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.
This does not count as an UnNews article, Nor does it count as an Uncyclopedia article. --NXWave 11:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete pl0x It's just not good enough.--Chobo66 17:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Comments
This article is too new (<7 days) - it should have been ICUed instead of VFDed (ICU now added). Nothing links to it, so there's no urgent need to get rid of it despite the fact that it's UnNews. I agree it's bad, but we have to give things time. And, while I'm being a complainy person, please don't add things to VFD when it's full - use the new Poopsmith's Lounge for that! -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 12:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Chobo66: It'd already been moved to userspace/{{ICU}}'d, so it's ineligible. –—Hv(talk) 13/07 17:54
Delete /me makes a mental note to search for all occurrences of the phrase "So-and-so is gay." to point out more potential rubbish. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 09:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Could be improved, but the titles of "Things you'll find in God's Ass" sections make it worth keeping. --Naughtius MaximusF@HWoof! MeowMUN 21:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Great idea, bad article. It's more unfunny ranting than anything else. Also, it's 2005cruft. --GeneralInsineratehymn 01:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
I wrote this a long time ago, so I guess I'm biased. I can remember thinking of the idea, which I still think is fairly funny, but my execution of it isn't that great. Maybe someone could rewrite it.—Sir Mandaliet♠CUNPSVFHGN(talk) 04:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Sometimes I think we must have got rid of all the crap by now. Then I see classics like this. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Yay! I had this on my private dung list. It puts the shpit in moshpit. ----OEJ 01:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that after I added it. I went to "What links here" and saw your userpage and thought: "No! Surely OEJ doesn't like this!" I was all ready to cross you off my list of nice people. :-) -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 09:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Somebody recently is leaving this article me in his will. Unfortunately I cannot claim this article myself and first needs all your credit card numbers. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 22:45, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 21:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Of course, the duplicate thing's not a problem by itself. But this isn't great anyway, so weak delete. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 21:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Hits all the dumb notes: shit, rape, and kiddie porn. ----OEJ 01:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete I feel sorry for people who are unattractive because they're sexist and aren't even funny. I hope for his sake he's rich, that's all. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 21:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep But only because stuff that's in userspaces is meant to be protected and I don't want to set any dangerous precedents. I will totally be looking the other way if some admin happens to erase things by an infinibanned user though. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 19:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep as per Sbu. Userspace is sacred, except to admins. But its definately exempt from VFD. Stick to mainspace guys. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.012:11, 13 July 2007
Keep - I don't see the point of deleting inoffensive userspace pages. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 03:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
It would set a bad precedent to delete a not shock/porn page from userspace, even if it is SU182's. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 03:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Retract nomination I only put this here because I already tried QVFD. I started to doubt myself immediately after nominating this, but I failed to act on those doubts. So there. Pentium5dot1 05:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete as nominator. I don't see why this exists. It is still locked as a year-old PLS submission (the process was presumably interrupted by SU182 being banned), and the real article is *almost* the same thing. Pentium5dot1 18:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete per "It's made by SU182". --GeneralInsineratehymn 20:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Has very little to do with the man himself, and is a rather lacklustre kind of random. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 11:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Something to do with a school, that leaves the rest of us in the dark. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 11:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete "What's your problem anyhow? What you looking at? This page too wordy for you?" Yes. Yes, that's my problem. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
2005cruft --GeneralInsineratehymn 23:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Not much to see, and no public restrooms. ----OEJ 00:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Everybody knows Shelbyville was founded by Shelbyville Manhatten, not drunken Welsh sailors. This is way too fact and figury also. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Extreme delete. Pretty intense and shitty vanity that slipped through the cracks --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 23:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Just quite bad. ----OEJ 00:39, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 23:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete One-good-line-cruft: "A rag of the white colour, is the most common sidearm of the French Army, for use when the standard-issue white flag has been lost/stolen/forgotten/eatenwhenthinkingitwasabaguette." -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 23:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Weak delete Because this rather pales into insignificance next to the subject itself, which is awesome. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep A fun little stub. And I do love autumn colours - I wish they'd come round and do this in summer too! -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 22:04, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Very weak keep its ok, there are far worse things out there to delete. Needs expanding though. And pictures. And proofreading.~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.005:59, 12 July 2007
Unless someone plans to fix soon, DeleteSirCs1987UOTM.t.c 03:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Put it out of its suffering. Delete--Chobo66 16:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. I like the idea of the spray trucks going round and colouring the leaves, but that's all. Chances are it'd never be improved... RabbiTechno 14:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Keeping this one, and adding it to my to-do list. I'll fix it up at some point in the near future. If I don't, feel free to harass me about it. SirFamine,Gun♣Petition»07/12 15:51
Keep The user who created it still works on it every day. its not done yet, so it still deserves the construction template. --GeneralAndMin.THEDUDEMAN 20:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete Ah, the old "substituted construction" gambit. Still looks tagged, but doesn't show up in the WIP category. --Alksub - VFHCMWARV {talk} 19:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't attempt to pull the wool over our eyes --GeneralInsineratehymn 21:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Maybe they are still working on it, but they'll have to stop at some point. And since it'll likely get deleted then (unless construction involves deleting most of what was written), we might as well delete it now to save them from wasting any more time on it. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 22:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete - if the author gives a shit and thinks they can turn this into a good article, then they should ask for it to be restored to their userspace. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 03:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. In some cases, it doesn't truly matter whether or not the article is being worked on but whether it looks like it's actually going to improve. And it doesn't. --SirIsaac 12:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
? You can't fix this.--Chobo66 16:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Beyond hope. But let them move to namespace before deleting. Sir Roger 23:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Comments
The reason? Unfunny sex references. --Alksub - VFHCMWARV {talk} 19:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I just put a message on the talk page, asking him to move the page. Give the guy some time to think my advice over before nuking it. --Ye Olde Luke 01:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete I've never seen anyone get quite so passionately ranty about a dead woman before. The only good line: "She is also known as cheapest woman in Lithuania and for that reason her portrait was placed on 1/3 lt bill." How cheap does that make the Queen? -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 01:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete RanDoM. Again, one line of goodness: "FOAF's slogan is "MUWAHAHA"." That is all. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 01:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep It's quite an original concept and well done, despite looking rather like it was made in five minutes! -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep The joke is there is no joke. --Alksub - VFHCMWARV {talk} 17:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. I had that very same conversation with myself, while I was on the toilet. Then I noticed that the roll of toilet paper was, in fact, just a roll of nothing, and forgot all about the whateveritis that we're talking about. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 19:03, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. I laughed more than I should have. --SirIsaac 19:55, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 02:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Sorry but either I don't get it, or there's nothing to get. Either way I'm voting delete. We can do better people. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.009:19, 11 July 2007
decent page, I vote to keep, what the hell is wrong with it?User:Froste21
Keep. It may be a little messy, but with appropriate cleanup it'll be awesome. Adzma 11:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. all really needs to be done, is take out the fucking long list of "facts" and quotes. everything else besides that is pretty humorous. not to mention, there needs to be an article about Big Boss.--TravisBatos 20:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Recently deleted [[1]]. Now recreated with exactly the same content. The Oblong Lobster 19:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. What's wrong with it? Memes out the yin-yang, seasoned with gamercruft and starry-eyed fanboyism, and sprinkled with misspellings, incoherence, and bad grammar. Other than that, it's pretty bad. ----OEJ 19:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
CVP, since it will come back otherwise. Plus whatever I said last time. Frankie! 20:25, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I did QVFD it yesterday explaning it was recreated but it wasn't deleted. The Oblong Lobster 19:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, QVFD's a bit temperamental at the moment - I've kind of extended my poopsmithery to tidying up over there too, but there's only so much you can do with relisting stuff. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Honestly, if everyone saw how many articles in the archives have been recreated - of course some of them may have been started anew, but I think there's little point in continuing to vote against stubborn writers. And if you block the page from ressurection, they just put it under a different name. There's little point in getting into a power struggle. If people are upset enough about deletion to put their articles on again, I'd leave them. At some point in the future they will probably get renommed, maybe when the person is no longer active on Uncyclopedia. Sir Roger 22:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep "Prostitutes of Victorian England were sometimes known to sport ‘arrows’ pointing toward their groins, shaved out of their chest hair to aid the intellectually impaired portion of their clientele with the act of doing ‘it’." Oh, I so hope that's true. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep My understanding is that the cookbook recipes are short anyway, and this one's not so bad. Sir Roger 20:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep Yes, we have loads of short cookbook thingumies, and this is not one of the worst. "While you are frying, slaughter the tribesfolk and scrape the delicate inner nostril and sinus flesh. Discard the remainder." I could just see Delia Smith doing it. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 00:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I hear you can't lose that - it just crawls after you, faster than you can walk. (BTW, check the orig version - IMO it's slightly better than the current.) SirFamine,Gun♣Petition»07/11 12:40
Template:BBS can go if this goes. Actually, it can probably go anyway, since this is the only non-redlink on it. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 19:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Chuck Norris should roundhouse kick this with Jack Bauer and Jackie Chan while fornicating with the Total Gym machine with Jenna Jameson and Brett Favre.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 15:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Crappiness incarnate. RabbiTechno 18:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep/Rewrite. I thought this was a pretty funny article when I started writing it. I guess it needs a rewrite or something. It's actually pretty good, but maybe I can convert the lists into sentences and paragraphs and add better jokes. This article is part of a series of Halloween movie articles, and without this article, it would be incomplete. PF4Eva, the King of ImaginationtalkContributions 19:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Weak Keep. For some reason, I found this concept, if not intentional, awesome. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 02:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete - I haven't de-vandalised it because it was slandanity against the person who vandalised it. Check the history if you like. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
And if anyone fancies a quick ban patrol through the IPs who contributed to it, that might be fun... -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Somewhere between Weak keep and Keep Again, I like. Am I just feeling too nice today? Somebody punch me to get me in a worse mood. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep This was one of the ones I meant on the forum topic - I like it muchly. Added a picture to help others like it too...? -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Article! Just Huff It™ - Sadly (for the article), your image failed to impress me SbU. Oh well, time to push it up against a wall. --CapercornFLAME!what?UNATOOWS 02:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete because it has no useful function. MaxMangel 14:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Also appears to be plaigarized. Sir Roger 01:25, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete I don't speak the newspeak. But even if I did I don't think I'd find much here. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep I dunno, it fills a niche. It's more random than random humour and less random than vandalism. Needs a prune and a watchful eye. Maybe I'll have a go later if anyone cares about this one! -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Comment. Why? AAAAAAAAA! was original for its time and displays a singular concept. This is just a random mash of words and pictures bordering on vandalism--TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 02:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep dammit. Though some individuals may not see it, a great deal of thought goes into this article, and the content is perfectly fitting of its name considering it to be an Uncyclopedia article. I do my bit to see that randomism and not vandalism is exhibited in this article, and it will be a shame and waste to see it go. And let's be realistic, people will come to create an article on a subject matter as important as random when they see there isn't one, and everyone knows deep in their hearts what an article named random is supposed to be like... --The Dit 08:32, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep I don't see what's wrong with this article, except that it could use some pruning. Some reasonable satire too. Sir Roger 01:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep Unless it's literally all the same as Hitler, there must be something in here you can salvage. Get rid of the repeated stuff and show me nothing's left and I'll rethink. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 01:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Hueg and worthless article. Most of it is just a copy/paste from the old Adolf Hitler article with the name changed, too. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:37, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Comment. I'm pretty sure it's an entire C/P. I tried to do some fixing, and 9/10ths of the images were broken, with the words "Hermann Zimmer" replacing "Hitler" or "Adolf". --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 01:51, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep For those who don't know, it's about Victoria Beckham, and I reckon it's just as good as if not better than her main article. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 12:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Not that bad, needs a pic though. How about one of Posh during entering the Earth's atmosphere? ----OEJ 13:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC) (added one ----OEJ 14:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC))
Keep, although it should still be expanded. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 15:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
2005cruft --GeneralInsineratehymn 07:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
ICUd once, not really improved that much. I would have deleted on sight but the article is six months old. -- HindleyiteConverse 12:17, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Really not really...you know...really...sort of...shit The Oblong Lobster 12:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Homer said it best: "I thought it was going to be fun and exiting, like that movie Spaceballs, but instead it was sad and depressing, like that movie Police Academy." -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 12:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep -- oddly enough, I kind of like it. Worthy topic for satire -- See this -- but article could use some tidying up. ----OEJ 13:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
2005cruft --GeneralInsineratehymn 07:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Merging Butlins with Pokemon? No ta. Some mildly funny bits though. I'll transwiki this to Illogicopedia. -- HindleyiteConverse 12:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep The recent pruning was just a quoticide. I did a major cleanup of some of the lists - there's actually a lot of good things in there, but it still needs more pruning of the non-list sections. Read it before passing judgement. Especially the bits that aren't the first big chunk of text. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 17:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, it still needs a major rewrite now. I think it'd be best to just delete and restart. --Dexter111344 18:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Except for the fact that unless you're very lucky, the person who chooses to restart will be a fanboy who writes something ten times worse. If someone really wants to write something much better than this, let them ask to delete what's here then. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 19:02, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Rewrite. Some tiny parts are worth keeping, such as the pictures of Zordon and the Pink Ranger. Could use better jokes, and some Super Sentai references. (Whoops, Forgot to sign my comment!) PF4Eva, the King of ImaginationtalkContributions 22:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete. This article was recently subject to a major 20,000 character pruning, but it still remains the listiest, unfunniest article I've ever seen. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 16:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Why is this a huge unfunny list? It really shouldn't be. --Dexter111344 16:46, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep in accordance to the Go Eat Shit Fuckers Law. --Dexter111344 18:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Kids these days, with their not eating 'shit fuckers'. Why, when I was a lad, we couldn't wait to run to the candy store after school to purchase and promptly tear open a package of 'shit fuckers'. I'm drooling just thinking about them. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 18:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep Because everyone else is voting keep and I don't want to look like I don't get it. I don't get it enough to be honest, but who does? The Oblong Lobster 19:37, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep. MO just made me hungry. –—Hv(talk) 2/07 19:39
Common sense tells me to say Delete. In-joke or not, this is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. --PhlegmLeoispotter* (garble! jank!) 19:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Here we go again! RabbiTechno 17:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Quick tip Yellow - don't nominate anything in the Uncyclopedia in-jokes category. I suppose every generation of n00bs have to learn this lesson for themselves, though, so I don't blame you for trying. -- (but) UntrueWhhhy?Whut?How?*Back from the dead* 18:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I, however, do. I'm plotting my revenge right now. Moo haha! SirModusoperandiBoinc! 18:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep This is used on user pages. I found the image kinda amusing on Pokémon personally, though the replacement is perhaps more intelligent. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.007:38, 02 July 2007
Comment Well, according to the rules, Pornographic/shock/gore images which are clear copyright violations and/or which serve little satirical purpose WILL be deleted without warning. I was merely trying to comply with that rule, as I don't find the image to be satirical whatsoever, and it's a pornographic image. --TV-VCRwatch 07:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Personally I didn't find it pornographic. There's some cartoon nipples. There's far worse around. ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.007:58, 02 July 2007
Keep. It's just a furry. I can't say whether or not it's appropriately used, as it's only used on userpages. Lastly, I'm well known for having cartoon nipples. One on each side. True story. But I digress. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 08:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep It's harmless. RabbiTechno 13:05, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Keep I don't like the image(mainly because of the fact that I hate Pokemon), but I don't see any reason to delete it, though. --Dexter111344 16:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete Um, no. --TV-VCRwatch 07:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Also, just a heads up, its generally against the rules to add more articles to VFD when its already over 15. :) ~ Dame Ceridwyn ~ talkDUNVoNSEarc2.007:38, 02 July 2007
I hate to look useful or anything, but what makes you think that adding that text has any usefull use at all? Instead of being useful, you just edit conflicted me while I was trying to clean out VFD. Shame on you. -- BrigadierGeneralSirZombiebaron 00:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}