From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Vote
|
Score: 13
|
| Nominated by:
|
1234 ~  04:37, 7 November 2011 ~ BB ~ (T)  ~ Wed, Nov 9 '11 6:56 (UTC)
|
For: 15
|
- I think Aleister or someone wrote this.
1234 ~ 04:37, 7 November 2011
- Absolutely. Also a great PLS entry. Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 05:30, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
- For -- Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 06:25, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
 For. —Sir Socky   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 08:14, 7 November 2011- For.
 TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK  00:06, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- For. -RAHB 09:00, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, go on then. --Black Flamingo 17:22, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Nomination and For. ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Wed, Nov 9 '11 6:56 (UTC)
- For. I understand and I wish to continue.
 . 08:33, November 9, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Feature macabre.
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 13:35, November 9, 2011 (UTC)
- For. I laughed, I cried, I don't know what the fuck is going on but I am concerned.
- For.
 Mattsnow 17:39, November 14, 2011 (UTC)
- For. I've been teetering on the edge for awhile with this one. I thought about voting against but those feelings had to do with whether it was appropriate front page material or not. That shit doesn't matter. The only thing that really matters is that I like it.--
   10:46, November 21, 2011 (UTC)
- For. It's actually quite embarassingly well written, though really it belongs at UnBooks: rather than in article space. Tristessa de St Ange 18:38, November 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Big ass for. Phlegm Leoispotter * (garble! jank!) 21:57, November 27, 2011 (UTC)
|
Against: 2
|
- Against. I judged this category in the PLS. Whilst I did like it to a degree. I don't see it as a feature.
 KittyKitty (t) (c) 06:25, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
 Against. I really didn't find this that funny. Great detail, though. -- PLEB SIR Lollipop (TALK) - updated on 7 November 2011, at 20:21
|
| Comments:
|
- Ehhhhhh I think this counts as an illegal self nom? Someone back me up here TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 05:07, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
- I might agree, except I really didn't write this. All I did was review it, in effect, just putting the changes directly into the thing instead of suggesting them on another page. But as it was also a PLS thing, was it also not effectively reviewed in that the judges judged and whatnot? True, none of them said anything useful, but I've seen worse reviews used to leverage the VFH rules.
1234 ~ 05:46, 7 November 2011
- Unreviewed PLS winners have been allowed before (by you, and Lyrithya was the nominator then too). I don't think anyone's ever decided on a policy for this. I suggest we start a couple of forums to sort it out right now. --Black Flamingo 20:18, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
- With drama and torches?
1234 ~ 21:00, 7 November 2011
- Yes, it will be the best forum ever. If Hyperbole were here it would no doubt make him quit the site forever again. Seriously though, I don't mind if this is considered an illegal nom. Has anyone decided yet? --Black Flamingo 21:22, November 7, 2011 (UTC)
- But Hyperbole is back again. -- PLEB SIR Lollipop (TALK) - updated on 7 November 2011, at 21:27
- I just don't see why it would be, seeing as you wrote it and you didn't nominate it... if what I did for this would be enough to make it illegal, then I shouldn't have nominated the last thing I did, either, and nor should folks who nominated anything else that they might have fixed up a bit prior to nominating... although I'm not sure what I did here really qualifies as 'fixing it up'. But anyway, if Hyperbole's around, that settles it. We should definite start this forum and sort it out once and for all. Who wants to do the honours?
1234 ~ 23:23, 7 November 2011
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
FML 
