Talk:Bloodbath World Cup 2006

Ace article. --nldr - MrN9000 is not "looking for idiots", IC was perfectly fine and there's nothing wrong with how whatever you want to do here. THEY WERE CRAMMED WITH POOR VOCAB CHOICES, THAT'S ITTTT 16:30, February 12, 2010 (UTC)

Tagged for FFW?!

My God, you must be joking. I rate this as one of my finest works for Uncyclopedia, ahead of all those supposedly 'magnificent' features of mine. I wish to contest the tagging and call for tighter monitoring of FFW taggers. Either that, or Uncy has completely lost touch with humour. :-( -- Hindleyite Converse 11:55, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

Agreed...clicking Random and adding a FFW tag after a brief glance does not constitute anything vaguely resembling a clean up policy. There are tons of crappy articles on Uncyc, why a few people seem intent on deleting ones that are in some cases borderline features is totally beyond me? -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Yeah, I really hope the admins deleting the articles will pay attention to the content of the articles they're deleting before doing so. In other news, I really think you should automate your sig, Mhaille. As well as log in. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 15:06, 27 July 2011

The principle of FFW seems suspect to me - but apparently I didn't vote on it or something. The way certain users have taken part in it is not on. Nominating 5 aritcles per minute is wrong however many words per minute you can apparently read. These 500 articles, that would normally have been subject to considered voting on VFD, will now just be deleted because somone wants to win some dumb-fuck competition. mAttlobster. (hello) 15:32, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

You might just as well add up the three highest users' tag count and accuse all three. On a related note, accusing specific users probably isn't going to help your case, unless if they're clearly blatantly abusing the tags, in which case other people will likely have noticed this already. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:10, 27 July 2011

I think if someone has picked 500 articles for deletion, of which, on checking 30 of these, some should clearly not be deleted, then I can make the accusation. I'm not picking up some poor defenceless rabbit; unless of course he is literally a rabbit in which case I both apologise for my antagonism and applaud him for being capable of operating a computer. mAttlobster. (hello) 19:04, July 27, 2011 (UTC)