From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
edit Older version was better
Is it just me, or do the newer versions of this page suck far more than the quasimdo jokes and shit that was here before 18.104.22.168 (Talk • ruinined all the
grounding breaking, revolutionary, superb and amazingly excellent 3/4 decent work of One-eyed Jack & company?
I'd revert it back to it's previous theme, (Last version I consider decent was by Pmurray@bigpond.com), but that's been tried once already now, and it got changed back into crap. I'd prefer to have enough
heavily inbred morons uncyclopedians asking to rid ourselves of this tripe, before I violate the ignorable policy that is the flamewar guidelines by doing a revert. --Xoid 08:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
My personal feeling here is that this list is --
- A. Not about Jennifer Aniston and consists only of a comparison between Jolie and Aniston
- B. Fanboyism: the list is mostly real material as seen through the eyes of a pussy-struck male.
(This male would most likely be 22.214.171.124, who added the comparison table on Jan 12th.)
I am strongly inclined to rewrite it with both actresses portrayed as 300-lb pro wrestlers with hair in unlikely places. However, in the interests of not starting a pointless edit war, I request you -- dear author -- to explain why the HELL we should let factual and unfunny fanboyism stand unamended. Please respond ASAP, with a buttered cinnamon roll included in your reply for Yers Truly has not had breakfast and is feeling a little cranky.----OEJ 17:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Hm. No reply. Oh well. This needs some funnying-up. Here it comes then.----OEJ 19:23, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
edit Dump the crap about Jolie
While it's obvious that someone has his/her/it's sexual fantasies wrapped up in a vain attempt to establish the worlds largest collection of Angelina Jolie's toe-jam, I really don't see the humour in this pathetic drivel.