Uncyclopedia:VFH/Star Wars(2nd nom, apparently...)

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

Star Wars (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Vote	Score: 16 Epic science-fiction masterpieces
Nominated by:	Nom, - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 03:42, Nov 11
For: 23	Nom&For. Well, I've been trying to touch up this rewrite, of late, and I think it's pretty good. Maybe it's curiosity that's driven me to see how this does here. I know it's long, but is it funny? I'm just hoping that it does better than last time... - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 03:42, Nov 11 For I've watched this evolve from cruft to... pure magic (or whatever)   Le Cejak • <-> 03:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC) For I like it a lot and I haven't even watched it evolve from cruft into pure magic! Robertodole 07:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC) For Very nice and funny article. -Razorflame (contributions) Talk 22:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC) For This is a good 'un. --THE 01:06, 12 November 2007 (UTC) For I was worried at first because the "VADER IS LUKES FATHER" thing was gone, but the above text spoiler bar more than made up for it. Good job. Azu 18:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC) To infinity... and BEYOND!!! Oh, wait, wrong movie...• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 00:41, 13 November 2007 (UTC) For We need to get a quote from here on Wookieepedia's main page. --Sir OCdt Jedravent CUN UmP VFH PLS ACS WH 00:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC) Five - This page 0WNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111!!!!one --SPY Administrator (Complain|I rock|In memoriam) HMRFRA WH 03:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC) For--Dr. Fenwick 04:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC) Force. -- Kip > Talk • Works • • 05:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC) Very Strong For I love this one is was an awesome article. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 ( yell | FAQ | I did this ) 07:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC) For. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  17:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC) For. Feature this, we should. Mmm. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 12:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC) For. The type of parody that only the most dedicated geek could produce. Sir Groovester | Contributions | Talk Page 04:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC) Weak For -RAHB 01:42, 19 November 2007 (UTC) For. -- Mitch 13:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC) For --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 02:45, 25 November 2007 (UTC) Door -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 06:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC) For -- Fou-Lu 23:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC) For--Æ 18:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC) FOR THE EMPIRE! - Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 00:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC) For --General Insineratehymn 01:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC) For --YeOldeLuke 04:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Against: 7	Against I think this suffers from not really having any particular idea behind it. It's better than Star Trek, but I don't think it's feature quality. mAttlobster. (hello) 14:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC) Agreed as per above. Also, there's not much funny there, if any. <3 .talk.work.?pedia.$A_{ward}^{waits}$ no focus, just rambling and disparate - jack mort | cunt | talk - 13:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC) Changing to against Thought about abstaining, but yeah. I realize now I just can't stand to let this be featured. -RAHB 00:41, 22 November 2007 (UTC) Against. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • SU&W) 02:48 Nov 25, 2007 Against. Not forced into this one. Sorry. MrN  Fork you! 23:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Nah Sorry Led, starts off good but soon loses focus. --THINKER 18:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments:	Abs Much better than what it used to be, but not quite humorous enough for me. Some good parts though. Fine I admit I have no idea what it looked like before this! - UnIdiot | | Talk | Contribs -01:51, Nov 16 I just want to say that it clearly does have an idea behind it, that being it's written by someone who only watched the film once and has developed only a vague understanding of the subject matter. At any rate, I don't think a lack of overall concept is necessarily a bad thing. It's certainly much more of an achievement to write a funny article without some magical concept to cling on to. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  16:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

VFH

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH

Click to feature this article