Sign below an article you find excellent. Please add new nominations on the top.
Initial nominations do not count as a vote For. Please use "Nomination and For" or some iteration thereof if you wish to vote for your nomination.
IP votes carry half the weight of registered votes.
Unsigned votes and votes without timestamps will be ignored, so make sure you sign your votes with ~~~~ or the "your signature with timestamp" button on the edit screen.
You may nominate and vote for your own articles if you so choose - please note it on your nomination.
When nominating an article, the template Template:VFH should be added to the end of the entry using {{VFH}}. Anything you add {{VFH}} to also shows up in Category:Feature nomination.
Failed VFH nominations should only be archived/removed by the sysops who pay attention to this sort of thing.
Previous featured articles can be found on the archive pages.
THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION PAGE.
If you feel the need to whine or start flamewars please do it HERE.
Violators of this policy will be SHOT.
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 be at least a week old before nomination. Articles nominated by people other than the author can still be nominated at any time.
VANITY REGULATION: Articles that meet the criteria for vanity may not be nominated.
Nom + For. Self-nom. Skewers suburbs and Utah 'culture'. Almost too easy. Zaui 19:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
conditional for great premise and some funny images to back it up but needs something more - what? i don't know :( -- LinkTheGameFreakBitch here 22:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Ye Olde Nomination and a big For - because it's the funniest thing that could happen to me while referencing to 50 Cent. And because I have to wait one week for a self-nom. And because I like to see my name on pages and shit. Lookie: Dumitru 04:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Against It has some potential for lovers of cereal but it needs a lot of editing and sharpening up --Sir Hardwick Fundlebuggy(Bleat) 04:06, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
For. This article made me chuckle. Considering how rarely I actually open my mouth upon finding something funny, consider it an achievement. --TheFreed MindSutoththeBlack Mage[FACEHOLE HERE][MUN][YvJP]I am not a disaster. 09:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
For. This amused me, and, since I've never read Hemingway and therefore am sure I didn't get a lot of the jokes, that makes this a winner for me.--<<>> 05:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
For "Squeeze some ketchup out in a line. Roll up the bread nice and tight. That’s it. Man creates food." Go go gadget literary humor! —rc(t) 18:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
For You can't argue with this. Feel the quality in that cloth. FreeMorpheme 21:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Nomination... An excellent article, very humorous, and plenty of pictures to make the reader continue reading. Contains no factual information whatsoever, besides the fact that Hector dies. And, yes, a self-nomination.
Against. Favours randomness over wit FreeMorpheme 19:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Against - for the same reason, too random. The basics of the Iliad are in place but it needs to be sharper. --Sir Hardwick Fundlebuggy(Bleat) 04:13, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment The sad truth is that people only care about their own countries. Don't get too worked up about it; writing about the humourous foibles of our own humble nations is a fairly benign form of national vanity. Modusoperandi 14:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Against I don't get it - if images can be called to American, this one is too British. Dame GUNPotYWotM2xPotM17xVFHVFPPooPMS•YAP• 13:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Self Nomination and For - Pointless Background Info you're probably not interested in: I got the idea for this article when I got pulled over by a morbidly obese cop for doing 122.9km/h. I got a $170 fine and 37 demerit points.....fags Enjoy. Das Boot 04:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
For, this is something we desperatly need in our ever increasing fat society. --OsirisX 08:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
For but I also took the liberty of adding a section on George W. Bush's Obesity Tax program. Dame GUNPotYWotM2xPotM17xVFHVFPPooPMS•YAP• 12:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak for. This article is too long, but I can't argue with the funny. It's got "it".--<<>> 14:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak For. Meh. I laughed at the picture at the top, though. --Sir Tripod2282cunvfptalkActive~14:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
N+F: seeing that Main Page isn't going to make it... I think it's a hilarious example of comic relief, and I had much rejoincing when reading deletion... er, huffing summaries. - Sir Sikon[formerly known as Guest] 07:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Delete!; the whole thing contains nothing but bad memories. --DW III 10:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
For. I WILL go for this one, as the deletion log summaries are often some of the best quality work at the site. :p--<<>> 14:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, your self-deprecating edit summaries when you have difficulty typing an error-free message (like to RC, re: the new Yahoo! design) are quite amusing as well. :) ~ T. (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Glad to contribute ;)--<<>> 17:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
For, just because I'm an ass right now. ~CaputosistheHorrible21:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak for. I think list articles are a bit dry. --L 07:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
For, funny stuff. - Surreal Hamster 03:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
For, Relevance to the government bludging even more money out of the average Kiwi User:Guru 21:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC) (actually posted by 222.152.81.215)
Comment:- I think you voted for the wrong article - see above. Das Boot 04:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
For. I'd prefer the mainpage or VFH, but I'm glad that one of these gimmicks can be on the front page at least once, specially after so many failed nominations.--Rataube 16:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
For. This page has new deletion log summaries every day. --Sbluen 17:59, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Against - I'd prefer to see real articles get featured. 219.89.25.56 05:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
For. One of the most frequently updated articles - hours of amusement can be had with this. •Spang•☃•talk• 08:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Against - - Real Articles Please!! Das Boot 04:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment ~ Fair enough, but please vote against all of the self-reference articles here, and don't single this one out. Or, you may be banned. :) (Kidding). ~ T. (talk) 00:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
For I thought it was fairly funny-Sgore 20:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Against I knew what the joke was going to be before I even opened the article. 'Hand Grenade' was funnier and done first. --ENeGMA 20:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
For Good article Das Boot 05:27, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Against. Just isn't hitting me with the "funnae".--<<>> 14:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
For. Highly original, I like it! --OliproAnchor (Harass) 12:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
For. ~ I like the single-action models myself. The moving thumb really lets people know that I've blown their head off for their stupid driving. ~ T. (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Nominate and For because PLS should dominate the clearly inferior non-PLS articles on the front page. (also it's a great article) --EvilZak 18:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
For Heh, this was going to be my next nomination but you beat me to it. —rc(t) 19:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak For It's a good, funny idea, but it's a bit short. - Lenin & McCarthy 19:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
For. Short but sweet, and PLS to beat Modusoperandi 19:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
For. Oh, absolutely. I loved this one.--<<>> 19:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
For- I wish it was longer, but it's still great!--2nd Lt. Claudius Prime 21:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Weak for Its a great base, but it needs to explore what happens to the Pure white when something hot and red gets thrown in with them - the stain of miscoloration. FOR!Dame GUNPotYWotM2xPotM17xVFHVFPPooPMS•YAP• 00:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
For Okay, seeing the support for this article, I must now expand it to win over those wary of its shortness. Strong Rad 15:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
For Wow - very witty! --Jester 02:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
For. Great - very me. --Witt E, 21:40, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
*For, funniest article i've read in a while. - jack mort |cunt| talk - - 16:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Jack, I love you as much as the next guy, but only one for vote per article, please. :)--<<>> 00:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Nominate and Strong For - This is hysterical brilliance. It helps to know a little about Cage, but I think it'd be funny without that knowledge. Very well-written comedy. --Imrealized 07:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
For, seeing as I wrote most of it. The only thing I know about John Cage is that he wrote 4'33", and that was enough to make it funny for me. --Spang 17:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and if you vote for, a keep in its VFD entry wouldn't go amiss. It won VFD. --Spang 23:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
For - nice addition to the composer pages :) --Lurgy 15:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
For. Man, this guy WAS high on kittens...--<<>> 18:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
For - I like to say 'exuberant' often, not just for effect, but as a real descriptor. This writing is clever and exuberant, and made me chuckle. Well done, I say, well done. — CornetSir Wilde Weas'lKUNVFHFP(Witty Remarkes) 15:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
For - I actually own a copy of Piano Falling Down Five Flights of Stairs in A Minor and it is some of his best work! Triddle 00:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
For - I've definietly heard 4'33" before. I haven't heard some of the others, but I was especially entertained by that section. --epynephrin 16:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Against. Some good jokes (eg the extended dance remix of 4'33"), but it's quite badly written. Heaps of grammatical errors and sentences that don't make sense - including the first one of the article! -Conniption 10:32, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
2 squared This really is brilliant... --Johnfn 20:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
For. Amusing. —HinoaKUN(talk) 00:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment Couldn't you work in a Mortal Kombat Johnny Cage reference?--SLACK...ah ah...he'll save everyone of us! 02:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
For. Because it zings with harmonious counterpoint.--Hardwick Fundlebuggy 05:29, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Against This article had a LOT of natural potential, which was completely quashed by stupid kitten huffing references that had no relevance to the complete insanity of this already bfi person --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Heterocidal Tendencies Man Babies 15:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
For. Very good, affectionate, i didn't know who the fuck he was but it still made sense and ammused - jack mort |cunt| talk - 12:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
FORE! Hilarious. I especially liked the part where the trumpets don't come in. --Sir Tripod2282cunvfptalkActive~ 16:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
For - I only wish he could have written a symphony for 10 people banging their heads against a wall in unison...A great article for the front page -- Sp1r1tofRad1o 02:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
For - the list of songs made me chuckle. --Nydas 09:18, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment. Did you read the actual article, Sikon, or are you just subscribing to the Do NOT click any links! philosophy?--<<>> 17:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Weak against. This article is very, very well done. I just can't bring myself to vote for anything goatse-related for the front page. Especially after Yesterday...--<<>> 17:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I cannot in good concience keep this against vote on this article as this is probably the best article on this page right now. Abstain.--<<>> 04:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Also strong against. Rocky Mountain Oysters was bad enough, then sexual innuendo, can't we keep the front page SFW? --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 20:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
For YES! good. an original take on goatse that won't make you gag. --JackMort 12:45, 10 March 2006 (GMT)
For. A Goatse on every computer in every school by 2007. -- Sir CodeineK·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 12:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Against - In what appears to be a sadly predictable trend for me. Even though the subject manner is handled cleverly, it's still one big anal sex joke at the end of the day. — 2nd Lt.Sir David, the Weasel of WildKUNVFHFPFire! 17:44, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Weak NEG-A-TIVE. I like this. I really do. It's smart, and I laughed. But I have to agree that the front page is starting to get too predictable in its display of crassness. I'm all for smutting it up, but too much of a good thing, and all that... maybe later. Yeah, definitely later. And no, not like that, you filthy bastards. I'm a trashcan. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 15:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Against. No Goatse!!!--Anon32 22:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
OH my fucking god, that is so disturbing! FOR! --POJoe!TALKCONTRIBSF@H 04:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
Strong Against. This would require an NSFWArticle for it to be featured, and it would mean some workplaces could block Uncyclopedia from their servers. --Sir Velair Wight 04:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
For Very well written. Ethereal 08:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
For. I didn't want to like the page, but the quotes won me over. -Conniption 17:01, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
I haven't voted on this yet? What the hell? For. —HinoaKUN(talk) 04:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Against. It's goatse. Period. Full stop. Whatever. ~ Ghelæ talkcontribs 15:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment Although I support Yeah - votes - this one is double. --SwamiA. Suresh 23:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment Indeed it is... —rc(t) 04:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Weak For ancient chineese secret? I just wish that the title wasn't so offensive --Mindsunwound: (MUN) Heterocidal Tendencies Man Babies 15:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
For Wholistic combination of the sacred and the profane --Hardwick Fundlebuggy 05:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
For Nice,Nice --Severian 19:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
For. I don't know what a goatse is, I know it isn't very funny outside this site, and this article is funny enuogh that I don't need to know.--Witt E, 05:23, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
For. C'mon folks, it's not what you think. By the time I reached the "Great Works" section, I was laughing my ass off. Get over the title and read it. :) ~ T. (talk) 13:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
For. I admit I was scared at first but this is frickin' hilarious. --Hobelhouse 17:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
For. Surprisingly refreshing material on an old joke. --TKF 22:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Against because of the image. (I voted against it on VFP, and I will do it again.) - Sir Sikon[formerly known as Guest] 04:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
For. Yes, the first of the seven uncyc wonders of the world. - jack mort |cunt| talk - - 16:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Against Cause the idea of a giant barbie scares me. --ZB 16:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Comment Darling love, vote on the merits of the article, not your fear of a twenty-foot Vulva on a Barbie giantess. Faster Pussycat Kill Kill 19:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
For Because it could have a twenty-foot vulva if it really existed. Faster Pussycat Kill Kill 19:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)