Talk:The Lord of the Rings
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
This ain't so great. The video at the start is perfect, but pretty much everything else is just random rapper-gay-Jesus-Hitler-Oprah-cow trash. --Imp88 02:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed most of the red links. Yay! - 333pet01:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
This article is horrible! It makes fun of Lord of the Rings and tries to make people think it's bad! I hope an angry mob of LOTR fans storms the Uncyclopedia headquarters with torches and pitchforkes and burns it to the ground (with Frankenstein Monster inside, of course) Beezwax 03:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
How dare you! God's just an omnipotent deity. Lord of the Rings is practically a religion!
This article was great it was very entertaining and made me chuckle
The LOTR trilogy are my favourite movies, but I still laugh when I read this article.
This article makes me want to cry. Saying characters from LOTR are secretly gay is only funny once, and even then it's not that funny. There is no need to repeat the same unfunny trash throughout, there are entire sections in this article that are 'This character is gay. This character has had bum sex.'. Wow, must've stayed up all night thinking up those jokes!
I leave this article now, never to return.
I am a man of few words. This article sucks!
The article is rubbish and needs a lot of work still. The One-does-not-simply-walk-into-Morder is better than the rest of the article; this is a problem. 18.104.22.168 16:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I have nothing to say. In fact, why did i even edit this? heck, LOTR is a great trilogy and i dont see why anyone should be making fun of it. u shouldnt even be making fun of LOTR at all anyways. if u cant say anything nice, dont say anything at all
The two large images midway down the page need to be shrunk, I'd do it myself if I knew how. --Lieutenant Fish 17:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
- Hey genius, those images were just fine and pretty funny the way they were, it looks terrible now. it cracked me right up the first time I saw them:D
Roman Dog Bird
RE: (cur) (last) 21:17, 19 April 2009 Roman Dog Bird (Talk | contribs) (13,909 bytes) (ENOUGH. This page is absolutely atrocious, and I am trying to make it look a little palatable. Yes, I removed over half of the content. Every bit of it was horrible. Get it?) (undo)
Roman, just cuz you dont like something it doesnt mean taht it's not in a good shape. You need to take a chill pill and quit changing pages that are really not in need or a "SteamRoller" and insisting that they do, only because you dont like them for one reason or the other... The fact of the matter is, that as it stands, The Average USER RATING for this page 4.5 which is damn near perfect. So quit being so gun happy with your damnned "Steamroller" 'cuz by the looks of it, people have spoken (check user rating for this page), and you need to take a chill pill and take off your "Steamroller". You are NOT the people!
- You're seriously basing your opinion on that silly user rating thing? That's a load of shit. No, seriously, try to explain to me why any of those quotes, or lists, or any of that shit that I removed was funny in any way. You yourself tell me what was so God damn funny about any of that. Thank you (or perhaps, fuck you, what the hell do you know, I've been here for two god damn years and know what I'm doing. God, I thought I would never have to say something like that, but you my friend have finally made me crack). -- Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 04:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Hey asshole, you don't need to get hostile bitch... Two can play that fuckface you hear? and by the way shove that Steam-roller up your arsehole, where it belongs you whore! Goddamn idiots everywhere I tell you...
- You didn't tell me what was so god damn funny about any of the stuff that I removed, you chode smoking queer. Chuck Norris? Mr. T? Clearly, you are the idiot. They certainly ARE everywhere, yes (I am not denying my own stupidity either, by the way), but don't think you're anywhere above them. Now, give me a concise, clear reason why I should keep all of that stuff. Go ahead. Get to it. -- Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 19:18, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- hey i agree i do that sort of a deal all the time, cleaning up stuff taht really dont belong on an article. But if you cleaned up the stuff, which I'm sure you rightly did, then there is no need to still have the steamroller on top of the page. That is ALL i'm saying. You say you moved stuff on chuck norris and Mr. T, well thats great, i would have done the same. But now that it's removed, then it's all good, and the steam roller does not need to be taking up space on top of the page! :P
What say you?
- Yeah, that is a little too much actually. I'd like to see the article re-written to an extent, but a hard (stemroller) re-write tag isn't necessary for this. I was going to take it off, but it kind of slipped my mind. Thanks for bringing that up. So, can we be cool now? I'm sorry about all of that before, I was just in a pretty rotten mood, and.......yeah, so......(immadink) -- Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 19:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- You got it! :D
Overprotective much? --Matfen815 19:43, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
Taking the hobbits to isengard
Should be an article on Legolas and the Youtube video, They're Taking the Hobbits to isengard.--22.214.171.124 23:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC) just an opinion.