From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
This page is an archive. The contents have been moved from another page for reference purposes only, and should be preserved in their current form. Discussion or voting on this page is not current. Any additions you make will probably not be read. The current version of this page can be found at VFD.
|
Score: -4
|
Keep (4) |
- Not Delete. It must be a template because it is referenced on dozens of pages of the game. Am not sure it should be in the Template space as opposed to the Game space; am not sure the game should survive. Spıke Ѧ 19:14 9-Mar-11
- Not really sure VFD is the place to suggest a complete overhaul of a game, since that would be what the removal of the template would require, but at any rate, it's in use, la de da. This and the rest of the subpages may as well be qvfded if someone can be bothered to condense the main thing, though.
1234 ~ 20:08, 9 March 2011
- Keep. *subpages*. 20:33, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Game is awesome, keep the template for obvious reasons already stated. -- TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:17, March 10, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (0) |
Delete. This template's only used in the game Pick Up the Phone Booth and Aisle. I'm not sure why we can't just substitute the content directly into the game page. 18:49, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- This game is VFD bad. How the fuck did this get featured?? And in 2007, no less??? pillow talk 21:34, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Is there any way we can defeature it so we can send it over here ? It agree that it's pretty terrible. 21:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- We don't have to defeature it to send it over here... there's no rule that says we can't delete features. (Although I do expect enough keep votes saying "What? Deleting a feature??" that the VFD nomination will fail.) After Pick Up the Phone Booth and Aisle, the feature I'd most like to see deleted is Senator, as it is, frankly, a piece of shit. pillow talk 21:56, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Yikes! Bring it on! Although (just as a user seeking Justin Bieber is, for a little while longer dumped into Justin Beeber) there might be the momentary humor (for us or the reader?) of getting this page when you wanted something about Senator. But it is an arbitrary hypothetical backed by listcruft and ramble. We vote pages like that into Oblivion several times before breakfast. Spıke Ѧ 23:01 9-Mar-11
- Nomination withdrawn.
1234 ~ 00:29, 10 March 2011
|
Score: -5
|
Keep (6) |
- Keep. Lyrithya, it makes perfectly clear what it's talking about, and does an adequate job of being "in the style of the thing it's about." The only question for voters is whether the attempt to illustrate the humor of a British TV program with a fanciful episode using Uncyclopedia memes really adds anything. Spıke Ѧ 12:42 9-Mar-11
- Keep. A classic show. Delete this? Just a minute! Aleister 12:50 9-3-'11
- Keep. Could be better, certainly, but it's pretty obvious what it's trying to do if you know the show in question and it's not a bad idea. --Zarbag 17:03, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. I did this! Well, I expanded on the initial one-paragraph stub. Not my best, but quite a fun idea I think. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 18:22, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. It's fabul...BEEEP!!!!!!!!! 18:52, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep If you think it's 'terribly amusing to people who know what it's talking about', it's probably not a good idea to nominate it on VFD. mAttlobster. (hello) 20:23, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (1) |
- I'm sure this is terribly amusing to people who know what it's talking about.
1234 ~ 04:19, 9 March 2011
|
Comments |
- Kept: Right, nevermind. I plead tiredness. Don't hurt me. *hides*
1234 ~ 00:20, 10 March 2011
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Wow, it's like one of those enormous incoherent fancruft articles, but in its embryonic state! Now's our chance to kill it in the shell! pillow talk 22:29, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Lame fancruft. Yes, it's embryonic, but it has taken almost two years to get this far. Spıke Ѧ 22:32 8-Mar-11
- Delete. Hype said "embryonic" --Mn-z 23:57, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- That's just bad writing.
1234 ~ 03:12, 9 March 2011
- Where's the funny? I found maybe one joke, the rest is made up fake fancruft. Simsilikesims 07:27, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- BORING Next! --Scofield 10:45, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- So painfully full of tired memes that it hurts. pillow talk 21:17, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Eh? Yeah, this one's pretty bad. Having innuendo and grues in the same paragraph is stooping to a new low. It would be nice to have a Canadian humor article, but it needs a better concept. --TheSlyFox 21:56, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. grues, LOL --Mn-z 02:54, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Meh.
1234 ~ 03:10, 9 March 2011
- Delete. A good introduction, but a crappy guide. --Scofield 10:40, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Comment. Perhaps re-direct to Meganew's user page since he seems to know about this subject. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 21:56, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 7
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (7) |
- From the mind of a man who tried to create a classic inside joke but failed to make any sense. pillow talk 19:56, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- But really can I? (talk) 20:32, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails as Uncyclopedian writing about Uncyclopedians. Fails the "encyclopedia article" canon with its Q-and-A format. Epic fail by being a whiny brat about it. Spıke Ѧ 21:03 8-Mar-11
- Delete. Should have stayed on the user's page or posted in a forum. Not an article. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 22:04, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- What about me? Can I be an admin? Pleeeeaaaase?
1234 ~ 02:44, 9 March 2011
- Delete. per above and stuffs. --Mn-z 02:58, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete.*sigh* --Scofield 10:52, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Pointless and shitty page that should be redirected to Why?. pillow talk 19:54, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- +1 Redirects. (talk) 20:33, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Really dumb babble. No need to redirect; readers who don't know where the question mark is should fail until they figure it out. Spıke Ѧ 21:01 8-Mar-11
- Delete. Dribble. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 21:53, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- How... illuminating.
1234 ~ 02:42, 9 March 2011
- Delete. W. H. Y. Why? not Why! --Scofield 10:34, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Redirected to Why?. SPIKE's point is valid enough, but still - Why:Not? pillow talk 21:37, March 9, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Delete. Unfunny and pointless. This was also ICU tagged years ago without much being done to it. --TheSlyFox 09:56, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Vigilance.
1234 ~ 10:02, 8 March 2011
- Delete. The Wacky Church genre should sound warning bells--It frees the reader to babble about nothing in the name of mysticism. Dogma and charismatic, mystic leaders become instant memes. Spıke Ѧ 12:50 8-Mar-11
- Delete. (talk) 20:34, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Shave it to oblivion. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 21:47, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Burn it down. pillow talk 21:47, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- Delete. Short and unfunny. Had an ICU about 8 months ago that seems to have been taken off without fixing the problem. (talk) 03:41, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Yeah, that's pretty much just someone's essay about the Tauren race - I don't see any satire, or, even, jokes. pillow talk 05:33, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. A fanciful chat about a race from World Of Warcraft; doesn't achieve humor Spıke Ѧ 12:48 8-Mar-11
- Delete. sub-standard fan cruft. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 22:01, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Not terribly interesting. Or... interesting at all, for that matter.
1234 ~ 02:41, 9 March 2011
|
Comments |
|
Score: 1
|
Keep (1) |
- Add a decent beginning to this and a couple of funny lines spread out and its salvageable... -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me)
|
Delete (2) |
- Obliterate. IP vandalism playground, totally unfunny and stupid. BURN!!! - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 08:46, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- this must die --Roman Dog Bird 09:02, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Invalid nom, tagged with {{ICU}} by JackOfSpades on 3-Mar, will die a natural death on 14-Mar if not improved. (Has turned from 4 paragraphs into 4 paragraphs plus endless tedious lists.) Spıke Ѧ 10:57 7-Mar-11
- Sounds good I much prefer to ICU and give someone a chance to save it rather than kill it dead straight away. Leave it for a few days to get moldy or become a polished gem. Either way no more need to make decisions. Pup 11:34 08 Mar '11
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- Delete. If we delete Poppy the Tart, below, then this one won't make any sense. Likewise if we don't. Spıke Ѧ 11:01 7-Mar-11
- Delete. Pretty high on the randumbo chart. --Count of Monkey Crisco 14:57, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. I seem to remember this being here before. I think it was deleted then too. (talk) 01:45, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Musta been another crappy article. This page has no discussion page; history goes back to its creation in Jan-09 with no history of prior deletion; it was on VFH in Apr-09; vote was 1-4 against. Spıke Ѧ 01:50 8-Mar-11
- Maybe it wasn't on VFD then, I did edit it on April 14, 2009 though so I've obviously seen it before and for some reason it stuck with me. (talk) 01:53, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Fuck PTI. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 01:58, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Not nearly as bad as Poppy the Tart, but just not a funny article. pillow talk 16:50, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- Is listiness and arbitrariness an article?
1234 ~ 08:57, 7 March 2011
- Yawn - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 09:11, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. This is like, Junior is told to write a paper in class, but elects to write about his moron classmates who can't spell. We feel for you, kid. Spıke Ѧ 10:52 7-Mar-11
- Delete. Detention and deletion, in that order. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 13:28, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Ah, listcruft be my wild mistress. pillow talk 16:49, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- This stub is just... sad. 'Side, we have far better baby-related things.
1234 ~ 08:46, 7 March 2011
- I got bored after reading some keyboard mashing - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 09:13, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Author amuses self by trying to gross out the reader; doesn't amuse the reader. Spıke Ѧ 10:50 7-Mar-11
- Delete. Lame. --Count of Monkey Crisco 15:03, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. pillow talk 16:48, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 7
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (7) |
- I just... Words fail to describe the hollowness I feel when looking at those article. It's like any sense of joy and liveliness I have is destroyed by the vacantness and lack of... I have seen universal entropy, and it is Weegee. Pup 01:55 07 Mar '11
- Delete. Another page on a minor character from Super Mario features yelling at the reader, incessant quotes, hyperventilated rhetoric, and the same old pics. Spıke Ѧ 14:13 7-Mar-11
- Delete. Rubbish. --Scofield 14:33, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. but look at the bottom, the "Internet Meme Recognition and Approval Committee" has declared this. Running afoul of the IMR&AC is serious business. We might be in over our head here. --Count of Monkey Crisco 14:36, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Ugh. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 16:19, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. and redirect to either Gay Luigi or Mama Luigi --Mn-z 21:29, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. The meme is actually kind of funny, but this page is a disgrace to both the meme and to Uncyclopedia. pillow talk 22:18, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 4
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (4) |
- You know how sometimes you're reverting vandalism, and you realize the vandalism didn't make the page any worse because that isn't really possible? pillow talk 04:25, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Garden-variety random band-cruft. Hype's Change Summary that "This has always been terrible" is on the mark; also has always been the property of Anons. Spıke Ѧ 04:35 7-Mar-11
- Delete. --Count of Monkey Crisco 06:01, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- I think the page is vandalism.
1234 ~ 08:57, 7 March 2011
|
Comments |
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (1) |
- Keep. For what reason should we delete this page, honestly? It could be re-worked or rounded out as much as we want. In all honesty, despite its use of abridged series jokes, it isn't as bad as a lot of what's on here. I wouldn't be so hasty to kick it off just yet, unless we want to make a new page to incorporate all the series' characters. Or something. --XSelo94 20:57, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- "I've seen worse" is not a valid reason for keeping. It's a poorly structured article with no real humor or even any highlights of note. Keeping this sort of article encourages the creation of more articles of the same ilk. There is reason to delete, and no reason to keep. The exception to this is if you belies the article as it is is well-written or funny or even has potential with rewrites. As such, if you put your hand up to fix it, more than happy to move it to your user space while you work in it. Otherwise, unless you truly believe that as it stands it has merit to keep, then I'd be obliged if you didn't vote to keep it. I'm not deleting it at this stage, to give you a chance to read and respond. I can't say the same for other admins. Pup 06:22 08 Mar '11
|
Delete (6) |
- "I'm on a blimp, motherfucka, in the fucking sky.” The other of the two pages that use {{Weegee}}. The character (from Yu-Gi-Oh) is real. The biography is invented. Author loves the game, author wants you to love the game, author wants you to watch videos and visit sites. Spıke Ѧ 01:41 7-Mar-11
- Delete. I fucking wish the biography was invented. This takes all it's relatively good jokes directly from the far superior parody redub Yugioh Abridged Series.--Count of Monkey Crisco 02:04, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. No hope for this one - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 02:10, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Cruft... I'd say more, but that's about it.
1234 ~ 08:57, 7 March 2011
- Unfunny, and if it's funny to any audience, it must be a very, very, very narrow one. pillow talk 22:14, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete YGO abridged did it first, better and better than this. Get this out of my sight. (talk) 06:25, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: -4
|
Keep (5) |
- Keep. Fox, there is not a single joke to be found here, but it's quite good. The concept is to take Lucas's voluminous output and search it for patterns; the joke is that the racism is in the mind of the author and not likely in the mind of Lucas. There are other ways to write an article than wackiness. The quotes from newsmakers, however, make it look like it belongs in UnNews rather than in mainspace. Spıke Ѧ 01:36 7-Mar-11
- Choppy, but not hopeless. It definitely has an idea to it.
1234 ~ 08:57, 7 March 2011
- It's not altogether stupid and I even smiled twice. Honestly, there have been FAs I've enjoyed less than that. pillow talk 21:57, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. It has funny sections, and its overall coherent. It has issues with choppiness and weak sections, but not any worse than most of the stuff here. --Mn-z 22:09, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Per above mAttlobster. (hello) 22:15, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (1) |
- Obliterate. There is not a single laugh to be found here. Don't we have enough Hitler jokes already? --TheSlyFox 01:22, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Comment. This was VFD'd three years ago, so I checked the edit history since the previous vote. The writing and content has been lengthened, but not improved at all. The concept still sucks. In fact, it burns my eyes just to look at it. --TheSlyFox 01:22, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Kept. pillow talk 01:51, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Delete. One of the two pages that uses {{Weegee}}. An article on the Super Mario universe too minor to be mentioned in {{Mario}}. "He is also a pain in the ass to millions and was made to fuck up mario`s career." Spıke Ѧ 19:56 6-Mar-11
- Delete. HAET HAET HAET - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 21:05, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable enough for knowyourmeme.com apparently. --Mn-z 21:52, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Bad Photoshop is YOU!! This article makes about as much sense as that statement. --TheSlyFox 23:06, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- I poop on this! --Roman Dog Bird 00:19, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- I thought I voted on this one...
1234 ~ 08:57, 7 March 2011
|
Comments |
- I'm going to go ahead and make that Weapons of Mass Annoyance thing an actual template. I like it. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 15:48, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Delete. per referencing Weegee in a template. --Mn-z 18:54, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- That's just stupid. Also, it's apparently only on two pages, and doesn't really do anything for either of them.
1234 ~ 19:28, 6 March 2011
- Delete. Chuck Norris and butt should never be used in the same sentence. --TheSlyFox 23:11, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Chuck Norris should never be used in any sentence ever again. --Roman Dog Bird 00:20, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Get you gone (talk) 00:43, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Weegee... --Count of Monkey Crisco 01:48, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Also also, please remember to use <noinclude>s when adding the {{VFD}} template to templates, or it winds up on all the pages using said templates as well.
1234 ~ 19:28, 6 March 2011
- I did, it was the person who moved the vfd template who took it out of the tags. --Mn-z 19:37, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, you'd know better, the amount you deal with this stuff, but seeing who did whatever would have taken effort. Anyhow, someone... well, assuming he reads this, now he knows. >.<
1234 ~ 19:46, 6 March 2011
|
Score: -1
|
Keep (4) |
- Keep The 'Plot' section made me laugh. mAttlobster. (hello) 11:51, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Not bad enough. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 15:45, 6 March 2011
- Bang. Bang. Bang. Blah. Blah. Blah. BLOOM!!!! This is worth keeping just for the plot section. --TheSlyFox 23:21, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Hahahaha. Cat the Colourful (Feed Me!!!)Leave me alone...
|
Delete (3) |
- BANG It sucks. --~ 11:13, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Love the Plot section, though. --Scofield 11:52, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Too much bang - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 20:50, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Not quite worse than nothing. The Plot section is a performance of repetition rather than actual creative writing, of which this article has virtually none. Remove "(2010 video game)" from the title. I'd vote Delete if we had another article Medal of Honor and if it were at all good. Spıke Ѧ 15:17 6-Mar-11
- Don't you think there's something else that could be called "Medal of Honor", Spike? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 15:45, 6 March 2011
- Absolutely. In that case the suffix would be appropriate. If we only had an article on the Congressional award, the disambiguation page might be fun; it could direct the reader to one of the two pages without describing either but merely by asking questions about the reader, as the audiences are surely mutually exclusive. Spıke Ѧ 16:46 6-Mar-11
- How accurate is this?
1234 ~ 19:22, 6 March 2011
Later: This was kept.
1234 ~ 19:26, 7 March 2011
|
Score: 7
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (7) |
- Delete Barely used template and looks like it was an old rewrite tag that has been superseded. I've removed the categorization from it but it still has next to no purpose. Pup 10:41 06 Mar '11
- Delete. You're right. --Scofield 10:54, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Agreed, this is pretty much useless. --TheSlyFox 10:58, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. We don't need any template that declares that a page either sucks or it doesn't. The encyclopedia canon requires that we at least seem to be giving the reader information rather than amusing ourselves with blabber. This template is used on exactly two user pages. Spıke Ѧ 15:21 6-Mar-11
- Delete. This appears to be an unofficial rewrite template, which is used when one wants to be more impolite and confusing than using a real rewrite template. --Mn-z 17:29, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Vigilance.
1234 ~ 19:21, 6 March 2011
- Delete. Barely used, not funny - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 20:46, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 7
|
Keep (1) |
- Keep. It's way more better than Justin Bieber and doesn't deserve to be deleted. --~ 11:05, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (8) |
- EXTERMINATE! HORRIBLE! - LOL vandalz
- Burninate Agree with above. --TheSlyFox 10:28, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. On second thought, we're better off huffing them both. --Scofield 10:48, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Huff them both. The same technique as Justin Bieber, which is not funny. Redirect them both to Justin Beeber, as I explain above. Spıke Ѧ 15:18 6-Mar-11
- Delete. and redirect to UnNews:Grown man hates Justin Bieber or Justin Beeber --Mn-z 17:55, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed, the UnNews article would be a perfect redirect. The new disambiguation page would also work. --TheSlyFox 23:36, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- This is by Socky; but I make the point on his talk page that in Justin Beeber, which we saved from VFD despite its unfunniness, the joke requires that the reader seeking a page on Beiber get dumped by surprise into Beeber. The top of that page has disambiguation. Spıke Ѧ 00:17 7-Mar-11
- Doesn't seem quite as bad as the other one, but it really is just more of the same.
1234 ~ 19:20, 6 March 2011
- --Roman Dog Bird 19:29, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Look I'm not the kind of person to 'rustle up a salad' or be understanding about badly maintained hedges. That's just who I am. Look, don't try and change me. It's not as if I'm a murderer or anything. mAttlobster. (hello) 22:51, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- The reason I said Justin Bieber was a worse page than this is because this article at least has a slight semblance to reality. However, most of its jokes are still pretty much based on the trolling comments on YouTube, so yeah, I don't see how this can work without a complete overhaul. --Scofield 15:25, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (1) |
- Keep. Needs a little love is all - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 07:59, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- It'll get a nice warm hug when it arrives in Article Hell. Spıke Ѧ 19:49 6-Mar-11
|
Delete (6) |
- Delete. Throws out a lot of cheap tricks but never gets funny or intelligible. --Count of Monkey Crisco 07:57, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Ridiculously horrible. All the dirty, sticky love in the world wouldn't save this shit. pillow talk 08:33, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Some decent bits towards the end, though I'm not quite sure if Codeine's mum has ever heard of these Sheepeh. --Scofield 09:28, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Burn, then quarantine the area for fifty years. Put simply, it's offensive (not the funny kind), full of memes and generally incomprehensible cow manure. --TheSlyFox 10:57, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. A sandbox of trite Uncyclopedia techniques, including grues, other memes, <math>, an entire section on Russian Reversal, and listcruft. Spıke Ѧ 15:04 6-Mar-11
- It seems to pretend to try to be smart.
1234 ~ 19:18, 6 March 2011
|
Comments |
- Bite on the external link and the Urban Dictionary's definition is "a person with Afro-style hair." The article turns this into "A puffy, curly and fluffy-haired Jew that is not actually a Jew but a Jew." Huh? Spıke Ѧ 15:04 6-Mar-11
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- Delete. Awful, pure stupidity - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 07:55, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Not totally awful, but it just drifts off into the middle of nowhere. --Count of Monkey Crisco 08:03, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- "You're fucked!" Totally random and unfunny. It was no worse, and was less vandalized, in 2006, but served mostly to induce the reader to enter Game:Zork. Spıke Ѧ 15:00 6-Mar-11
- Delete. A pathetic joke. Save the pic, though. --Scofield 17:52, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Random.
1234 ~ 19:17, 6 March 2011
|
Comments |
- Why isn't the "Heart of Midlothian" the middle of nowhere? or to be precise, the middle of the middle of nowhere? Spıke Ѧ 15:00 6-Mar-11
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Delete. What the hell is this shit? This is a terrible concept. --Count of Monkey Crisco 07:44, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Awful, just fucking awful - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 07:48, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. So, it's about trees and, um... what?? --TheSlyFox 10:12, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- EXTERMINATE! This guy doesn't know how to write. --Scofield 11:46, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Small genitalia. No comedy theme, no relation to anything. Of the genre, Create a character and then ramble about him for a while. Spıke Ѧ 14:56 6-Mar-11
- That's... um... nice? Why do we care, what's the connection, what's funny, where's my smoothie?
1234 ~ 19:16, 6 March 2011
|
Comments |
|
Score: 8
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (8) |
- Delete. It's time to level this shit. Nothing but BUTT POOP and 1337$p34k. --Count of Monkey Crisco 07:29, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- I would like this to go away. pillow talk 07:43, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Maybe funny in a parellel universe, its as witty as the delete reason I just gave - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 07:49, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Er. At least it goes by quickly.
1234 ~ 07:53, 6 March 2011
- Obliterate. (talk) 08:05, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Mildly promising start is tossed into the trash thanks to some pathetic writing and randumbo. --Scofield 09:17, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Explodonihilate Wow. This is about the worst one I've ever seen. --TheSlyFox 10:08, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. This is a wasteland: Pick a word and then commence to saying "funny" things. When you run out, just rant at the reader; that's funny, isn't it? Spıke Ѧ 14:54 6-Mar-11
|
Comments |
|
Score: 2
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (2) |
- EXTERMINATE! - Tired of giving chances with ICU templates only for the writter to remove them, its terrible, lacks humour and frankly I should just post this on QVFD and be done with it. - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 21:03, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Technically, it's too old now for qvfd. I wonder... no, that'd take effort. Although... *wanders off*
1234 ~ 21:18, 6 March 2011
|
Comments |
- Deleted: The author blanked his own page, which I interpret as a request for deletion, and if he wants it back, all he has to do is create an account. pillow talk 21:39, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (2) |
- Keep. Alot better than that other article. - LOL vandalz
- Keep. Simple excellent I don't even know why it's being considered - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 02:48, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (8) |
- Delete. Horrendous. And I'm not saying this just because I'm a fan. --Scofield 19:10, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what the concept of this is even supposed to be... but it's pretty bad writing. In fact, it's downright terrible. Contents also include Hitler, him being dropped on the head, beavers, viruses, memes, an obligatory tumbleweed... eh. Some of the individual sentences are reasonable, though.
1234 ~ 06:56, 6 March 2011
- Delete - it's fucking horrible, and if the other one is even worse, nom that and let's delete it too. pillow talk 08:32, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- DIIEE-EEH!!! JB sucks! Cat the Colourful (Feed Me!!!)Leave me alone... 10:39, March 6, 2011
- Delete. Kill it. --~ 11:03, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Its "comedy" technique--random cheap shots with no relation to reality--is evident in the intro and gets worse if you elect to dig in. Spıke Ѧ 14:53 6-Mar-11
- Delete. I'd suggest redirecting to UnNews:Grown man hates Justin Bieber. --Mn-z 17:31, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- --Roman Dog Bird 19:31, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Comment.::A lot WORSE. I say redirect to Justine Bieber! --Scofield 19:32, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Comment.::Justine Bieber is the worst article of the 2. I guess there "Love them or hate them" articles. - LOL vandalz
- Comment. What Scofield said. Justine is much better than this but Justin Bieber doesn't worth deletion too. --~ 08:31, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- What low standards you have Frosty. What low standards.... --Scofield 09:01, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. I would like to abstain from voting here, as this one's just mediocre. What I'm more concerned about is that Justine monstrosity. Does anyone else think it should be VFD'd? --TheSlyFox 09:57, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. Better yet, let's just merge the two and let them be outlets for what is really just an overrated YouTube meme; if we get rid of either, someone will just replace it with more of the same. --TheSlyFox 10:00, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. Somebody PLEASE VFD Justine Bieber and get this out of the way! - LOL vandalz
- Comment. Justine Bieber was already nominated for vfd before, and kept. However, I find this to be a much worse article because of its incessant trolling, references to penises and vaginas, references to Nazism, and nonsense numbers. For me, this is about as crappy an article on Justin Bieber as one can make. --Scofield 10:45, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: -8
|
Keep (8) |
- Copy-edited. It would be funnier if readers searching for Bieber were presented with this not hilarious but quaint biography of a black bartender than the total hatchet jobs in our other pages on the singer. Spıke Ѧ 15:09 6-Mar-11 Copy-edited Spıke Ѧ 19:47 6-Mar-11
- Not bad enough. --Scofield 15:20, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 15:50, 6 March 2011
- Keep. per above. --Mn-z 17:55, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep, but improve and rename Justin Bieber, per SPIKE, and let the other Bieber's die the death of a thousand cuts. Aleister 18:59 6-3-'11
- Terrible. And yet it contains paragraphs... real paragraphs. I'd forgotten what they looked like.
1234 ~ 19:24, 6 March 2011
- Keep. --Roman Dog Bird 19:25, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. - LOL vandalz
|
Delete (0) |
Obliterate. Biebercruft. I went there. - LOL vandalz
|
Comments |
- Kept; nomination withdrawn.
1234 ~ 20:51, 6 March 2011
|
Score: 9
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (9) |
- Delete. does not categorize and lame. --Mn-z 04:04, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed, stupendously lame. pillow talk 04:20, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Yay, meme!
1234 ~ 04:29, 5 March 2011
- I like roflcopters. (talk) 08:30, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- I do not understand the concept behind the roflcopter, nor do I understand most internet memes and why morons insist on using them instead of things that are actually funny. Also, it's 5:20 AM and I should be asleep right now. --Roman Dog Bird 10:20, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. ROFL means "Rolling On Floor, Laughing," right? But where in the Far East do they talk about things "that likely to be attacked"? Spıke Ѧ 11:30 5-Mar-11
- Bad grammarz. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 11:30, 5 March 2011
- I'm gonna play Sycamore here and suggest you take this kind of lame crap to QVFD next time. --Scofield 18:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. So it catgorises 4 pages big deal, its just stupid and pointless. The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 02:53, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- RE: Scofield: I'm assuming Dex (and/or Sycamore) is going to vote keep on this one, and if it keeps and deletion votes, that proves it's not qvfd bad or something. --Mn-z 23:59, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- You'll notice that Socky, Lyri, RDB, and I all voted "Delete" when we could have just deleted it. I don't think very many people agree with Sycamore's take on category deletion. pillow talk 00:04, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- However, since the nominator is fairly certain that are people that would object to the deletion of this category, QVFD would not be appropriate. Plus, there are more than a few instances of the community finding categories hilarious that I think are stoopid. In other words, the problem isn't with the procedures, it's with the opinions of the electorate. --Mn-z 02:26, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: -2
|
Keep (7) |
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shabidoo (talk • contribs)
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Matt lobster (talk • contribs)
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roman Dog Bird (talk • contribs)
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Another n00b (talk • contribs)
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thekillerfroggy (talk • contribs)
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scofield (talk • contribs)
- Keep. Funny. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frosty (talk • contribs)
|
Delete (5) |
- Delete. does not categorize, not funny. --Mn-z 04:01, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Might be funny with the right pages, but the ones that have been included are just random nonsense. pillow talk 04:24, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Mmm, nonsensical at best as it's being used, and not likely to get any better, considering what it is.
1234 ~ 04:26, 5 March 2011
- No. (talk) 08:32, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Mocha hates being gargled? May have amused a writer who can't do better than random. Doesn't amuse, or guide, anyone else. Spıke Ѧ 11:29 5-Mar-11
|
Comments |
- Wow, it took me quite a while to go through the history trying to figure out which faggot stacked the keep vote, only to come to find out these are all actually legit. pillow talk 20:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- HAW HAW --Roman Dog Bird 21:59, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
Kept. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hyperbole (talk • contribs)
|
Score: -4
|
Keep (9) |
- This is screaming with great ideas, funny moments and super original. There is so much potential in this, did any one read more than a section or two? There are jewels in there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shabidoo (talk • contribs)
- What Shabidoo said. There's enough potential to save, but it needs some serious help. Suggest rewrite? BLU Scoutgineer 06:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- One doesn't suggest. One steps forward. Spıke Ѧ 11:32 5-Mar-11
- Keep. Have done an edit sweep, changed the numbers in question, etc. Why this is on VFH and why it has gotten so many nay votes is a mystery to my mysterious ways, it wasn't a bad page to start with. (oh, I see. Puppy edited some of it earlier) Aleister 14:06 5-3-'11
- Keep. per Al whoring on my talk page and making me feel special. (talk) 21:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Major re-writing is working! - The admirable Lord Frosty the Snowman 22:17, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- holy mind -- TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:20, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, better.
1234 ~ 00:22, 6 March 2011
- yeah --Conformist 02:45, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. per fixing and above and bandwagoning and whatever. --Mn-z 02:52, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (5) |
This article is downright ugly, a complete idiot magnet, and doesn't even seem to be funny. Blargle.
1234 ~ 03:56, 5 March 2011
- No offense to Frosty, but when he was reverting vandalism, it was very difficult for me to tell which one was the vandalized version. pillow talk 03:57, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. typical aimless fancruft that sounds like much of it was written by a 12 year old. --Mn-z 04:08, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
Torn but I must vote to delete because of the dates on the episodes. That was the tipping point for me. Ok Al you win. (talk) 08:36, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
some faggy show for faggity faggots --Roman Dog Bird 10:28, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. After all the fix-up work done so far, the intro still isn't English, it makes the point that the show is funny instead of showing how the article will be funny, and everything else is a list and the usual recitation of episodes with author's sardonic twists added. Spıke Ѧ 11:32 5-Mar-11
- 'Delete T'was awful friends. I cannot abide it. Join with me in a toast to sunnier times. mAttlobster. (hello) 11:41, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Uncyclopedia needs an article for Phineas and Ferb, but this is just a load of shit. --Scofield 18:46, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Meh Don't see much of value in there, but I've cut out much of the garbage in the latter half. Pruning down the first half may make it redeemable, but even then it will be a sub-par article. Pup 05:49 05 Mar '11
- Kept. pillow talk 06:55, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: -2
|
Keep (5) |
- Keep. I took it back to an earlier version edited by Froggy, who gave it some good compliments in his summary line. Earlier version please, when VFD'ing a page, tiz the way to go. Aleister 00:59 5-3-'11\
- Thanks for the legwork (fingerwork). But in this version, there are 17 quotes (though they are somewhere else) and the acronym isn't explained at all, however awkwardly. The stub on this mysterious Weapon of Mass Destruction ends with a first-person moral-of-the-story. Still Delete. Spıke Ѧ 01:26 5-Mar-11
- Keep. Give me three days and a bagel, preferably with a side of cream cheese, and I should be able to make this article worthy of being saved. Or can we no longer do that? --Sir Oliphaunte (განხილვა) 01:40, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- keep --ShabiDOO 03:10, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - Has a good concept, maybe somebody above can fix it up. Simsilikesims 04:28, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Oliphaunte. pillow talk 20:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (3) |
- Delete. Awful. --~ 20:35, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. If I encountered this page, whose obvious motif is a dippy acronym, I wouldn't have read it. Of course no one would have encountered this page. After seven quotes and two paragraphs, the article spills it: "The acronym for B.O.X. is actually backwards for Xtreme Object, Bitch!" Hardly worth waiting for. Then there's Fun Facts. Then there's phrases that, through the substitution of B.O.X. for something, become different. Spıke Ѧ 20:55 4-Mar-11
- Delete. Possibly the worst article I've seen on vfd. 22:11, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
Delete. The only thing actually amusing in this article is text lifted directly from Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater. pillow talk 01:03, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
That's just disappointing.
1234 ~ 03:21, 5 March 2011
|
Comments |
- On second thought, the guy wants it, so I'll stay out of this one.
1234 ~ 04:19, 5 March 2011
Kept. Oliphaunte has been granted one month and one bagel to make this not suck. pillow talk 20:37, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Appallingly dumb from start to finish. Worse than a blank page. --Scofield 18:55, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Adam Lambert you say? Aleister 18:57 4-3-'11
- Delete. The humor on this American Idol contestant consists of substituting words with random other words, and incessantly telling gay jokes, sex jokes, and masturbation jokes. Wikipedia does say he is "openly gay" so this is based on something; but it isn't at all clever. Finishes with the usual turning of song titles into sex jokes, yawn. Spıke Ѧ 19:36 4-Mar-11
- Fag Status: MASSIVE! Also, Ugh. This is one of the dumbest things I've read on here for a long while. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 01:08, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Not funny. pillow talk 01:09, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Adam Lambert is GAY! Get it? Me neither. Simsilikesims 04:31, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- If this gets deleted, do I still get to keep my UN:REQ award for the page? --Gamma287 02:06, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Ummm... sure? pillow talk 05:03, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Comment.Suggest it is moved to Gamma's page for further work rather than outright deletion. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 13:18, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- An article this crappy doesn't deserve a second chance. Monsieur Gamma can start over with a blank page if he wants, but I want to see a red link here! --Scofield 18:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter. As long as I can keep my award. --Gamma287 19:04, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Sure, whatever. --Scofield 19:13, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Gamma287, if you want it in your userspace, let me know. pillow talk 20:34, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 0
|
Keep (3) |
- Stupid, but not really delete-worthy. Granted, I was reading a random revision from the history. Seemed shorter than what's there now. Okay, so maybe I'm lazy...
1234 ~ 03:12, 4 March 2011
- Feature. --Roman Dog Bird 08:59, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Hard rewrite. Keep the photo of the French team with the caption. Simsilikesims 04:50, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (3) |
- Delete. - random and stubby. Kupkari is the real national sport of Uzbekistan. -- 18:44, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Listy, unfunny, racist and not in the good way (yes there is a good way). Delete this shit. -- 18:48, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Sorta dumb. --Count of Monkey Crisco 19:01, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Again, Coronium, nominator is required to peruse the History for a better version of the article, which in this case isn't hard to find. Spıke Ѧ 19:44 2-Mar-11
- The racism was inserted by an IP who made up the idea that "Edwin" and "Jensen" were playing in Jensen's basement, and Jensen was really a basement dweller with a Jewish mother. The article generally fails to explain anything about Edwin and Jensen otherwise, and has numerous inconsistencies. Simsilikesims 04:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
No consensus: Kept. pillow talk 20:35, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 1
|
Keep (2) |
- Since it shows no overt signs of badness and a generally clever writing structure I'm giving it as pass for exactly the reason Hyperbole doesn't want me to. --Count of Monkey Crisco 18:44, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. I honestly don't get any of it, but that's probably because I'm not Scottish. But it looks like it would be rather funny if I understood it, and that bit at the end about the tyres (nice spelling!) was good for a laugh. --TheSlyFox 01:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (3) |
- This looks like unfunny nonsense to me. Is that because I'm not Scottish, or is that because this is unfunny nonsense? pillow talk 18:25, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- This isn't really coherent to me, and I'm not as optimistic about its merits as Spike. 19:40, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- It seems bad.
1234 ~ 06:09, 1 March 2011
|
Comments |
- Horribly written--You start each section feeling as though you've come in at the middle of the story--but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt that it might be amusing to fans, and it does seem based on real events. Spıke Ѧ 19:07 28-Feb-11
- At some point, we need to have a good, hard look at Template:SPL-08 in general. I think a lot of people are giving terrible Scottish football articles a pass, because they glance at it and think "Meh, I wouldn't understand this anyway, I'll just leave it alone." pillow talk 19:55, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- I have no problem with Uncyclopedia having articles on Premier/major-league sports teams, or that these will be written to a narrow audience (though it would be good writing to include enough background to try to pull in the rest of us). Spıke Ѧ 19:58 28-Feb-11
- No, I don't have a problem with pages written to a narrow audience, either. What I have a problem with is terrible pages written to a narrow audience, where every editor here says "Well, I guess I've gotta give this one a pass, because I'm not in its audience." At some point, I think we have to say "Okay, this looks bad, and if someone doesn't come forward and tell me it isn't bad, we should operate under the assumption that it's bad." pillow talk 20:45, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Written by a rival fan of the other club Heart of Midlothian - otherwise known as Hearts. Like (Glasgow) Celtic and (Glasgow) Rangers, extreme rival fans of these teams add a religious dimension too if you don't know the background. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 18:53, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- So... are you familiar with this stuff? And, if so... is the page funny? pillow talk 20:57, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Not if you are a Hibs fan but besides the red links and the staccato 'style', it's salvageable. Perhaps Sycamore could add his own Scottish colour to the proceedings. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 22:37, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Heart of Midlothian, is that Scottish for the middle of the middle of Lothian? Spıke Ѧ 00:34 3-Mar-11
- Yes like the common expression 'heart land' or the centre of something. The title comes from a book by Sir Walter Scott (Ivanhoe) set in Lothian and was the name adopted by the local Edinburgh team some years later. The Scottish like romantic names for their clubs, there is another team called 'Queen of the South' based in Dumfries, a name coined for it by a local poet in praise of his city. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 07:17, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Carped.
1234 ~ 18:53, 5 March 2011
|
Score: -1
|
Keep (5) |
- Keep. I don't know, but there's something oddly funny about a werewolf obsessed with books... --Scofield 17:10, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Uncy should have a Herman Hesse page, and this is a great start to build one around. The concept as Hesse as a werewolf who loves books, and then writes them, borders on genius. I edited a bit, and even though I read most if not all of Hesse's major books, I don't know how to fold them into the words here but I do know it's doable. Aleister 21:42 2-3-'11
- Keep. Since Al is fired up on this, perhaps it could be kept and the central idea isn't bad at all. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 07:07, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Bloody stub.
1234 ~ 03:05, 4 March 2011
- It just needs love. I actually kind of like this one. It could do with a bit of sprucing up, but I think it's worth keeping. I'll try to do a bit of de-listing on it and remove some dumb stuff. --TheSlyFox 01:48, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (4) |
- EXTERMINATE! Utter shite. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 14:42, 2 March 2011
- Delete. Stubby, three-paragraph biography was started in 2005 (by spork-and-randomize) and has not been touched since--except for the list. Spıke Ѧ 14:55 2-Mar-11
- Delete. I don't know but there's nothing funny about a werewolf obsessed with books. --Count of Monkey Crisco 18:25, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Nothing really worth keeping. -- 18:28, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete.. Not a bad idea, but it needs a total rewrite. Delete, and start over with the idea of Rudolph Hess' 3rd cousin. --Gamma287 12:01, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- Comment. I decided to try my hand at fixing it. I am, however, completely unfamiliar with Hesse's works, so someone with a bit more knowledge on the subject should step in. --TheSlyFox 02:42, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
- So, yeah, this is like keeped. (Do I need to do anything else, or do the Smiths take it from here?) pillow talk 04:54, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 10
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (10) |
- Delete. doesn't categorize, obnoxious rather than funny, and vore related. --Mn-z 02:55, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. It made me laugh. No wait..it didn't. (talk) 02:58, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Bologna has? Locust has? Papercut has? Senseless. Spıke Ѧ 03:03 4-Mar-11
- Throw in garbage disposal. Tripped the "What Is This I Don't Even" alarm, it's more like a Category-O-Randomness. BLU Scoutgineer 03:07, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- kill it now. Maaaaaaaaaan, this category be trippin' man. It's Mrthejazz... a case not yet solved. 03:11, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Too much.
1234 ~ 03:35, 4 March 2011
- WEIRD AL LIVES --Roman Dog Bird 08:53, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- This made my eyeholes burn. It's that bad. --Gamma287 12:10, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- one more In b4 Dexter. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 12:54, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Really shouldn't be here. --Scofield 17:23, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 5
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (5) |
- A VFD save from 2008, this pile of rubbish has been rotting in our mainspace for 3 years since. RAHB clearly didn't do his homework. --Scofield 14:55, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- It seems bad. Mind, I'm open to convincing otherwise.
1234 ~ 03:34, 4 March 2011
- Most band articles go one of two ways: 1)This band really sucks! 2) This band is really awesome! Neither is really a funny way to approach a band article. This article at least tries to avoid that by making moose related puns. I'm a bit of a muse fanboy myself, and I sure do like moose, but I think maybe this needs to go buh-bye. It's Mrthejazz... a case not yet solved. 03:57, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- buncha limey faggots --Roman Dog Bird 08:56, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- It's terrible and unfunny and now it has 5 votes in 24 hours so I'm going to delete it. Wheeeeeeee pillow talk 00:45, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- For starters, why is an article about Moose (band) named Muse? I'll withhold judgement in case someone claims that some of this bandcruft relates to reality, but casting them as, alternately, aliens and Doctor Who is just stupid. Nonsense numbers, encyclopedia clichés, and other pomposity abounds; Section 4 deteriorates fast; Section 5 is the usual rubbish of making puns or off-color jokes of each song title in a list. Spıke Ѧ 02:29 4-Mar-11
I don't know enough about this one, so I think I'll abstain. Ooh, comparisons to radiohead, real original muse lovers/haters. I do know that "Muse" is a real band, and at least some of the article actually references them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the whole "Moose" thing is just a little "ha, their name sounds like moose, get it?" I don't know of any band named Moose though, so it may be wrong. I doubt that any of that would effect the vote, but I figured I would share it just in case. It's Mrthejazz... a case not yet solved. 03:16, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- I evidently know even less! Spıke Ѧ 03:22 4-Mar-11
- What do you know? --Roman Dog Bird 08:56, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. pillow talk 00:45, March 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 6
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (6) |
- Too random to live. I still don't see how this wasn't deleted. There's no point to reverting vandalism. It doesn't really have much of a concept from my point of view. --Gamma287 02:01, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Redirect. Aleister and I already saved the 24 Hour Breakfast War, and this article is starting out the same way. Spıke Ѧ 02:32 4-Mar-11
- Delete. per above. --Mn-z 03:06, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, my... now that is impressive.
1234 ~ 03:35, 4 March 2011
- poop poop poop pooop --Roman Dog Bird 08:54, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Let it die. --Scofield 17:20, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: -4
|
Keep (7) |
- Keep. Not terribly written; not offensive, though there are many better things to say about the human race than the frequent recourse to the goat-fucking joke. Scofield, find the best past version in the history--say, from about a year ago--revert to that, and see if you are still anxious to delete it. Spıke Ѧ 15:38 27-Feb-11
- Keep.You're kidding me, right? --~ 15:46, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- It is really exausting reading so many articles to decide if its worth fighting over keeping or not. This is a keeper. --ShabiDOO 15:57, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Why? An wiki like us must have decent articles like "Humans". Codeine's mom has definately heard of them. It is funny. Why delete it? -- Lollipop - CONTRIBS - WRITINGS - SHOP - Now adopting! 23:43, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- It's horrible, but not delete horrible. More like normal Uncyclopedia horrible.
1234 ~ 00:01, 28 February 2011
- What? --Scofield 11:51, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Uncyclopedia sucks. People tell me we can't just delete it all. This depresses me, but what can I do?
1234 ~ 19:29, 28 February 2011
- Human. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 15:56, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Per spike Loopygrumpkins 01:50, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (3) |
- Terribly written, offensive, and probably a violation of our cyberbullying policy. Redirect to Humanity: A Retrospective or even list it on UN:REQ if you have to, but please take this away from here. --Scofield 15:31, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Obliterate. I didn't have to read very far to decide that this article was written by a twelve year old. Total crap. --Gamma287 15:42, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. The real problem with this article is that it doesn't have any overall concept. It's been written bit by bit over the years, and hasn't really progressed in terms of humour. I'd just redirect to Humanity: A Retrospective which is a much funnier take on the subject. 17:17, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- There are some good bits in the older versions, but the article is way too crammed up with random humor to be considered up to the mark. Reverting it won't solve the problem, I'm afraid. --Scofield 15:50, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Reverting won't make it a masterpiece, but will eliminate a lot of recent vandalism, and is your duty as nominator. Spıke Ѧ 16:30 27-Feb-11
- It's in a terrible state, stuffed with rubbish. I will have a look at it as well now that I have seen this current mess. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 11:50, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- The only thing that will save this article is if more than half of it is simply excised--and I don't want to do that without a consensus first. --TheSlyFox 06:31, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Kept. --ChiefjusticeDS 10:28, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: -1
|
Keep (3) |
- Keep. You may feel good about eliminating a not-too-bad article about a Voodoo diety. I'll wander by here and kick in a "keeper" instead, light some incense, kill a chicken, and leave quietly. Aleister 14:14 27-2-'11
- Let the fix kill it if noone wants to turn it decent.
1234 ~ 23:54, 27 February 2011
- Maybe I'll do some stuff on it, but it really isn't too bad as is. Aleister 23:56 27-2-'11
- It needs love. Admit it, it does!
1234 ~ 02:33, 28 February 2011
- Actually I'm with Al and Lyrithya on this. Seeing as Al actually knows who this is there is a chance it could be reworkable. (talk) 20:12, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (2) |
Delete. Expired fix tag. Never mind, bed time. (talk) 09:05, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete anyway - random and unfunny. 12:47, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. If this is not a spork, the subject matter is arcane, and the text does nothing to make it funny to a general audience. Spıke Ѧ 14:41 27-Feb-11
- Kills a chicken, sucker-punches a lamb, and shakes some bones on behalf of the naysayers. Don't tell me I've never done anything for you, and all I ask in return is one For. vote apiece on one of my pages presently on VFH, a small price to pay for this intercession. Aleister 14:50 27-2-'11 (How's that for the best whoring of the year? Takes a bow, thank you, thank you.)
|
Comments |
You know you have a problem when you start reading "February" as "January" (talk) 09:22, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: -5
|
Keep (5) |
- Keep. This is a very popular pastime currently, such that there aren't even blank stares when someone mentions Tom Brady and the mousey accountant says, "I have him on my team!" We need a page on this obsession, and this is how you'd start it. So: Not irredeemably useless. Spıke Ѧ 12:38 1-Mar-11
- Keep. It's short, but coherent. Not useless. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 15:58, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Meh. It's not really very funny, but it's just not bad enough for me. 16:29, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Not horrid... stub it, I guess. Except I can't be bothered...
1234 ~ 22:07, 1 March 2011
- I could. Rewritten and dedicated to the man my sister divorced. Spıke Ѧ 02:05 2-Mar-11
- I didnt check the histroy, but this is a superb quick rewrite. I laughed more then a bit and saw a concept sneaking in there !!! --ShabiDOO 02:03, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (0) |
# Delete. I get the impression this article is irredeemable uselessness. --TheSlyFox 10:05, March 1, 2011 (UTC) I am withdrawing my vote, since Spike's rewrite has made it something worth reading! I love all the nerd references (not that we're nerds, right?????), and I would really like to see more of them! We might have a Feature here if more people will adopt it. --TheSlyFox 05:01, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: -5
|
Keep (11) |
- Keep. Am I the only one who thinks those things are funny? Then why don't we delete the example on vandalism on weels too? It's like all the others. --~ 20:31, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Same as above. - LOL vandalz
- Keep Go fuck yourselves. And if you have any problem loading this, it's because your Internet is slow. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:23, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- -- 21:27, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Dude, seriously, that picture makes me physically ill and I don't want to have to avoid VFD for days. pillow talk 23:41, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Damn you! -- 05:19, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Fine, then I'll pick a different one. Does this one make you "physically ill"? -- 15:01, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- No, that's all good. pillow talk 16:17, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Great! P.S. ~ 卐 -- 17:09, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- --Roman Dog Bird 22:16, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
GO EAT SHIT FUCKERS !!!
- I am 110% for keeping this. --ShabiDOO 23:09, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- PS disclaimer. The previous was not an attack against those who want to delete this (though its bodacious and shouldnt be deleted) but is instead an ironic form of vandalism, as per the other two above. It is infact, simply a reflection of my low stardards of taste. --ShabiDOO 23:39, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- For. I got lead poisoning from these pages. (talk) 23:21, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. And never nominate this again! --Scofield 11:18, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Where else would we keep vandalism in case we needed it? --Count of Monkey Crisco 18:27, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- The village dump?
1234 ~ 01:50, 3 March 2011
- Keep. It gives vandals a creative outlet for wankery. Many times after a heavy drinking binge I've thought, "Gee, what would be a great way for a young, reckless, psychotic upstart to act like a dick with no real world consequences?" The answer, uncyclopedia vandalism. In my inebriated state, I have Vandalism on wheels to thank for me not actually uploading vandalism to the "real" site and screwing everything up. As the saying I just made up goes, "If you take away the playground, don't be surprised when they start playing around in the shower instead." It's Mrthejazz... a case not yet solved. 04:20, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- THIS IS SPARTA!!!!! <<< The previous vandalism has been brought to you by: TheSlyFox 05:23, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (6) |
- If anyone thinks we need to look at these individually, I'm happy to nominate them one at a time. But - why would we want to keep these? They take forever to load, they break things, they're so huge they resist being edited, and there's literally zero funny or otherwise interesting content in them. pillow talk 18:39, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. A page purporting to be examples of vandalism of a wiki, and seeming to be vandalism of a wiki, is probably vandalism of a wiki. There is no concept even for any occasional humor except to be something that has the precision of a can of spray paint. Hyperbole, your link does exactly identify (rather than merely describe) the pages you want deleted; so, as for games, separate votes should not be necessary. Spıke Ѧ 18:57 28-Feb-11
- Indeed...
1234 ~ 19:04, 28 February 2011
- Ugly, unfunny, unimaginative. Unsuited to Uncyclopedia. 19:08, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. I think the concept could work, if the pages are kept under 40 kb (or so) and don't break the internet whilst loading. Right now, they are almost unloadable and uneditable. I don't see any problem with deleting the current ones and working out a system to create new ones, if we have the need for them. --Mn-z 21:42, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. I would like to register a complaint. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 18:43, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
Comment. I agree with all keep votes. If we get rid of it, it's just going to cause vandalism to overflow into the real articles, and that would just be a mess. Not to mention it's one of my favorite parts of the site. --TheSlyFox 06:20, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Score: 4
|
Keep (2) |
- Keep I think it's funny that "2006cruft" is typically funnier than anything that gets featured. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:30, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Weak keep Thinking it should be renamed though. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 16:01, March 1, 2011 (UTC)
|
Delete (6) |
- Obviously unfinished article that would have assuredly been lost to the ICU if written today. pillow talk 18:30, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Blending the Skywalker/Kenobi dynasty into the Muslim Mahdi is an interesting idea. But this 2006 biography never got past the section on Birth. Spıke Ѧ 19:02 28-Feb-11
- Delete. Yay, 2006cruft ! 19:39, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Hyperbole (talk) 20:21, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
- Unfinished, underdeveloped notion that doesn't seem that good. Maybe it could have been. Maybe it still could be... *eyes Dexter*
1234 ~ 06:35, 1 March 2011
- Delete. A relic from a different age. Can't see who will want to work on this without starting afresh. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 18:49, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 8
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (8) |
- Delete. We have ourselves a troublesome IP who is sporking Wikipedia pages about Filipina actresses, and then adding a quote to the top that says that the actress is "fucked" or "fucking." See also Shaina Magdayao, where the IP is edit-warring with me over the ICU tag. Um... think I should add the IP to Ban Patrol, or is there a better way to handle this? Anyway, this page slipped our notice for a couple weeks and should be deleted. pillow talk 00:04, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Referring to ourselves with the royal "we" now are we? (talk) 00:11, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Hardly; if you are on this page because you care, the problem is hardly Hype's alone. Spıke Ѧ 00:31 3-Mar-11
- Delete. Yeah this should go. (talk) 00:11, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Intensely unfunny. Spıke Ѧ 00:31 3-Mar-11
- Delete. QVFD worthy.--Count of Monkey Crisco 05:05, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Incinerate. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 07:04, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Fuck this IP. --Scofield 14:53, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- What, more of this? Yeesh.
1234 ~ 03:33, 4 March 2011
- Oh, for the love of God. --Roman Dog Bird 08:57, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: -4
|
Keep (7) |
- Keep. This is the work of User:So So, one of our best writers, doing something that's kind of hard to get at first glance - he kept vandalizing his own article in bizarre ways, suggesting that he himself had Dissociative Identity Disorder. So, the joke is in the edit history. It's not a very accessible joke, but it is kind of funny when you finally do get it. One of his personalities is a juvenile vandal, one is Japanese, and one is, apparently, a cat. pillow talk 20:48, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree with hyp on this one. It's a remarkable article done in the style of wh- get bent you bloody wankers, you all suck cock. (talk) 21:12, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Hype's explanation, So So's genius, the fact that the page has been protected to amberize the joke within the history, better than your average map. Aleister 21:13 2-3-'11
- Keep Somebody got VFD and VFH mixed up. It's happened before. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 05:07, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep There are so many articles out there based on Chuck Norris being awesome. Why is this nominated? mAttlobster. (hello) 15:28, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. It's a different kind of article that not everyone can get. No one is going to understand every joke there is, but that's no reason to get rid of something that is actually quite clever. Loopygrumpkins 01:56, March 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep, assuming it's the only one.
1234 ~ 03:29, 4 March 2011
|
Delete (3) |
- Delete. Pointless one-liner. Even I, a lover of stupid humour, didn't find it funny (by the way, can someone fix this? I can't figure out how to work the bloody source code). Seijana 20:32, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. The page is protected; you click on "penis enlargement" and you see the real text of the page, which is in the change history at 2006. There is no reason this joke (essentially, the page is "in the style of the thing it's about") needs to be hidden and put off-limits. If you want to play games with the reader, put it in Games. Spıke Ѧ 20:51 2-Mar-11
- Delete. I don't really find the joke funny, even after Hyperbole's explanation. 21:01, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- The directions are there; just copy the thing above, next time... at any rate, no template for the page due to protection, and I can't be arsed to read the talkpage to sort out what it even is, so I'll just leave, now.
1234 ~ 20:41, 2 March 2011
|
Score: -5
|
Keep (6) |
- Keep. Short but not awful. --Count of Monkey Crisco 18:58, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. Predictable humor but flashes of brilliance. (The program replaced "the previous series, Ostrich Month, which was a commercial failure.") Froggy and e|m|c started this last July and never finished it, despite being asked nicely by the Chief Justice. I.P.Anon has taken it straight downhill since then. Coronium, revert this to the best version in the history! Spıke Ѧ 19:40 2-Mar-11
- Keep. I reverted it to the pre-shat-upon version and then ran through and tuned it up, and now I think it's actually a pretty nice little stub. pillow talk 20:31, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clean up. this is a fun article. And slightly funny. --ShabiDOO 02:00, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep. I like it. --Scofield 15:50, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
- Good enough.
1234 ~ 03:13, 4 March 2011
|
Delete (1) |
- Delete. Beautifully crufty little stub about some sort of television program. -- 18:55, March 2, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|
Score: 1
|
Keep (0) |
|
Delete (1) |
- Delete. Plagiarism. As I pointed out when it was on VFH (talk) 05:09, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
|
Comments |
|