From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Vote
|
Score: 3 sexual arousals
|
| Nominated by:
|
~ 20:07, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
|
For: 11
|
- Nomfor. A 2006 poo lit winner, that never got a feature status. Short and sweet. ~ 20:07, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Most definitely. Staircase CUNt 20:25, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
- 4 trains going into tunnels. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 20:42, 13 September 2009
- For. IronLung 00:42, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Because puns are clever. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 12:50, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Cleaver & Funny!!! Funnybony 19:05, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
- For. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, September 16, 2009 (UTC)
 Weak For - The concept is funny, and the article is well-written. I still think it should have been longer and funnier, though. Rbpolsen ♦ Come Rant · Come Look at all My Crap 16:10, September 17, 2009 (UTC)- For. I laughed, so yeah. ChiefjusticeDS 21:47, September 17, 2009 (UTC)
 For.   Join Us 19:06, September 20, 2009 (UTC)- For. I laughed. Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 06:54, September 24, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against: 8
|
- Weak Against. Left me feeling dissatisfied. There were a few funny bits, but it seemed too short and didn't address bits of metrosexuality that I thought were going to be in the article. :/ • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 01:16, Sep 14
- Well you've got an idea However it feels like there is more room for expansion, it seems to skirt around going into any great depth and I didn't get the origins part. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
     07:14, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
- Another weak against. I thought the Freud/Jung thing was fucking hilarious. I thought everything else was a bit of a mess.
 pillow talk 22:21, September 14, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. Goes off the rails after a great start
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 20:37, September 15, 2009 (UTC)
- against. this is a 2006 gem with a solid concept. it needs work before a feature, though. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 03:29, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. Per all of the above, really - this could and should be brilliant, and in places it is, just not in enough places. --UU - natter
 16:07, Sep 24
 Against. per above. --Mn-z 05:09, September 26, 2009 (UTC)- Weak against. With rewriting and fixes ("underground underground" "young human couple, believed to be a white person") I can see this being featured. But not now. Could use a good Pee Review. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 13:37, September 27, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments:
|
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
