This page is an archive. The contents have been moved from another page for reference purposes only, and should be preserved in their current form. Discussion or voting on this page is not current. Any additions you make will probably not be read. The current version of this page can be found at Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion.
Just because I didn't agree with you putting John Goodman all over everything doesn't make it suitable for deletion, does it? Crablogger 14:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete
Kerkill Ready for a new term? Slappycruft. It means it's Slappy Squirrel fancruft created to please one user. Plus, the user (using his IP) has reverted to the vanity version! --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 14:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Or move to userspace per my Slappy's Angels 5 vote comment. --UU - natter14:36, Jul 22
Crab, you are a sick son of a bitch. And I mean that in a bad way. Get help. Le Cejak•<15:35, 22 Jul 2008>
delete. regardless of any controversy, these articles bring nothing to the table and do not belong on uncyclopedia. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Just move all the slappycruft into his userspace. Easy. --SirDJ~Irreverent 14:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Move somewhere off-wiki. I think the bulk of Crablogger's contributions need a new home entirely. Really, this series of articles is like nothing I've ever seen. It's enormous - less than half of it is on VFD right now. The amount of material we have on Animaniacs' Slappy Squirrel rivals the volume of everything I've ever written. And it's not amateur or sloppy work - the prose and formatting are excellent, the articles are long and thorough. The thing is, I can't find any satire or jokes or humor in them. It appears to me that Crablogger could be a member of the furry community who has a fixation on Slappy Squirrel, given his contributions on WikiFur - this seems even more true given that the content of this endless series of Slappy articles is just a long stream of prose about cartoon characters getting naked and having sex. Am I honestly looking at some kind of furry porn right now? I mean, is that the joke - that a furry fetishist would write all this material? Or has a furry fetishist really come here and written all this material? At any rate, none of this fits on Uncyclopedia. It's just something other than comedy. I hate to just say "delete" on something so much work has gone into, but I think the dozen or more articles about the sexual habits of an Animaniacs character really have to be taken somewhere else. Any thoughts? pillow talk 14:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good. And while we're moving all of this off-wiki, let's pull out of Iraq, too. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 17:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Just because you hate this article yourself doesn't make it a candidate for deletion. Personal opinions don't make a good case for deletion. Crablogger 14:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
delete. regardless of any controversy, these articles bring nothing to the table and do not belong on uncyclopedia. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
So are you planning to move pretty much everything at Template:Slappy's Angels? Seems that right now half of it is in and half of it is out of userspace. Or maybe I should just calm down and give you some time to finish... pillow talk 14:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Or not, per Mordillo's recent comment... pillow talk 15:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Slappy's Angels 3
Keep
You're doing it again. If you think it is Slappycruft, then explain why Full Throttle and Slappy's Angels 5 were both given 5-star ratings from other users, and this one 4 stars. Crablogger 14:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Or move to userspace per my Slappy's Angels 5 vote comment (particularly the bit about article ratings). --UU - natter14:35, Jul 22
no no no, not even to userspace. Le Cejak•<15:35, 22 Jul 2008>
delete. regardless of any controversy, these articles bring nothing to the table and do not belong on uncyclopedia. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
REVERTED. See my remarks down there. ~ 15:04, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Slappy's Angels 4: The Quest for More Money
Keep
Yes, we know what it is. It's you abusing your power. Crablogger 14:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Dexter isn't "abusing power". He's taking a group of pages in front of the community for our opinion. No special power or privileges are involved; you could easily do the same. pillow talk 14:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Or move to userspace per my Slappy's Angels 5 vote comment. --UU - natter14:34, Jul 22
no no no, not even to userspace. Le Cejak•<15:35, 22 Jul 2008>
delete. regardless of any controversy, these articles bring nothing to the table and do not belong on uncyclopedia. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Slappy's Angels 5
Keep
Slappycruft that has a high rating among members. Crablogger 14:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Or move to userspace. OK, point 1: the ratings are very easy to rig, and there's no way of showing how many people have voted, so it could just be "has a high rating from you, the author". Point 2: see here - I agree with Gwax's basic sentiment, this doesn't really have a place here except for in your userspace, Crablogger, where you are welcome to move it if you want it kept. I, however, see no humour or satire, just a load of fancruft about something completely made up. Plus you keep putting yourself in these articles, which is vanity. All my votes on the other articles will refer to this vote, to save typing this out again. --UU - natter14:32, Jul 22
Out of curiosity, what does a move to userspace accomplish? Seems to me that userspace is more or less identical to mainspace except that the "Random page" button doesn't bring it up. I feel like this belongs on a different wiki altogether, if anywhere. Maybe, you know, Slappypedia. Wonder how hard it would be to set that up. pillow talk 14:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
no no no, not even to userspace. Le Cejak•<15:35, 22 Jul 2008>
delete. regardless of any controversy, these articles bring nothing to the table and do not belong on uncyclopedia. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:52, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
It may seem like vanity to you, but the idea was to be the reverse. Note how I keep using self-depreciating humour to make myself look like a complete and utter idiot. The idea was to be vain but to be self-hating. Crablogger 14:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, if this is a series of more than a dozen satire articles, where the target of the satire is your own fixation and how strange it is, that really does break the policy set forth at Uncyclopedia:Vanity Policies. The litmus test is "Might Codeine's Mum have heard of this group/individual/organization?" And there is no way that Codeine's Mum is aware that someone out there is... unusually interested in Slappy Squirrel as a sexual being. Also, does it really take more than ten long articles to take the piss out of someone who is unusually interested in Slappy Squirrel as a sexual being? If this is all a long, extended meta-joke - articles that exist to poke fun at their own existence - I'm having trouble seeing it. It seems like this was written for reasons other than making a bunch of people laugh. pillow talk 14:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me but since when exactly do we move mainspace articles into namespace BEFORE the vote has been completed?! You want those moved, you'll wait till the vote is done. Not a second before that. ~ 15:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Comment. I don't want to be the one to put the nail in the coffin, but I can't find any funny here. The author may want to read UN:BOLLOCKS. It's not very helpful but I think it's at least applicable. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 20:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Spife
Keep
Delete
delete. pointless, unfunny, essentially no edits since creation. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 13:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Religiouscruft. Plus, Chuck Norris at the end. "Buddha Replied with shooting lazers out of his mouth while screaming, 'SHOOOOP DA WHOOP!'" Buddha was black?(Had to say it.) --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 15:53, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. One of the easiest votes I've ever cast. --UU - natter14:45, Jul 22
Kerkill Took a few seconds to read so it clearly is too short. Plus, the lists aren't funny, and neither is the premise of the article itself. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 15:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Dull 2005cruft WP spork that's not linked, pointless, and unfunny as far as I can see. And not linked from anywhere. --UU - natter09:47, Jul 22
Nuke - Unfunny? This is horrific (Bonner) (Talk) Jul 22, 10:34
Delete. Not funny. Listy. Not linked to so not loved. Name-droppy. Did make me laugh, but only accidentally, by claiming Jim Carrey attained "diety" status. --UU - natter09:34, Jul 22
Delete. Yea, not great. MrNFork you! 10:30, Jul 22
Delete - The only thing I laughed at was the misspelling of the word Genesis (Bonner) (Talk) Jul 22, 10:47
Delete. One dull block o' text, and that's basically it. Didn't find anything in it that made me laugh. Yes, it's a real bike that has then same name as a type of poultry. Heh. --UU - natter08:58, Jul 22
Delete. UU is in a bad mood today. MrNFork you! 09:12, Jul 22
Delete. I ICU'd this back in April. The IP removed the tag and I didn't notice. Silly me. Anyway, this is name-droppy, random, and unfunny, so can we get rid? Also, no edits since April and it's only linked to from here, so it's unloved. --UU - natter08:49, Jul 22
Kerkill I'd say keep if it there were a God the Sexy Asian's/God of Half-White Latina's... But that ain't there. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 01:12, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Promatter
Keep
Delete
Delete 2 edits in 3 years? Time for this stub to go. MrNFork you! 22:18, Jul 21
Delete Not terrible, but there's practically nothing there, it does lose coherency at some point, and there's no point in keeping it alive. -RAHB 23:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill "his father didn't give a fuck about his death" Good, cause I don't care about this article. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 01:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Mak-Daddy
Keep
Keep Just enough of a vibe to get my keep. MrNFork you! 21:30, Jul 21
Delete
delete. it could be that this isn't funny to me because i don't enjoy rap music. more likely: it's shit. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 21:02, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Isn't funny even for those that do listen to rap music. Somehow funny for MrN... --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 01:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
Weak Delete I can see a decent concept in there, that's slightly developed. There's so much random in there though that I think it would be best to start over with the same idea. -RAHB 22:28, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Sword of the Kings: The Legend of the Man in the Yellow Hat
Delete Sounds like a basic pilot episode for a Justice-League type show. Which I guess is fine, except this is a humor wiki. -RAHB 22:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
George Washington Carver/Secret Peanut Uses
Keep
Delete
delete. immature, random. this one will make your head spin. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 03:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
I think I'm in a good mood today, because this made me smile. Maybe it's 'cause I know a bit about the stuffs that went down, what with the Bakumatsu and the Restoration n' all that. Anyways, yeah. - P.M., WotM, & GUN,Sir Led Balloon(Tick Tock)(Contribs) 18:06, Jul 19
Very weak keep per TLB. I think this is marginally better than having no article here at all. pillow talk 20:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete
Delete I read it a few times... Na. We don't want this stub. MrNFork you! 16:56, Jul 19
keep. even as i'm typing this i'm still laughing at 'Frisk the Indigent Shopper'. tag this one 'short' or somesuch. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 02:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Keep Per Hyperbole's abstain. Can someone show me what a good football article should look like? --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 21:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Really weak keep. I dunno, some of it's kind of amusing to me. And I don't even know anything about football! --Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 00:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Meh Per RDB, except I do know a thing or two about football. -RAHB 08:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Maybe I'm still bitter that they took away the one chance the Falcons ever had at winning the Superbowl all the way back in 1998. Oh well. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 00:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. It looks like a passable article until you read it. MrNFork you! 00:01, Jul 19
delete. one of those articles where you know it's coming, and then...*BAM!!* there's a list at the end! --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 02:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Abstain. For all I know about football, this could be witty, biting satire. Hell, for all I know about football, it could all be true. pillow talk 16:58, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Generally things with Captain Cum Back in them are not biting satire... --SirDJ~Irreverent 06:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
I know plenty about football. This seems to be about a completely different sport! ;-) --UU - natter09:17, Jul 19
I think this thing they are talking about is a bit like rugby but with crash helmets so that you don't get hurt UU... MrNFork you! 15:32, Jul 19
MrN, soccer in America is football in the rest of the world. Football in America is like British rugby. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 01:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
If anyone can point out where the funny is, I'm happy to vote keep, but I can't see any. Harry Potter is for kids anyway. Not like LOTR (obviously) MrNFork you! 12:42, Jul 17
Kerkill Shit about some band James Blunt made. It features stupidity and horrible, idiotic lists, as well. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 02:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete It's been vandalised a bit, but that probably improved it. MrNFork you! 02:52, Jul 19
Meh The problem is the good lines in it have been used. Several times. On every band article we've ever had. We don't need another page to perpetuate the jokes, masquerading as original content. -RAHB 08:23, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
It has a few good lines ("The word "Shikari" is Indian for "An appropriate band name, please". and "Enter Shikari are a British-slash-Indian-hunter band founded by James Blunt and who specialize in the musical genre of ... ah ... what's screamo, emo, electronic, rock and post-hardcore put together? Scremectrockore? That'll do. No one cares anyway." made me snigger) but most of it is listcruft. Still it would be sad to lose a band article with at least some good lines. --SirDJ~Irreverent 07:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Substitute
Keep
Delete
Delete Whatever this is, it's no substitute for humour. MrNFork you! 02:08, Jul 19
Delete Survived a vote back in 2006 which was the last time it was edited since it was created in 2005. It would never be allowed these days, and it's time it went. MrNFork you! 00:50, Jul 19
I don't see how you could have thought Dexter was even referring to you, man. You're clearly not the guy who's been "recreating it all." now........right? --Hi, hey! I'M A MOTERFUCKING NIGGER BITCH LOVER 01:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
I was referring to MrN... dang adults, I would have gotten away with it to! /shakes fist --SirDJ~Irreverent 01:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Damn it. First I try to fix Rock lobster, and then I discover that Lobster is a mess and I have to fix that too, and now I find Crustacean totally unredeemable. What is it about shellfish that makes editors write so fucking badly??! pillow talk 19:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
This article goes in so many different directions, and none of them are good. Has one editor, and hasn't been touched since '06. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 17:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Not good. Although an article about Pontius Pilates could actually be pretty hilarious. Actually, I think I have to go write that. pillow talk 19:31, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I agree. It's sitting in the requested articles section right now. Do it. Do It. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 20:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Comment. I don't want to be the one to put the nail in the coffin, but I can't find any funny here. The author may want to read 
Delete.--
The sheep choir of Pakistan
Abstain. It's not that bad, but not good. 
