Uncyclopedia:Red links are not bad

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 16:13, February 5, 2011 by Thekillerfroggy (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
This is an essay. It is not an ignorable policy on Uncyclopedia, so you should ignore it even more and disregard the mad ramblings of its writer. Or you could submit it as an Uncycloversity assignment in lieu of actually doing any work.


Seriously, they're not. We need red links because we need more articles, important ones like Robert Kennedy or Glasnost. Even the stupidest, most outlandish red links can inspire an author, just read Codeine is a fat cunt for an example of this. Even though it is terrible (and it is), it was inspired by a red link, like hundreds of other (poor) quality articles around these parts.

Red links aren't ugly, they're useful. Disregarding their use, they still aren't ugly! They're pretty like the red rose, or a swath of blood, or the star Betelgeuse. Aaaaahhhhh. Red links. Beauty.

See Also


Bloink1 solid
This article needs to be expanded.
This article is a stub. The article submitter may also have been pouring boiling hot water down his trousers . You can help Uncyclopedia by drying his pants.
Personal tools
projects