User:Mrasdfghjkl/vfptest

Hitlerbear reminds you to focus on quality.

Sign below a picture you find excellent - new nominations go on top. Unsigned votes will be thrown out, and IP votes carry less weight than votes cast by a registered user, because anonymous IPs are pathetic peons in our eyes. Feel free to add an thumb + description + article. You may nominate and vote for your own images: such is the freedom of Uncyclopedia. Make sure your vote is clear, by using 'For' and 'Against' in bold type. Neutral votes are absolutely unnecessary. If you're only making a comment and not voting, be sure to note that.

Please submit only original pictures to VFP! Images cribbed from elsewhere on the internet will not be featured on the front page, though you are welcome to use them in articles.

For discussion about VFP see Uncyclopedia:Community_Portal/archive2#Here_we_go_again_with_Rainbow_Brite.

When nominating an image, the template Template:VFP should be added to the end of the entry using {{VFP}}. A featured article should have the template Template:ImageFP, using {{ImageFP}}.

DO NOT place multiple versions of an image in a single entry. Should the original nomination fail, nominate the revised version after it has been deleted.

Removal/archival of failed/expired candidates, as well as the decision on which have reached failure, must only be performed by the sysops who have nothing better to do than look at pictures all day, so leave it to them.

You can see all the featured images listed here, or on the archived voting pages: 1, 2

To vote on previously featured images, use Uncyclopedia:PFP.

THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION PAGE.
Please limit discussion to the VFP discussion page, or the appropriate image talk.

Current nominations

New nominations on top, votes start with *, please

Joy of Killing

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

...happy little corpses... --KATIE!! 09:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• For.---Rev. Isra (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against(Uncyclopedian 15:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC))
• For. Uncyclopedian, senses of humor can be rented at the front desk. :D --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 16:35, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for I only got this joke because someone explained it to me. It IS hilarious, but I didn't get it at first.<<>>17:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• For 'I'm gonna bust a happy little cap in your pretty little head' ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 19:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. HAHAHAHAHA!   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Abstain, until KILLING is written in happy little trees. -- – Mahroww a.k.a. Hoyetii “Art” Emerson  22:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

White Square

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

• Nominate and against.--Xiao Li 08:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Better than most. --Splaka 09:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Conditional for you nominate a actual image :} --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 13:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Abstain. If this is gonna be another one of those Fisher Price situations, I'll stay out of it. --Boy Toy bitch at me 15:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against I want actual images!(Uncyclopedian 15:51, 7 February 2006 (UTC))
• For. Because it would be funny. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 16:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and the caption should be something along the lines of "a polar bear blinking in a blizzard" rather than what it is right now. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 16:38, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Extreme Lesbian Support. This rivals Malevich's Black Square, which depicts negroes loading coal at night. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 16:55, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against Anti-humor is great and all, but I don't vote for it.<<>>
• Against. This isn't a picture, and hence is not qualified to be the featured picture. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 17:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• .  !!! a nihilist approach to a request of 'No' ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 19:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Contre. This is obviously just a copy of the French flag, we need something more originale. --Carlb 21:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• No. Not funny. --POJoe!TALKCONTRIBSF@H 22:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I think Hitlerbear does a better job of this, and we shouldn't have two warning images. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Jihad★Mart

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

• Nominate and For. Rather amusing. --OsirisX 22:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Pretty funny... --Jocke Pirat 22:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against Badly done and doesn't tickle my funny bone. --S P I N N I E 23:12, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• You haven't seen badly drawn until you see n00b YTMND pages

• Against. Lacks cowbell and funny. Again. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 23:19, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For You mean you can't understand Wal-Mart jokes?(Uncyclopedian 23:25, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

I can understand it perfectly well; it's just not funny. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 00:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• For If only because we need a Jihad-Mart joke on the front page.<<>>00:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• The retailers are growing increasingly aggressive; if I worked anywhere near a prime US Target I'd be afraid for my life! --Carlb 00:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• For holly Jidhad, Martman --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 13:23, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• BURNINATE! Not only is this a bad image, it isn't funny or relevant to anything. ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 18:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• AGAINST TO THE POWER OF 50. Poor, poor picture, does not poke me with funny, Osama fase is over. By the way, pasting someone else's head onto a body IS NOT FUCKING FUNNY ANYMORE! LET'S BE ORIGINAL, GOD DAMNIT!!! --Boy Toy bitch at me 15:18, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Someone else's head??? Um, do you have any idea how long it took to convince Osama to pose for this photo?

Cabinet

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

• Nominate and Vote. Funnier than any of the other current nominations.--Rataube 13:53, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. I believe this is an actual picture. ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 15:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak For Some of the heads don't look correct, but other then that yes it's sorta funny --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 15:55, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - but the article it's on needs expanding, and it might be funnier if at least one person (not necessarily Bush himself; maybe the guy in back?) was not wearing a furry mask. --Some user 16:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against, until. What's with the wave of poorly done pictures? Make it look like the heads are actually attached to the bodies, then we'll see. --Boy Toy bitch at me 16:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
  • For. What the heck. If no-one else cares, why should I? --Boy Toy bitch at me 16:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For!!!!! Hilarious!(24.207.91.40 16:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC))

Likely sock. --—rc (t) 06:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• For Needs a link in the blurb, but otherwise pretty good stuff.<<>>17:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. I just saw this, and I was thinking about nominating it, but now i can't remember where it's from.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 17:24, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Whee, fun. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 18:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Thanks for the nomination.  :) -- Rei 19:44, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Extreme For! This is perfect!(Uncyclopedian 00:54, 6 February 2006 (UTC))
• FOR! What an accurate depiction. --OsirisX 02:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For --Xiao Li 09:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. I like it, but WHAT THE HELL IS THAT GRAY THING AAAAAAAHHH GET IT OFF ME AAAAAAHHHH!!! (BTW, anyone else getting a strong Avengers: The Movie vibe from this?) --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 15:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For Very clever --Jester 18:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For Nominate this already!!!!(142.22.16.57 18:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

Comment: I think you meant "Feature this already." And I agree, but please don't use sockpuppets to vote.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 20:01, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Likely sock. The IP, not Tompkins. --—rc (t) 06:32, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Against The quality is pretty bad, sorry. Some conservative freak 01:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against I dislike ballot stuffing too --Splaka 06:29, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against It's pretty good, but some of the heads don't match. The hands look great through. --—rc (t) 06:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Franklin Foot Fetish

Featured picture candidate
Benjamin Franklin was the United States' first "ambassador" to France. {{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

• Nominate. I honestly think we need more pics on this page, so I found this one by Some user, which I've posted here without permission for you to rip to shreds, since I think it belongs here. I hope said user doesn't hate me now...<<>>20:01, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• For! Hate you? Why? I was wondering when somebody was going to notice this one! It almost makes you think you're on Wikipedia. --Some user 20:05, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against, until: I think the image lighting/blending could be improved. If it is, then we'll see. --Boy Toy bitch at me 20:15, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for. Too lazy to think why. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 20:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Good image, and the caption really makes it. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. I just didn't find it funny. --★★★Joe★★★ 00:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against The images don't mesh. --—rc (t) 02:47, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against It isn't funny. And the foot only has four toes... ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 02:51, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment and For That's a reason it's funny, the four toes thing!(24.207.91.40 04:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC))
• Weak For if his tongue was a little out it would be better. the images look fine 2 me.--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 08:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for--Rataube 13:22, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• 'For, because of lude insinuations. --138.28.149.85 01:09, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For It's good. What else can I say?(Uncyclopedian 03:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC))Against Nah, not that great.(Uncyclopedian 20:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC))
• Against Very nice idea, but the lighting of the foot & Ben don't match well enough. --Jester 18:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• I vote for this, because it's perfect!

Unsigned. --—rc (t) 23:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• Very For It's hilarious and it looks good. The only thing I don't like are the quotes around Ambassador. I like deadpan more than sarcasm. --User:Maximilian 13:15, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

People-Off

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

Are we really that hard-up for nominations? If so, I'd like to nominate (and for) this one - it popped up on Recent Changes one night, and since then I've linked to the article 2-3 times, mostly just because I want so much for it to really exist. (Possible sizing issues, though?) --Some user 19:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• How much does it go for? I could use some. For. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 20:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• 444. Where can I get some? --OsirisX 00:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for. Kinda funny.--★★★Joe★★★ 00:51, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak against Yes, funny, but there ARE size issues, here.<<>>01:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• FOR!! I already sent my $39.95 in! ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 02:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for It's nice, but too much profanity for me.(24.207.91.40 04:35, 5 February 2006 (UTC))
• Weak against. The "People Off" text is obviously photoshopped. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 04:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• FOR PISS off everyone who doesnt--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 07:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. Size issue, do you want to f**k the front page?--Rataube 13:23, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against, until: The image is good on 85 pixels, which don't screw up the front page, but the smaller text can't be read. Fix it, then we'll see. --Boy Toy bitch at me 14:49, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Amazing(Uncyclopedian 03:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

Wiki DeathStar 5

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

Wiki DeathStars moved to WikiWars, on the discussion page. Please, anyone who cares, make an article about them.

Sorry guys. It's neither the time nor the place, but I couldn't resist --S P I N N I E 22:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

• For! This is actually the best of the bunch.--Bradaphraser 22:49, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 23:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Very original idea,actually.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 23:13, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• I agree, Four was not enough. Nonymous 00:06, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• For, eh? --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 00:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• We need 'for more version--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 00:39, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against As an in-joke, it's really funny (and well made), but I can't imagine people that haven't seen the others will understand it. In any case, there should probably be an article for these pictures (something about a brave group of uncyclopedian rebels fighting a war against the evil foundation, aided by teddybears). Doug 03:25, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I like this one, it's funny. However, without a wikideathstar, it is a slightly confusing in-joke, as Doug mentions above. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 03:53, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I'll vote for it if someone gives it a suitable description. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 22:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Comment I just changed the caption...you like it Dawg? --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 01:15, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment I changed it again, but it's still not funny. --S P I N N I E 03:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment: I changed it. :-) --Boy Toy bitch at me 03:13, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

• For. But how many Wiki Deathstars does one need to make? --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 03:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against. Too blurry and hard to get. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 06:23, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• Conditional for - add more symbols to the walls to make it look more like a Wiki. --80.195.22.150 09:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. In-jokes are the best jokes. --KATIE!! 20:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• For see, THIS is new, all the other ones, just no. new jokes,or at least variations like this one, PLEASE!!!--Nappy The Quarryman 07:24, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. --Rataube 13:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against: in the context of the other ones, this is good but it doesn't have enough funny as a standalone image to warrant featuring. --Sir gwax (talk) 17:13, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against, until. Improve this picture, make the puzzle pieces smaller, and then I'll vote for it. --Boy Toy bitch at me 23:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• For: This rules! (24.207.91.40 04:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC))
• Against. The joke has got so out of hand, it's lost the original "funny". --⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ign^STFU F@H|CUNT|+S 22:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment If by "out of hand" you mean "funny", and by "it's lost the original "'funny'", you mean "It should be continued," I concur.--S P I N N I E 06:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

• Great, this shit is headed for the number one spot! ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 19:55, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. The others were better. --OsirisX 01:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

• For. --Gamiac 18:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. This is just cool!(Uncyclopedian 00:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

Polar Bear

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

• For. I saw it in new images a while back. I thought it was funny. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 11:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against. I like the pic but I don't think it's funny. --Boy Toy bitch at me 16:16, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for This one also caught my eye. It's well done, and it's funny if you're not paying attention for a moment, then figure out he's not actually eating raspberries. -- Bradaphraser 18:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For--Rataube 22:46, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Pretty funny. --—rc (t) 03:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For I got a good laugh out of that one after I realized what was going on. --Mosquitopsu 15:19, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I'm stupid. What's he really eating? It just looks like a bunch of red balls, with blood around them. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 00:24, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Againstits just a polar bear eating something dead and bloody with raspberries photoshopped on top, is this some joke for people who live in countrys with normal bears? --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 00:37, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak against. The "censoring" effect is worth a smirk, but not much else. Plus, the blood's just too obvious to make the raspberries work -- my initial thought was "bloody snowballs?" when I saw it. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 19:19, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For--S P I N N I E 22:58, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• FOREEEEE!!!!!--User:Golfer 1:58, 01 February 2006 (UTC)
• ACK!!! You really have to read the article to have an appreciation for the pic. It's supposed to be a crappy, obvious photoshop job, that's what makes it funny. Based on that criteria (or maybe the fact that I did it???) I say FOR. -- – Mahroww a.k.a. Hoyetii “Art” Emerson  08:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Abstain until a far better comment is added.... --⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ign^STFU F@H|CUNT|+S 22:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against WTF?? ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 19:39, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - I just changed the caption... Better? -- c • > • cunwapquc? 17:21, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment Hey! You changed the caption...it draws attention ^^^away^^^ from the pic, not to it. HOW DARE YOU!
Further discussion moved to Image_talk:Polarbear.jpg

• Weak for Good, but why did you keep a piece of the kill under the bear?(24.207.91.40 04:59, 5 February 2006 (UTC))
• For --eander315 17:21, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For -- Rei 19:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against, until Change the caption to something funny, please.(Uncyclopedian 02:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC))
• For --Lurgy 06:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Amnesia Islands

Featured picture candidate
The television show Lost is filmed on location on an unknown atoll in the South Pacific. {{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

Since you guys seem to be looking for the next big RadX image (two shot down this week), try this one. I'm for it. Strong RadX 21:52, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For ~ Kakun 22:28, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Forward - Nonymous 23:35, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against - the question mark means alot more then forgetfulness --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 05:41, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • But in the contest of a desereted island, it means only that. Kakun 15:25, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against. It's a nice image and all, but it doesn't hold much comedy value. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 07:17, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Does the new caption help the comedic value any? Strong RadX 20:11, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Weak For. I... kinda like it. Acid Ammo 15:47, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --Rataube 18:47, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --PiOfFive Brilliant!
• Against -- Lord Karaluch | Talk  16:19, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Four. Four-thirty in Newfoundland. --Carlb 16:59, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against Good art. Not a bad concept. ...it just doesn't make me chuckle.--Bradaphraser 21:55, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the new blurb won this one for me.--Bradaphraser 23:15, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For - Reminds me of my mental state most of the time. Why am I here again??? ANIDN MENOSCWICZ
• FOR - I must see this image in the portal NOW!! Unsigned
• weak for, it's not really up to par with the rest (e.g. Mr. T in stained glass) Anon32 21:18, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against Amnesia Island, but for Questionable Atoll. Prettiestpretty 16:55, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Changed vote FOR! Prettiestpretty 15:19, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)

What if we called it the Island from the TV show "Lost"? Strong Rad 20:23, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For: it's got a quaint charm to it. --Sir gwax (talk) 05:29, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against --Leo 06:27, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Against due to the new caption. Honestly, I like the caption given on its source page better than the suggested alternatives. --Algorithm (talk) 08:53, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For this image with this caption. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 10:14, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against --S P I N N I E 15:34, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against - a bit weak IMO - David Gerard 12:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong for. --Joe857 16:19, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I don't get it.(24.207.91.40 03:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC))
• For I like this a lot.(Uncyclopedian 01:26, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

Previously Featured Pictures

These images have already been featured. Do not put any further votes on this page, use PFP instead. kthx

Individually wrapped M&M's (from OCD)

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

Featured --—rc (t) 06:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nomination & Vote ~ MoneySign was kind enough to make this for me as a surprise. He says it's not one of his best works, but I think it's great. --T. (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Awesome, plus, someone would actually buy these. — — 2nd Lt. Sir David, the Weasel of Wild KUN VFH FP Fire! 18:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• For--Rataube 18:53, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against I don't know why ... but this just doesn't hit me with the happies.--Bradaphraser 19:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against. Frankly, I don't like it. And this could be just because I'm in a bad mood. --Boy Toy bitch at me 20:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak For. I love it, especially since OCD kinda runs in my family. However, it took me awhile to decipher the picture.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Enthusiastic For. But you should work "OCD" into the caption. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 23:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Sure  :) Anyone have a suggestion? --T. (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Dunno. "New for people with OCD:" maybe. I saw OCD in the header and got the joke. I just want OCD to be in the caption somehow. Doesn't need to be clever. --Rev. Isra (talk) 00:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• For, but I sra's right. I thought it was about condoms. Kakun 23:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against. - Taken out of the context of the article, it makes little sense. There should be something in the caption about OCD. --Leo 02:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against. - I was neither, for or against but now that it is the size of a house it must be stoppped. i dont want 2 stay on the fence --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 09:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against - too tiny to be fun on the front page Mtu 01:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against- It's familiar, which means it should be funny. But it's kind of...not. I dunt know why. Frankenberry Grr 06:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 12:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• For --ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 14:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Funny --Bananas21ca 01:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
• For My company had a discussion last night on whether to make these, but then we saw they were already featured here! - Birdzofafeatha
• For --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 00:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For --KWild 10:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• For for being genuinely funny on its own without a lot of backstory -Drdisque 19:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• More or Less For --Ghelae^talk 20:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Funny, even when you know people who have OCD. --Joe857 16:17, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Made me laugh out loud; just subtle enough, nice wrapper text. Sj 03:51, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. That's a hilarious picture!(24.207.91.40 04:55, 5 February 2006 (UTC))

Likely sock. --—rc (t) 06:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• For. Good job, whoever made this!(Uncyclopedian 00:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

Evil Cookie Monster

Featured picture candidate
Cookie Monster's last name becomes much more accurate when he is deprived of cookies... {{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

Featured --—rc (t) 05:31, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nomination and for. I went looking for a pic worthy of this page, since it seems we all agree that more are needed. What do you think?--Bradaphraser 22:43, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. That's good stuff. --Boy Toy bitch at me 01:29, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• After so long! another picture I can hapily vote FOOOOR, with no doubts.--Rataube 02:25, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against nothing clever about it at all, put him next to a boiling cooking pot (with the hand sticking out aka cooking monster)with a spoon and then it might be funny--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 03:07, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Weak For After looking at the current bunch this would have 2 be the second best of the lot after the wiki versions --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 00:21, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• Für Its quaint --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 15:22, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For shore. -- » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 23:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• Yummie Brutal enough.-- Swami A. Suresh 00:34, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• for. Kakun  nukaK 02:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 01:03, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Comedy gold! User:Happybaboon
• Ja! I'm still giggling. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 19:16, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• Forbes! It's mine --Count of Monkey Crisco 23:54, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• FOR - Ah, blurry and violent. Nice. 2nd lt. sir wild weasel kun vfh fp ^{sex & violence!} 18:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• How cute and adorable... perfect for the little ones when they're acting cranky. Carlb 19:00, 31 January 2006 (UTC)]
• FOR —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kerflanacles (talk • contribs) 04:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. --KATIE!! 20:45, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Mickeys

Featured picture candidate
{{{4}}} Image credit: [[User:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}]] Archive - Discuss this image

Featured I didn't even count the votes. Haha, suckers! --—rc (t) 03:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

• Self-nomination I made this a long time ago. Unfortunately the article it's on is pretty sparse and it could use a better caption, but what the hey, I'm feeling wild today. --—rc (t) 19:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Hey Dicks, I think someone slipped him a Mickey. For » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 19:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Gimme a Hell yeah! Cuz Stone Todd sed so. --T. (talk) 20:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak For. I can see them in front page, but they look like erasers to me. --Boy Toy bitch at me 21:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak For--Rataube 21:24, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. In answer to all of you non-believers' questions: So?   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 22:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For, if only because there have been no featured pictures on this site that have taken pot-shots at Disney, and that needs to be remedied.--Bradaphraser 22:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. (conditional on it being that size or close to it on the front page). ---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:07, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• For! --Leo 01:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• For: they're totally trendy. --Sir gwax (talk) 06:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Rf!o: Deez pilllzzz gotttts mereee FCUKDDD U!P1!! ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 05:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
• Oh dear! I haven't voted for yet! --KATIE!! 05:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
• Hey man... slip me one a dose... I needs it FOR my hot date lateh... --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 19:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Now this is feature-material! --⇔ Sir Mon€¥$ign^STFU F@H|CUNT|+S 06:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. --71.32.75.47 07:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

• Abstained WTF is a Mickey? I Just learned what a Hickey is. And a Wedgie. But Mickey???-- Swami A. Suresh 00:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse, a classic Disney character.--Rataube 02:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

And a "Mickey Finn" (or just "Mickey") is a drink laced with drugs (hence the Mickey-drug connection). Not raver drugs though. I don't think. --—rc (t) 02:42, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

• For. --Hinoa 00:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• yes Kakun  nukaK 02:49, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 02:03, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Haha.. Disney is almost like a toxine in our society already. Look: leech.dk/free_culture.swf free_culture.swf. Dark_ApostropheThe Memory Hole 15:12, 31 January 2006 (UTC)