| Keep |
- Keep. I remember the day after Oklahoma the talking head on the news was saying how they had a description of the suspects...swarthy skinned, mid-east accents, etc. Timothy McVeigh was whiter than me, and I'm practically transparent. This story fits, too well, but it fits. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 17:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- STRONG KEEP. Censorship is not going to make the situation go away. We have to confront our problems head on.
- Keep. Definately some redeeming value here, even if just for the main idea of "all terrorists are Muslims". I agree with Asteroid that the picture is unneeded, unless the caption is improved or the picture itelf is replaced/shopped to something funnier. Either way, I've never seen 'too soon' being an issue on Uncyclopedia; I'd hate to see it be one now. I'm imagining that's the bulk of the argument for deletion, and it shouldn't be. Tobz1000 18:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Per my comments on the talk page. --Olipro
 Anchor KUN (Harass) 18:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Because we spend half our time offending most of the population of everywhere, and the things that we say about more minor countries are far more offensive to them than this is to Americans. This news article is comparatively gentle compared to what could have been said, and it's got its share of funny, if in an uncomfortable way. Having said that, we could remove the picture from the top of the news feed, since it's a bit incongruous with the donation banner... oh, you have - okay then. --
 (but) Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 18:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep —Braydie 18:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I've done some more thinking. It's funny, so I change my vote to keep. Despite the fact that everytime I see that man's face it enrages me. Kip the Dip 19:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep This article is funny and less ofending than all the stuff about holocaust and so on. So why it should be delated? Because it offends Americans? User:Jedrus07
- Keep -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me) 20:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- FEATURE because not only does it have little to do with the incident itself, it has much to do with what could've been. Also per Strange but Untrue. --Ж
 WHEEEEE! 19:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Without satire, the terrorists win. You don't support terrorism...do you? -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 19:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Mhaille and Rangeley said it on the talk page -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 20:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- FEATURE!!!!!!!!!! If we are not allowed to make controversial statements, we have surrendered to the "nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." Please, for the sake of liberal Western democracy, keep this up. Self-censorship is nothing but voluntary slavery. It's gentle compared to many of our other articles, and satire must not allow itself to devolve to base stupidities for fear of being "too early." Interestingly, it is never "too early" when thousands are killed in Darfur or Iraq. This is nowhere near as offensive as our other stuff; it is only a controversy because it satirizes America. Sir Àrd-Easbaig Gearcemeanaigh Mac Ádhaimh, UmP (Talk - Articles)
 - KUN SEXY WH21:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep KEEP! biting satire is what we are about surely? nothing is sacred, if you don't find it funny then you should be shot. smashmybrothersfacein 22:22, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep it is funny--Slogan - (T/C/med) 21:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Sick, twisted, and droll... it's penultimate UnNews.
 Rev. Zim (Talk) Get saved! 22:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Not to say it doesn't need a bit of work, but still a funny piece. Does the author really sound like he's mocking the incident? I'd be more inclined to vote for deletion if it were on the grounds that Un could get by on the eight million governmentally-critical articles it already has written.. --THINKER 22:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep In order to heal, we must learn to laugh so we can get over the pain and suffering that Cho caused. Instead of a VFD this should have had an ICU tag on it. It could have been written better. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 00:13, 20 April
2007 (UTC)
- Keep --Sir OCdt Jedravent CUN UmP VFH PLS ACS WH 00:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Its satire, and restrained at that. The fact is, the shooting happened. And I am willing to bet that a good number of people thought that the shooter was a Muslim, including our half-wit President. Dame
 GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 00:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Keep Obviously I've been one of the people here who has been very zero tolerance on being insensitive about the VT tragedy. This, however, doesn't mock the tragedy itself but rather satirizes the concept of racial profiling. It's not a great article by any means, and it still feels too soon, but I wouldn't delete it. --
 » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 01:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Now, as much as this article may be "too soon" or "offensive" (which it is - and how), we should only delete on the grounds of unsaveable crap. This is average quality, but not VFDable. We certainly shouldn't delete this just because it is offensive. -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 02:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. "Too soon?" It's parodying the American people's racist views, not the 32 people that died, and not the person that killed them. I don't see why this is "too soon."
  t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 02:23, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Strong keep. We must hold to our principals and make it ok to satirize every innocent murdered if we'll satirize anyone innocent murdered. However, I'd like to delete the picture of the villain, which I explained in the talkpage.--<<
 >> 02:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- I WANT THIS MOTHERFUCKINGARTICLE TO STAY ON THIS MOTHERFUCKING SITE there isnt much more to say
 Weasel 3689  04:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - I only wish I'd thought of the Muslim angle when writing my article on this tasteful topic - David Gerard 08:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - Karma-AH 09:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Uncyclopedia has been cracking jokes about tragedies like this all the time. Why should we make an exception for something just because it happened in the United States and not in a random third world country Americans don't know about? Kumiankka 09:46, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep The concept of it is hilarious, needs a rewrite however. I believe the points for keeping it from being deleted have been made by other users, and I completely agree with them. As for saying that it is offensive; no its not, it doesn't poke fun at the victims and the only people who say that is should be deleted are dirty, pro-PC, uber-liberal, baffoons who deserve to be deleted themselves. -- The Turd From The Golden State
 WEST END MASSIVE Talk to me SLAVE!! 16:32, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep 1000 dead in Iraq, 30000 dead per year from gun crime in USA, link them together and you get this very witty entry. (that fooled someone I know)--Darwin of suburbia 17:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep simply because I don't like things being censored just because it's "too soon". An Ape that Only Exists on Thursdays 21:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per Olipro. The article is fairly decent, and UnNews doesn't have as high standards as main article space anyway. It is no less appropriate to joke about deaths in the USA than about those anywhere else. Definitely remove the "old guy" phrase and the picture though. --
 Alksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 21:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment "...UnNews doesn't have as high standards as main article space anyway". As an UnNews guy...ouch. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 21:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Drat, I knew that would earn me some ire. I had in mind this sentence from Uncyclopedia:How To Get Started Editing: "generally UnNews pieces are allowed to be shorter than Uncyclopedia articles." That's all. --Alksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 22:21, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep--I understand the joke it's making fun of Islamophobia and who the media seems to assume that this is a terrorist attack carried out by some Arab guy because he thinks Americans have sinned it's not offensive to people who died it's making fun of the way how our media handles a situation like this.--Scott 00:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Hell yeah!-- » >ZEROTROUSERS!!! EAT ME!!!! CRAZY PERSON! SMELLY!!! ILLOGIC, BEHOLD!!!!~» 01:11, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Changing vote.--» >ZEROTROUSERS!!! EAT ME!!!! CRAZY PERSON! SMELLY!!! ILLOGIC, BEHOLD!!!!~» 01:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep while it does seem a bit soon. It doesn't disrespect the dead. Nor is it in poor taste. --Kenvalyi 02:09, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep If thirty two people had been shot dead in any other country, we wouldn't think twice about whether it was in good taste. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 05:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep —Another Pongo Flame Sandbox ☭ 09:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Nomination and delete Not only is it far too soon after the VA Tech shootings for this article to be up, but it just isn't that funny. I'd also like to note that we've had a discussion on the talk page over this article, and that I've already deleted it once (Mhaille restored). —Major Sir Hinoa prepare for trouble • make it double? 17:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
*Too soon, really. And if not, at least take the picture of the murderer from the front page, that certainly adds no comic value to the site. ---Asteroid B612 (aka Rataube) - Ñ 17:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC). Changed my mind.
- Delete It didn't offend me, it just sucked. Toss it. Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 19:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- What's that? Up in the sky? It's a bird! It's a plane! No, it's a flying delete vote!!!!!!!!!!!! Not funny yet. If you were gunned down by some crazy dude, would you want a page about it here? In a while, it might be somewhat close to comedic. Stars+stripes 20:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Not only wasn't the article funny, but I know quite a few people from VA tech, and it's just too soon to even joke about it. Try in a few years.--Skyl3lazer 21:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- A few YEARS?! Are you mad? In a few years, nobody will even care enough to render it amusing! --Ж WHEEEEE! 23:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete It's not the fact that this doesn't amek good poitns but it's just too sooon to be realising something. Just horrible timing and bad taste. This would be like making fun of the kids at Columbine the day after it happened. People have lost they're children not in the least bit appropriate for right now.--Gaberou 21:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete. Too, soon. Article about a gunman that claimed thirty plus fatalities are saddening, not funny. Think about. YOU were shot and killed by the shooter, and Uncyclopedia makes JOKES about your killer? This article is sickening. Give this article Death, Pestilence, War, and Famine. ---Han Solo (Flame)< 22:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete Too soon and also not funny in the least. Quadzilla99 23:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete Not a time to be making jokes in the event of this horrifying tragedy. Gryffon 00:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete When something like this can survive, uncyc has jumped the shark. --
 » His Majesty King George VI (the boxes)   02:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete So far across the line it can't even see it, through a telescope. --Themuppetshow 16:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete We've really crossed the line here.--» >ZEROTROUSERS!!! EAT ME!!!! CRAZY PERSON! SMELLY!!! ILLOGIC, BEHOLD!!!!~» 01:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Hinoa's right, it's not that funny. In fact, it's not funny at all. Satire, of the biting social variety. We do still have room for that here, don't we? If not, about one fifth of my stuff (including a couple of features) should go VFD as well. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 17:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- And here I thought satire of any variety was supposed to be funny. Shows you what I know. —Major Sir Hinoa prepare for trouble • make it double? 17:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Just because YOU don't find it funny does NOT mean everyone else shares in your goddamn opinions... I'm only ashamed you felt you had the right to instantly delete it rather than take it here in the first place --Olipro Anchor KUN (Harass) 22:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Whoa! Step away from the anger. Hinoa did the right thing - we're talking about this aren't we? And all of us are letting our opinions be known. Don't let Cho's hatred spread here, too. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 00:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's my own annoyance rather than hatred... it got a VFD because Mhaille restored it after Hinoa deleted it on sight... and can I reiterate; why is it you Americans find it perfectly acceptable to mock Middle East terrorism... yet homeland violence is totally out of bounds, rather hypocritical to be frank... not to mention I specifically made sure NOT to mock the deceased --Olipro Anchor KUN (Harass) 01:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Why too soon? To laugh about bad things that happen to real people or even fictional charachters, you need at least a minimal level of detachment from them, otherways it's not funny, it's just hurtful and sad. This article looks like the kind of article that could make me if not laugh at least smile from the witty staire, but not just yet.---Asteroid B612 (aka Rataube) - Ñ 18:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Meh, didn't care for it, doesn't need to be deleted, but still, meh.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Madretsma (talk • contribs) dif
- It's pretty stupid to keep a bad article just because you want to prove a point. Deleting it out of censorship is just silly. I don't quite see how a particular kind of news story should garner special attention, to be deleted because it's deemed offensive, or to be kept because it's a political statement against censorship. The obvious solution is to make a better article. I think the point of this whole site is to collaborate to make things better, not bitch in a vote that will clearly go nowhere. (Gir. 03:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC))
- Gir Your so right, spot on. Keep this arctical and REwrite it. It's a great idea for a UnNews story.--→☃☭Mr.Huffy☭☃← 09:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- It doesn't need a rewrite, IMO, just some tweaks. It got caught, huffed, unhuffed and protected so quickly that no one had a chance to make it all shiny. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 17:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
|
