personality too. We went through primary skool together and now that we are both at single sex secondary schools it is harder for us to see each other much any more. The main problem is that she loves my best mate and he loves her back. I have loved her for so long and she knows this but it doesnt make a difference to how she thinks of me. I would do anything for her. I would die to keep her from harm. I would never play footy again for her to love me the way I love her. This is stupid but it seems like such a betrayl of my best mate to go out with her when I have loved her for years before they even met. I have always been there for her but it doesnt make a difference. She is so kind, caring, wonderful and selfless but the one thing i want most is for her to love me which she never will. I know you might think that its stupid that a teenager could know about unreciprical love or whatever it was but I do. Every day I talk to my mate at Lunch time and the first thing he says is about her. Always. It hurts so much to see them holding hands when I know she will never want to hold my hand. It nearly kills me to see her kiss him when I know I will never feel the touch of her lips. I see her every day but sometimes I think that she doesnt see me. We are friends but that is all we are ever going to be. I love her. She doesnt love me =[ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.87.173.9 (talk) 15:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Chin up man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.111.73 (talk) 04:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The story of my life. I've never had reciprocated love. It's truly wretched. My longest obsession (so far)was for two years. The only thing I can really say is that you mustn't think you're alone. I would like to give advice on how to win her, but as I've never been able to, my word doesn't really count for anything. Yes, I'm also a teenager, and of course it's perfectly possible for teenagers to experience unreqited love. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.117.98 (talk) 21:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm there to. Tis sucks. MichaelCody89 03:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelCody89 (talk • contribs)

This seems to be unrelated to the article, I say in should be deleted. (this is not a chat room). I'm just not sure on the policies regarding talk pages. BrainMagMo (talk) 18:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

     Of course it has nothing to do with the article and violates Wikipedia policy, but it's touching. Please let it stay. Telos (talk) 01:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

         I second that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.150.181.180 (talk) 00:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Also agreed Dolphineclipse (talk) 06:44, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

"I would never play footy again for her to love me the way I love her." Wow, you must really love her —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.186.36 (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

RZApublican posted:

ahaha wikipedia e/n

RZApublican posted:

Unrequited love

well, the article is just a list of examples in fiction, let's have a look at the talk page

quote:

Cardcaptor Sakura

I added about Tomoyo's unrequited love for Sakura in the TV section. This might be important since I didn't see it listed.. anyways. 24.129.239.143 06:35, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello, guess what? I will eliminate your contribution,

quote:

because the case of Sakura and Tomoyo is a platonic love, as Sakura never realized that her friend was in love with her. The unrequited love refers to a refused love. Yes, this is cruel, but say good-bye to your text. Happy day. 200.71.186.110 23:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

acker posted:

acker posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Meat_stubs

i don't really think this is worthless, i just laughed at the name of the category

The Harvard Comma posted:

Limerence

quote:

This is correct. Profane language strictly speaking is not the same as obscene language. Taboo references to body parts and functions are obscene. Profanity is something else, it does not respect religion. We all have the same body parts and functions, but we do not all have the same religion. I'd be hard pressed to think of a people that did not find constant reference to bodily functions annoying and improper in polite conversation, or did not refer to them when they wished to be shocking. I think that is something we have in common. Profanity, on the other hand, is a totally different matter. It depends on who is defining it. If you are not acquainted with someone else's religion you might find that you are being totally profane and horrifying without even knowing it. Such statements, inadvertent or not, have cost people their lives. This article is really quite unacceptable. Its author(s) betray not only a preoccupation with the confrontations of youth over matters we consider vulgar but also a disrespect for religion in general and Christianity specifically. Do you really want us to think the Christian religion is responsible for western in general and French in particular profane language? Give us a break. Go have another argument with your parents, leave us out of it. The article is certainly completely wrong. Obscene language was certainly much less shocking to the Romans than it is to us, as their taboos were far fewer. There was not too much privacy in ancient Rome about either the clothing, the toilet or the sex. Many of the female slaves were put to prostitution quite openly. Most of the considerable upper classes had one or more servants perpetually present. Discussion of intimate medical conditions and problems was quite frank. This was a village type environment - everyone knew everything about everyone. You might sit next to your neighbor on the public toilet; men and women bathed nude together in the baths. As in societies that customarity go nude or nearly so, these customs did not affect the rules of sex and marriage. What you young people are experiencing here is culture shock. Can't you manage to keep this out of our encyclopedia? You need to grow up a bit more. Get yourselves blackboards and when you feel the urge go scrawl shocking words on them. Leave us alone. If absolution for your young sexual practices and desires is what you are looking for, we can't do that. Sorry. Now, for the profanity. Latin literature certainly offers reams and reams of profanity. In Shakespeare's time they used such language as "Odd's Bodykins", by God's little body. Is Christianity responsible for that? In Plautus just about every third line has a profane epithet, such as Hercle, "by Hercules." As the latter was considered divine, the term was a shocking profane epithet. And it goes on and on. The plain and simple truth is, you don't know a thing about your topic, editors, you've done no research, you take the words of the one source you do use out of context, and you are very fond of repeating vulgar words for the female genitals. How old are you, 15? 16? Believe me, son, matters appear quite differently when you have to assume the roles of a responsible adult. I don't know what to do about this article. Rather than delete it and start completely over I second the motion of the editor who started this topic, let's change the name and content. I suggest "Latin taboo language" to include both obscenity and profanity. I could put 4 or 5 serious tags on this from non-NPOV to unsourced and could also recommend it for immediate deletion. Instead I am going to give you a chance to bring it up to acceptable quality. Get with it or get off it. I'm working on Latin articles from time to time. When I get around to this one again if nothing has been done I will be making radical changes or else putting in all the warning flags it deserves.Dave (talk) 12:19, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

quote:

Get Out is one of the earliest board games published by Cheapass Games. Players are trying to move out of their parents' basements. They roll dice and move around the board, trying to collect jobs and apartments.

RZApublican posted:

found the most worthwhile thing on wikipedia

Get Out (board game)


unsurprisingly there is nothing on the talk page

Seamonster posted:

this is in the "did you know" section as im posting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_paper_orientation

literally an article that has no other purpose than to be poo poo on

Seamonster posted:

this is in the "did you know" section as im posting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_paper_orientation

literally an article that has no other purpose than to be poo poo on

that horrible article posted:

A toilet seat left up: not ready to be sat upon

Aleksei Vasiliev posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotel_toilet-paper_folding

quote:

32. One Of Our Team Tickled And Fingered Very Greasy Vaginas And Holes