Voters: don't be dicks and do be constructive with criticism. Writers: Don't be prima donnas. Be open to criticism.
Articles from all namespaces (including UnNews, HowTo, UnBooks, etc.) are eligible for VFH. Votes against articles based on namespace prejudice will be discarded.
If your article doesn't make it to the front page, don't despair. It may be eligible to be Quasi-featured so long as it meets certain criteria.
THIS IS A VOTE, NOT A DISCUSSION.
If you feel the need to whine or start flamewars please do it HERE.
Violators of this policy will be
killed by your own Green Shell.
Current Nominations (new stuff at top, prefix votes with * )
SELF-NOMINATION REGULATION: self-nominated articles (i.e. you write an article and then decide to nominate it yourself) must spend at least one week on Pee Review OR receive one critique via Pee Review before nomination. Articles nominated by people other than the author can still be nominated at any time and require no review (though it is still recommended).
VFH IS NOT A DISCUSSION PAGE. If you'd like constructive criticism for your article, please submit it to Uncyclopedia:Pee Review.
"This is just so damn funny, i appreciate the research and effort that has been put into this article and the fact that the comprehension is also acknowledgeable by people who aren't very smart." --King Nothing 09:52, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Great article, really funny. Hitler jokes just never get old... Really well written too, and the jokes were particularly clever. Loved it. - 126.96.36.199 10:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Against Votes: 1
Against - Not completely finished. That and I also suspect sockpuppetry. --AAA! (AAAA) 10:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
This really, truly, splendidly, and munificently, is one of the funniest, most hilarious articles that I have taken the time to enjoy reading. This article is definitely, positively, and absolutely deserving to be featured. --GeneralInsineratehymn 04:24, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
For: The Fundies keep blanking the page so it's gotta be good --Pam Johnsenson 21:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Against Votes: 3
No. No, it's not. It is, however, something. So we're partway there, at least. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 22:07, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Damn those blanking fundies. Why doesn't God just blank it? He could blank it surely. Come on God for fuck's sake blank it! Maybe it was God. Was it God? The Oblong Lobster 22:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
After researching this fellow, I've concluded that this article could be about a million times funnier. A million, man! Work towards that (PS- The Fundies - didn't they release a technopop album in the late 80s? lol) --THINKER 22:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
O.nu[brm } Urp, following a positive pee review and some fixing-up after said review. In case you have trouble comprehending this article, I included a handy link at the bottom in case you don't feel like Googling. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 01:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Cby.p.oycbiv Dao mf kry.! --THE 20:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
For, since you changed the intro...but I've still never actually seen a Dvorak keyboard. I'm going to check the article and see if there's a pic of one in it.--Sir Shandon 06:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Against Votes: 1
Against. It should appeal to the nerd in me, but...it's more of a gimmick than a page. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 05:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
#Against...although my vote could be changed. Here's what happened: I looked at the article. It hurt my eyes and I went away in glazy-eyed incomprehension. Then I came back to view the link and discovered what the deal was. Somehow it needs to be made more obvious what the article is about....maybe a line at the top, something like "So, I bought myself this shiny new keyboard! Hmm. Something's different. Let me plug it in..."?--Sir Shandon 10:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I added another introduction to attempt to solve that problem, Shandon, without going completely off the theme of the article. I hope it's suitable. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 20:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Expanded the introduction a bit and included a fully translated version in the first external link at the top. Sure, it takes a way from the joke, but the majority of the people who have seen this seemed to be asking for one. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 21:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Nominating and for. Nice rewrite by Nakedman. Notice that this article is not random at all: it's perfectly coherent with its title and draws its humor for what it doesn't deliver. Ignoring the band is a very ironic comment on its real relevance. -- herrdoktorneedsAbeam[scream!] 19:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Nah not feelin' this one. Sorry doc. --THINKER 18:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Abstain. I was going to vote Against. Then I read the talk page & thought the talk page was more funny than the article. Then I read the article again. Maybe I'll vote For if it gets another appropriate picture or something to grab the reader a bit better.--Sir Shandon 10:00, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Against per Mr. Vib --THINKER 01:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Okay, okay, I fleshed out the text and dropped the "this reporter" bit. I didn't wanna, but I am bowing to peer pressure for the greater good of Uncyclopedia. Jeez, the things I do for this website...back in my day it was "this reporter this" and "this reporter that". Kids these days! SirModusoperandiBoinc! 02:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Change of Heart. I took a second read and imagined the cowboy narrating. Needless to say, it made the difference. --Mr.Vib 00:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
For, though it's been bugging me that a lot of really good articles have been too short lately, like this very short article. If the trend continues I may start voting "against" stuff on the grounds of being too short. User:Wehpudicabok/sig 03:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Gotta check the audio later. --So So 06:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
For...yeah, it's different. And funny.--Sir Shandon 10:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Against Votes: 0
No against votes
This is an ad parody that was made with recording in mind; I figured that the joke would wear thin with a 7 minute recording, ya know? And while I do agree that some small articles could use expansion to heighten their funny, I think that some shorties-but-goodies are warranted (like this one; if only because I entertain myself...and the opposite is a hard pill to swallow). :) --THINKER 01:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
For I've seen the article before, and trust me, this is a vast improvement. I think it should get a full protect after (if) is gets to the front page though. •"Spang"•contribs | talk• 15:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Very Strong For. This is an amazing improvement over the original article. Finally, one that doesn't say anime fans are [insert insult here]. That in itself deserves a feature, if even just to keep it that way. I really do like the chemistry, though, very original! -- TheSlyFox 00:46, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
For. Nice work chaps. His Grace, the Duke 11:37, May 24 2007 (BST)
For. Well, what the hell did you expect? I merely laid the corpse out on the slab, it was Cap'n Ben who attached the electrodes and sent it lumbering towards the Village People. --El Zoof 05:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
For It should be featured without a doubt. Kip the Dip 12:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh my god, this is brilliant. For. --Emmzee 13:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Dig very good stuff --THINKER 18:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
The image is strangely assembled from four parts, however, when you press refresh theres a new fortune! its the only good part of the old article. cept maybe "how to be hysterical." LeatherboundbooksTalkContributions 22:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm gonna think on my vote for a while. I've been pretty ruthless tonight thus far, and the turn around in this article from its stint on VFD (which can't have been much more than a week ago) is enormous, but sadly it still fails to hit that secret spot for me. The funny spot, not the other one...pervert!~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.008:30, 13 May 2007
Not this version of it no. Extensive work has been done to it since it was on VFD. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.012:32, 14 May 2007
Aw is it like that? Didn't do too bad, and the comparison is pretty steep.. The cookie is cool? Who can say... But, Leatherbound hasn't answered my call for Ups or downs, so whatev... :) --THINKER 09:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Not at all. I've voted for plenty of good quality articles. Just the recent batch don't quite hit the mark for me. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.011:17, 13 May 2007
Well, considering I put it up for VFD because it was under the wrong name and was a completely different and terrible article, think of them as seperate entities. (Do it for the random fortune fortune cookie, if only the random fortune fortune cookie) LeatherboundbooksTalkContributions 13:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
for in school today, some idiots use the day after tomorrow as a reference for their presentation on global warming. what the fuck? the experience makes this all too funny in the saddest of ways. LeatherboundbooksTalkContributions 02:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Nom+for, journalism par excellence! --Unedible 14:05, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Cuz this is what it's like when worlds COLLIIIIIIDE! •"Spang"•contribs | talk• 15:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
And yet I still have no idea what it's like when doves cry.--<<>> 18:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
For, because it's a good article, and also because I give voting preference to UnNews. Mostly the first one, though. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 18:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)