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.
Delete I'm not sure if the term "Frog Bashing" is another word for "racism", but that was what this article was from start to finish. First to the French, now to all of Africa. Conniving 13:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Bash --Kip > Talk•Works•• 14:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete How very strange that the concept of the article changes three (count 'em, three) times. Not only that, but it uses run-on sentences which is bad (omg) and seems to lack basic grammar skills this thing deserves to die.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 14:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Nyamos usually live up to OVER 9000 years! Yeah, but where's the WOW factor? -- Le Cejak•<-> 01:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Well, "15 pages" is subjective. -- Le Cejak•<-> 01:03, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
If you'd checked the history, you'd have found it was ICUable, and I put the template back that was unjustly removed by the author. Secondly, 15 pages is 15 pages. –SirSkullthumper,MD(criticize•writings•formspring) 01:05 Oct 07, 2007
Oooh, it was made just this morning! I found it by looking at a template on QVFD. neevermiind... Le Cejak•<-> 01:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep - I still think this has a purpose. Also, I do not particularly want to remove this from hundreds of pages. I don't think there is a good reason why this should be deleted. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 07:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep --Kip > Talk•Works•• 14:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Switched vote not nominating it anymore, sorry Cajek. Dossier 14:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Looks very useful. Conniving 16:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. A little unnecessary... is it just me, or does this Dossier guy seem to have it out for Cajek? --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 01:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Per TKF. Maybe Dossier has prejudice for Cajek, but this template, just this one, must go--SirManforman 01:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I kinda use this a hell of a lot. Also, I already have reasons ON the damn template why this is better. Please don't delete it, guys. -- Le Cejak•<-> 01:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Nah. I read it. It's pointless. People don't care if a color's randomized through names or hexadecimal digits. Stick to Spang's template. –SirSkullthumper,MD(criticize•writings•formspring) 01:10 Oct 07, 2007
Okay, I need to edit a few things here and there... Le Cejak•<-> 01:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I could save you the trouble. I've been itching for a good purge as of late. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 01:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
haha, go for it dude! Le Cejak•<-> 01:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thank you Modus, but it's only a trick of the eye. The template is only used on other templates which are on lots of pages. ...I think... Le Cejak•<-> 01:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
uh, okay, I switched my vote... Le Cejak•<-> 14:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I switched my vote too, I just now realize what I've been doing to Cajek. Dossier 14:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Looking at it again, maybe this IS a useful template. Dossier 20:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Maybe Somehow I think this can't be VFDed as I think this may be a in joke. I'll ask Famine the creator of this article about it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep on the grounds that this is the work of Famine. --GeneralInsineratehymn 01:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that should influence anyone's decision to keep an article. Conniving 20:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep and heavily revise; project namespace. (Though if it is deleted, redirect it to Uncyclopedia:Administrators or whatever that page is.) —Hinoatalk.kun 02:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep (without merge) I think someone's just going to make this again either way. The first sentence got me, they slow down the site and stuff when they actually keep it moving (maybe they stop it from going so fast that it actually crashes). Of course, something like this would need the help of actual bureaucrats that can laugh at what they write about themselves. Conniving 20:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep As per TKF. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 22:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Just merge it with UN:ADMIN. OneCoolKid 20:58, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Conniving's rewrite saved the day--SirManforman 21:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
It's been rewrote...rewrotted...rewrotten...typed, so keep. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 00:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Good shout from Conniving. This has definitely left the VFD station. The Oblong Lobster 17:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Nom & Delete. Crap. This is the type of crap I'd QVFD, but it would leave a nasty red link on the list of admins. They should get rid of the link on that page if it is deleted SirManforman 00:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete, or, rather, redirect to The Bureaucracy Channel. That keeps the redlinks from buzzing around pesting admins. ----OEJ 00:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete, as OEJ. What? Stop staring at me. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 00:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Query What's confusing? Tell me, I could possibly improve that portion. Conniving 22:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Well, TBC is a good dam' ardickle, Modus, and deserved the attention. We're not staring at you, we're staring with you. ----OEJ 01:12, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, praise from Caesar. That's like pennies from heaven, except that it's praise instead of pennies. Also Caesar instead of heaven. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 02:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment I didn't realize Famine wrote this article. I still don't see the need for this to be kept, checking the history, and it's nearly a year old. Also, in the page history, Famine said uh, this page didn't exist. I feel guilty hitting save, this sucks so badly. But hockey is on, so I'm not 100% sure he would mind. Anyways, I'm not so sure what to think anymore--SirManforman 22:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment I think the article could be improved with help from actual Uncyclopedia Bureaucrats. Any that are willing to take my interview would be great. I left a message on several of their talk pages. Conniving 18:52, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment - You probably wouldn't need an interview with burea's, all they do is user rights, though it's a good thing you're rewriting--SirManforman 18:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment I know, it's not needed, but I just get the feeling i'm on to something with this. Conniving 18:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Strong Comment. Looks like it's been expanded. All you "Deletes", reconsiderin' time! --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 21:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Ah, thank you. For a second, I feared Manforman was the only one watching the page. Conniving 21:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
You might want to re-upload that first image. It seems to have taken a beating from the image crash. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 01:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering if anyone else noticed that. I'll go do that now. Conniving 01:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Since it's so short, having one thing that made me smile is sufficient. The line about Prince is gold, Jerry, gold!-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep, as it is part of a series. The Keyboard template does NOT deserve red links. Conniving 03:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Nom & Delete. short stupid non needed stubSirManforman 23:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete I suppose. Awfully short and silly. ----OEJ 00:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. I know it's in a series, but if that series is to be kept, it should have some redeeming qualities, and I see none here. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 11:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete I'm really lost with this series keep thing. This article is bad, there's no point looking further than that. The Oblong Lobster 02:39, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
The problem with deleting articles which appear on a template -- like the keyboard template -- is that the reason for the template to exist gradually erodes. If the keyboard template is riddled with redlinks, it seems silly to have it at all. ----OEJ 00:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Having redlinks on such templates is a good way to get someone reading a similar article to notice it and have a go at writing it themselves (I count 2 or 3 redlinks on the keyboard template out of over 100). Deleting the template spoils the series, and the other option is to combine them all into one page, which would be rather messy for anyone trying to actually read it, though might appeal to those attempting to "un-clutter" the wiki. There isn't a lot of content on each individual page, but that's because it's really a whole series about the keyboard keys strung over 100 or so pages. Nobody's expecting a feature here. •Spang•☃•talk• 09:48, 05 Oct 2007
IDEA - I don't know if it was mentioned but why don't you put them all on one page and redirect the others to a section of the page? -- 18:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Concurrence. We did that with all those "Secretary" pages and it worked fine. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 20:14, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Someone tagged this article for deletion as part of Vigilante Week. Everyone I've shown it to thinks it's hilarious. Maybe I'm biased -- I am a music nerd and I wrote it -- but I say KEEP! The Realms of Gold 21:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep and Speedy Close per above -- Don't need to say more as there was no nom amd delete reason. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 05:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep, although it isn't my cup of tea. This is. Well, it's less of a cup than a can, and it's less tea than beer. But other than that it's exactly the same. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 00:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Comments
Umm, no delete votes? Who nommed this? By the way, it's not Vigilante Week. It's Vigilance week. JediBobThings I've saidThings I've done 02:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete Lies! Utter lies! Axe (Lynx) does not make women want to have snu snu (?) with you. All it does is make my olfactory senses want to commit suicide every day. This article deserves death!-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
LAZOR I'm sorry, but incredibly stupid puns pretending to be Star Wars names aren't funny. JediBobThings I've saidThings I've done 02:25, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete Perhaps it's just me and my pesky "last lingering thread of sanity" but I think that incoherent doesn't begin to describe that garbage.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
In 2007, Mitch 1 2 tried to eat "Rob Reiner"--SirManforman 17:25, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. The page is dumb and short, but that "castle" line straddles the line bewteen madness and insanity. I'm stealing it and putting on my userpage. An egg this crazy will, no doubt, hatch someday. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 21:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Who? When you have to ask yourself that question, and it's not funny, then there's a problem. And I doubt any amount of Wikipedia-ing will make this funny.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Don't see what's wrong here. And don't forget to tag articles you put on VFD with the {{VFD}} template. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Big fat keep, in fact. This is funny. And the picture of the bears shooting a cannon at unicorns is great. (Whoops -- the bears probably appeared in Bears vs. Unicorns Conflict first, so it's...well, not plagiarism, but something.) ----OEJ 00:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. I peed and enjoyed this. I see no reason at all this should be here. Did you read it at all? --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 10:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
KEPT. you know... sign language for Unicorn looks a lot like you're calling someone a dickhead -- Prof. OliproKUN(W)AnchorOpBur. (Harass) 01:45, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Nom & Delete. Hidden F Series Page, nothing but a short stub with very few jokes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. "...all the keyboards that had them were impounded by an army of three eyed fish" is the epitome of randumb. ----OEJ 00:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Have Jason murder it. Get it? F13: Friday the Thirteenth? Oh, you people suck. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 21:45, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete As much a fan I am of mocking Ko<backwards R>n, this thing is, like, the epitome of bad. Worst F page I've seen ever.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments
DELETED F13 - it doesn't exist, but you can edit there -- Prof. OliproKUN(W)AnchorOpBur. (Harass) 01:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete Unfortunately, this one does not share the ingenuity and untapped potential and all-around worth of the other F articles that I've voted keep on. Just because it's a series doesn't mean it's OK to leave a crappy article here.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Sigh. Not very good, not very long, but has two good jokes in it: F8==fate and Unsafe Mode. Most of the keyboard series are short, and this one fits the (unfortunate) mold.----OEJ 00:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep - LMAO, why in the world do you hate this one Manforman? —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep It's an original concept, at least. Well, maybe not original in the sense of the term you've come to believe, but it's got the most potential of the Fs listed here.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Nom & Delete. Another crappy FSirManforman 23:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep Rewrite if you will, but a template like the keyboard template shouldn't have redlinks. JediBobThings I've saidThings I've done 02:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Nom & Delete. SirManforman 22:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete Makes as much sense as the Bible The Oblong Lobster 22:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete Unless improvement takes place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Nom & Delete. I don't know what language it is written in, but it is certaintly a language I don't understand. Also, it overusers the term F2SirManforman 22:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Alt+F4 This Too many red links and it doesn't make sense having a multilingual article here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
keep damnit* It's funny. They make fun of the lyrics. Knowig what the lyrics are helps the humor =__= Lord Gneo 05:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Killplzkthx. I can't believe I read all this. 75% of it is made-up lyrics about sucking cock, and the other 25% is name-dropping random nonsense. –SirSkullthumper,MD(criticize•writings•formspring) 20:30 Oct 04, 2007
Sugar, were going down. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 21:42, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete When I see those poorly-done parodies of Fall-Out Boy lyricism (or lack thereof), it saddens me. Such a good chance at parody, wasted.-SirLjlego, GUNVFHFIYCWotMSGWHotMPWotMAotMEGAEDMANotM+ (Talk) 22:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Nom & Delete. I'm not entirely sure what to do about this one, even though it's a stub it has about one or two good stuff in there. Unless someone's offering to fix this article, I'll keep my vote. Narf, the Wonder Puppy/I support Global Warming and I'm 100% proud of it! 22:48, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Can you have any more pictures from the Public Humor Domain? --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 20:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. As per Dr. Skullthumper and TheKillerFroggy. ----OEJ 01:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Nom & Delete. Pretty poor if you ask me (Bonner) (Talk) Oct 4, 16:48
Delete. Bad. Capitalization is scattered randomly throughout. The subject is either Europe and northern Africa or something "near Bejing" -- apparently the author doesn't know. Sheesh. ----OEJ 17:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Suggestions: what is "breg", if not a misspelling of bread? And "breg force 13" is, as far as this reader is concerned, completely undefined. The problem with using undefined made-up things is that the reader sees them as nonsense...that's why I characterized MWJ as incoherent. It does not make sense even internally. "It lead to the discovery of the magical land of Winkle and its various subordinate clauses" is ungrammatical and needs fixed. The image...geez. It's embarrassing. At least someone should photoshop a finger and some sort of monster instead of using a really poor-quality paint-mash. ----OEJ 19:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh god, it mentions the subject of one of my all-time worst articles...and doesn't even link to it. The shame, the burning shame...oh, wait, that burning is just herpes. Never mind. ----OEJ 00:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Unless I missed something, and I don't think I have, this is random rubbish. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 14:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Cliché fanboi cruft: a sludge-metal musician touted as "creator of the heavens" as usual. Somebody likes a band member; fine, but not a rationale for an article. ----OEJ 14:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
George Bush playing the Kitten brings silly and terrible thoughts to my brain TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 02:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. I can't tell if this is vanity or parody, but either way it's unformatted and unreadable shit. TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 02:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Need paragraphs, consistent tense (some is in past tense, some in present tense), and some sort of reason for being. ----OEJ 14:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. If it is parody, it's very subtle. Basically, it's a mess, and all but unreadable. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 15:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Strong Keep. Since when was having one or two red links a reason to delete? --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:05, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep for historical significance. --GeneralInsineratehymn 00:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep - Err, you may not have noticed this, but this is actually a pretty good article. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 05:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Fairly good parody of vanity kruft. --THE 21:56, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete. Has No Potential. The style and format it is written is bad, and it sucks, red links as well SirManforman 23:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete - Another Lame State. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Comment - that and the POV the article is written on, it's a vanity like POV, bad--SirManforman 00:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Or maybe it's just satire. I have an idea, why don't you VFD Mr. Kearsy, too? That's total vanitycruft. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Because it was featured, that's why. While other articles may be total vanitycruft, this one just doesn't do it for me. --SirManforman 00:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment - If it is kept, it should be renamed (i.e. Visiting Uncle Frank in Delaware) and there should be an actual article on the state --SirManforman 00:59, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Comment - If someone writes a better article on the state, I'd be happy with that. However, the title should stay the same for now. It's a tradition that we have some non-uncyclopedic articles. Uncyclopedia would be very boring without them. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 05:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Agree with Cs1987 in this case. Traditional encyclopedia POV is objective, neutral, and conservatively voiced. A parodic inversion might be subjective, first-person, and peculiarly voiced. You can look at the article to hand that way: as a satirical inversion of all that traditional encyclopedia stylists would hold dear. Or you can look at it as a cheerful romp. Either way it's not bad. ----OEJ 16:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. But needs editing for capitalization and such. ----OEJ 15:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Weak Keep - pretty good compared to the rest of the states series. I liked it overall, but some of the lists could be removed--SirManforman 23:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Nom and Delete - Another Miserable State Article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 02:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Nom and Delete. Red links, only 2 stupid pics, stupid SirManforman 22:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete State Article, Is it possible to list all of the states at once so we can get this over with? —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. It's well known that people in Nebraska don't have computers, so this is the sole exception to the State Rule. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 02:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
They deserve better than this. I'm V-tagging it, and fully intend to put some spadework in to help it out. It won't end up a masterpiece, but hopefully I can make it acceptable. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 09:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete - Weird and unfunny. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 05:10, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Uncertain vote - U-shirt is a lot worse than this article, so I'm tagging that with {{V}}. Consider merging T-shirt to Shirt. Pentium5dot1 04:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Agrees with the merge. 02:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Must Keep - A four year old's reference to tell on the five year old that said "I go to Uncyclopedia" because it is definitely only for 6 year olds and up! -- 00:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Nom and Delete - Good idea, poor execution (Bonner) (Talk) Oct 2, 15:56
Nom and Delete - Another random Jesus. I peed this a while back, since when there's been no improvement. It's unfunny and should go. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 09:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
What? - Read the article and tell me it should be deleted... -- 00:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Barleywood indeed! This is not a bad article for the most part; it is well-developed, and "after years of being mocked and ignored" Kansas deserves it. ----OEJ 12:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
It's relevant, nonrandom and funny in some parts. Plus, the people who voted to delete this are all users who very rarely vote keep, and not one of them gave a reason why it should be deleted. No way in hell am I going to delete this. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 02:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't Kill! - It has facts, but not ones approved by the English professionals. KEEP! -- 23:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Fuck you --Kip > Talk•Works•• 13:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete - Page is too factual, doesn't seem funny, and doesn't seem to fit here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete - I support deletion, but consider a redirect to Fuck. There is nothing worth merging. Pentium5dot1 00:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
No, fuck you! --GeneralInsineratehymn 01:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Quite possibly the least connected article of all time. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 22:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Gibberish --GeneralInsineratehymn 01:54, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Nom & Delete - Unfunny listy crap (Bonner) (Talk) Oct 1, 16:07
Delete --GeneralInsineratehymn 02:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. This was tried before and let off. Better luck this time? I don't see the funny that others found. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 08:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Yeah, badly written unfunny rubbish. Point the author at the Halo wiki and let them have fun! --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 08:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete A pathetic shade of patheric. The Oblong Lobster 21:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete This is not as funny as the other in-jokes, although I admit I'm really not that experienced as an Uncyclopedian. Can anyone think of a merge or redirect target? Pentium5dot1 21:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete - Can you tell me what the point of this article is? There isn't much content. (Or was it already deleted and someone brought it back?) -- 23:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete. I still don't like it, even if it does have a certain sentimental value in being one of the first articles I ever VFD'd. RabbiTechno 18:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep - Why get rid of the states? There is some humor. (British Translation: There is humour to a slight degree.) -- 19:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
*Strong Keep - WTH this is funny why delete it. Are you tring to delete all states, If you are I dare you to go after Kansas —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete - After thinking about it. I think it should go —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Now sithee lad, this needs 'elp in t' form o' a re-write, but it 'as its moments. By 'eck. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 12:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete--SirManforman 14:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Weak Huff - The following comment is true -> It is a little funny, but they're too many contradictions in the article. <- This comment is false. —The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
