From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

edit Complete rewrite

I've written an alternative article here. If anyone thinks it's better/worse than the current one please comment - I may overwrite the current one with this one if no-one says anything, because I think the current article is crap :P (though I'm not claiming my rewrite is much better) --Huffers 06:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, the old article was so random I've overwritten it with my rewrite. Please don't revert it back - post comments here first. --Huffers 20:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

It takes itself too seriously. Add some humor without making it either too insulting or too random.

edit Pre-rewrite discussion

This article is too acurate to be funny

Since everyone hates furries, wouldn't it be consistent with Uncyclopedia to have an article that's filled with love for furries? User:Invisible Queen

Why?It's fine the way it is.The article's funny without being insulting,unlike ED,which is neither.I like crack.A lot.

Actually, the only people who hate furries are people who listen to Rush Limbaugh and people who can't come up with anything other than stale internet jokes from 1998. One would hope there's enough creative folks here to bring Uncyclopedia some higher quality humor instead of just trying to be another lame-ass Encyclopedia Dramatica ripoff, which totally fails to be funny at all. —Mad Anthony Wayne 06:21, 17 Jan 2006 (UTC)
Oscar Wilde loves to eat spats. Devil Bunny needs a ham. — Mad Anthony Wayne 23:54, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mad Anthony Wayne, when commanded by General George Washington to attack Stony Point, replied, "Give the order, sir, and I would storm Hell itself!"

Rawr! — Mad Anthony Wayne 03:12, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Smelly guy and Sibe removed, too close to being real content. (Sibe IS a furry, and I figure accuracy's a no-no) - ME2

edit Herma-nerma-nyerma-noo.

I was on Something Awful back when making fun of furries was THE THING to do. This article needs to be less accurate. And preferably nonsensical.

Yep... too much accuracy--Jake4d1 20:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was around then. Those Something Awfullans love us furries, for all the attention they give us. This is a tad accurate, but it's not really focusing too much on the "Disturbing" parts of the the fandom. I say we keep it. Besides, I'm not as easily offended as most furries. It is quite funny, actually.

edit Poorest Formatting Ever

This is probably the worst article I've ever seen.

It needs a good ol' cleanup by somebody who actually knows what the hell is going on.

But no one knows what the hell is going on.

This was from when someone reverted it by copying the diff. Owch. Semicolons everywhere. GreenReaper 01:58, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

edit Therianthropy

Someone should make an article on therians, since they can be just as funny, if not more so, than furries. Check out if you don't believe me.

edit title

This is rather useless but I just think I need to point out that this page, and the page on encylo[expletive deleted]ia dramatica are pretty much on par as far as accuracy goes, but the former is just hatefully inaccurate insipid, stupid and all in all not worth a velvet painting of a whale and a dolphin getting it on.Uncyclopedia can be inaccurate and a little hateful, but even furries find it funny. Just saying. Random Task 11:02, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I nod in extreme agreement. The furry onion one was better, anyway, tons better. Even though I've got quite the bias, being a furry and all, I don't really care either way (Hah, interaction out of me? What made you think I gave a single care?), but this is to uphold the sanctity of the collapsed boat of insanity we call Uncyclopedia. We don't want to become an unfunny Encyclopedia Dramatica clone (Because that very same website is the dryest well of humorless idiocy I've ever seen), we shall rise against. RaphaelFaunus 05:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed! --user.gif Efitu (TW@) 02:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Personal tools