Forum:Unlaughable but not VFD articles

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Unlaughable but not VFD articles
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2957 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

Hi, fellas. I once VFDed this article and later removed it from the list. The author told me that the article was vandalized, reverted it to the complete version and I agreed to unVFD it. But... I don't know. I think the article does not deserve being deleted and it is somewhat interesting, but it's almost unlaughable.

I remember that and old deleted article had a tag on top of it in which was written: "Serious On... [can't remember the middle]... Don't expect any laughs". I searched for this tag and could not find any template or page with it. Guess it was directly placed on that page.

Well, what I want to ask is: should we create an "Unlaughable" cathegory and add a template for it? This is intended for "sophisticated" articles that are not disposable but cannot make you really laugh, as the one I mentioned above. If you agree, I have a good idea about how this template would look like.

herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 19:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)



You mean

right? I think this temp applies more to purposely serious pages (like F@H) not ones that just suck and arn't funny...--Anyone 20:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes, that one! But what do you think about my proposal? May I edit this template? I'm thinking about a big one, with a picture of Jean-Paul Sartre - in my humble oppinion, the unfunniest person to ever walk on Earth. herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 20:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  • If by edit this exact template and change it to fit your needs, then by-god man, what are you, crazy? They'll kill you. But, I'd say feel free to take the source from this template, or better yet, a more box-like template (like bat fuck insane or what not) and copy it over to your sandbox and edit to your hearts discontent. Then come back here and whore your achievements. --Anyone 20:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Aw, forget about it. Now I see how the template was intended to be used, as a 'serious zone delimiter', to be worked with the 'unserious zone delimiter'. Then my idea is another one. A new cathegory template with about the following text:

"This article sense of humour is too much sophisticated for your petit-bourgeois sense of taste. Don't expect vulgar cracking-ups, just sit down with your pipe and let a subltle witful giggle form in the other corner of your mouth". herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 20:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


Personally I laughed out loud at that page. But I am a Religious Studies nerd. ---QuillRev. Isra (talk) 22:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

  • See it? It's too much sophisticated for me! :D

Tell me people, shall I create the template or not? herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 18:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

No. It'll be abused and people will slap it on anything they don't like/get. That page is ferpectly pine. Freemorpheme.gif 18:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

  • By the way, I've found a simmilar idea:
Kraspin One or more of the authors of this entry was terribly bored. They may be afflicted with Attention Deficit... hey, we should go fly kites. That'd be so awesome! We haven't flown kites, since, like, summer. Hey, summer is when birds come out! Birds are so cool.
You can help by paying for their Ritalin, or finding them a kitten to play with.
herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 18:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • There it is. I will place it under some Pee:

herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 20:40, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Ow, and yes, the article I've mentioned above does not fit in the definition for this template anymore. herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 21:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The template was aparently approved in the Pee. So I will just remove it from here to note include this discussion in the cathegory. Thanks! herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!]}
  • Limitations of Superpowers is not a funny-ha-ha-booger-joke article. We had a discussion about satire versus comic writing awhile back. Satire is not necessarily laugh-out-loud funny. We can indeed create a tag that says something like Satire! Not Necessarily Funny but then perhaps we should create a tag that says No Noticeable Satire Or Parody, Just Booger Jokes to put on the multitude of articles which in fact have no noticeable satirical content. As a general thing I dislike templates, except admin-enforcement notes like VFD. It's simply a label applied by somebody with an opinion and the label 1) may not be correct; 2) may not make sense to all readers; 3) may do the article grave injustice; 4) may be misused by assholes. Down with templates -- down with "Jesus Approves" and "Contains Facts" and all that shit. Remember, 90% of the readers are smarter than the person who placed the template, and are laughing at him behind his back. ----OEJ 19:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I disagree, OEJ. Templates have become one of the most distinctive features of uncyc. Specially when they are funny - and I hope this one of mine is. By the way, if one disagrees with the placement of a template he or she can just remove it - provided the adequate discussion in the talk page. herr doktor needsAcharge Rocket [scream!] 19:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, we can agree to disagree. I do not remove templates (except very rarely from pages I originated) because of lingering free-speech issues that my psychoanalyst has been unable to resolve using electroshock/tequila therapy. But I never place them (except for {{construction}}, {{vanity}}, and {{vfd}}) because I am not arrogant enough to put a label on a piece of writing. It is what it is, as my dear old lit teacher said, not what someone's arbitrary label says it is. As far as being a distinctive part of Uncyc, yes, that's true -- templates are as distinctive as a big hairy wart in the middle of a pretty girl's upper lip. I know, that sounds harsh and bitchy, NeedABrain, but since I expect I am a minority of one on this issue I might as well be honest about it! ;) 'Nuff said on my part, I've made (and over-made) any possible point I might have. Anyone care to light off some rum-soaked Cheetos? ----OEJ 23:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I love templates. Especially {{Too many templates}}, {{Not enough templates}}, etc. They're not intended to 'label' articles and such. They're meant to be silly and funny. --User:Nintendorulez 23:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects