From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
|This article was nominated for deletion on June 25-26, 2009.
The result of the discussion was keep.
Hey, I laughed. - David Gerard 07:06, 13 Apr 2005 (EDT)
edit The problem
- The problem is, you can hardly write a proper Uncyclopedia article about David Icke. He is already too preposterous. Sorry, ettlz.
Can it be true?! The old saurophobic son-of-a-god-head is beyond the scope of even the 'pedia? Well it was worth a go. I mean, hell, there are articles on John Travolta and Tom Cruise. Ettlz 08:34, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC)
- Well, for my part, I found myself chuckling at the recently added 'bibliography', and then I realised that those actually are his books. --Magicaltrevor 17:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
- yeah. perhaps there is a little bit too much real information here. perhaps not enough about the humanoid agenda to ridicule reptilians, or how David Icke is a big repressed self hating reptile who just needs to deal with being a cold blooded egg sucker. damn humans always hating on the reptile folk. pity the fools
edit NO offensiveness at all
I completely agree with David and have read 3 of his books. I feel that this article does him justice and is not offensive at all. In time it may be funny and just not stupid. Keep up the good work guys.MichaelACookII 18:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
LOL what a loser ^
Too right XD^
edit Waste of Time
What fun it is to have EVERY SINGLE THING THAT I WROTE removed because someone subjectively thinks it 'isn't funny'. No attempt was even made to discuss it, just whallop there you go mate on your way. What a shit! --TheChurchofScientology 16:03, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
edit Suggested rewrite
This could be hard one as Icke's beliefs are beyond probably any other stuff on Unencyclopedia. I have volunteered to have a go and clean it up - perhaps repointing, replacing the serving hatch and changing the colour of the wallpaper...there is also no point in filling this article with a rant as the man's ideas are pretty mad to begin with ...Anyway once it is taken off VFD I will have a go as I was there when Icke first came out with this Lizards Are Running the World...--RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 09:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- I had a go at it, but there are many sections that seem to be actual Icke nonsense that has been inserted by his weirdo cultists. The same is true of other conspiracy theory pages, like Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson, someone seems to have been busy with the anti-semitism on all three and most of them contain a few bits of abuse posted by the tin-foil-hat brigade. It needs completely pulling apart I think.--TheChurchofScientology 10:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- At the moment I am waiting for the admins to agree and let me take this article 'home' and give it a makeover but I don't if you have your own ideas on it as well. I thought uncyclopedia should have an article on him but this one isn't right as it stands. I had thought to make it more like a 'inside the head of D.Icke' style where at least in his world all this lizard stuff makes sense. Otherwise it is difficult to make fun of someone who has crazy ideas to start with.--RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 11:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for reminding me that I had promised to fix this. You are welcome to have a go btw. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 19:24, January 27, 2010 (UTC)
How come Prince George and Princess Charlotte don't switch between the two forms 'because they can'/because they are cute little infants?
- I have no idea but the Icke is still spouting his nonsense unabated. --RomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 23:34, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
- 'Cute little infants' have no self-control, and then do things because they are told not to.
Would Tom Brook, sometime Mayor of Bethnal Green London and long term chimneysweep remain human or be reptiloided? 184.108.40.206 17:54, July 7, 2015 (UTC)
They still exist.
Wouldn't shapeshifting of the kind suggested be physically impractical/require more energy than could be consumed? 220.127.116.11 15:57, July 8, 2015 (UTC)