From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Vote
|
Score: 1 cases of some sick
|
| Nominated by:
|
Mnb'z 17:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
|
For: 6
|
- nom + 4 --Mnb'z 17:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- For takeoffs on in-jokes that improve on them. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 18:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- lol awsom --
 Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 19:36, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 For. A bit brief but otherwise I go FOR !! . --Romartus 12:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)- Sure. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 15:03, Mar 23
- For. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 20:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
|
Against: 5
|
- Against. Its a good UnNews but no better than all the others I've read recently so I don't see why it deserves this more than others. --Kit talk
 14:07 23 March
- against. i never was a fan of any of the content relating to this specific in-joke. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 19:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Against I need no reason. EVAH!!! --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 01:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Na. It is awesome however. MrN
   Fork you! 23:01, Mar 24
- Against. I really like this, but I always think one of the purposes of the featured article is to draw in any passers-by who might read it and think, "hmm, that was fun. Let's see what else these guys have got." This is just too in-jokey for that to happen. Rabbi Techno kvetch
 Contribs  FOXES 15:17, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments:
|
- Gerry, what about this? It was originally part of that in-joke, till I fucking renamed it. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah and what about this? It was originally part of that in-joke, and still is.
 pillow talk 22:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
