Uncyclopedia:VFH
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Welcome to the Uncyclopedia Votes for Highlight page. To nominate an article, type the name into the box below and follow the directions.
- Vote for an article you find excellent.
- Previous featured articles can be found in the VFH archive.
- Voters: don't be dicks and do be constructive with criticism. Writers: Don't be prima donnas. Be open to criticism.
- Articles from all namespaces (including UnNews, UnTunes, HowTo, UnBooks, etc.) are eligible for VFH. Votes against articles based on namespace prejudice will be discarded.
- If a nomination disappears from this page, it is likely to be found in either the recently featured or recently failed nomination lists.
- If your article doesn't make it to the front page, don't despair. It may be eligible to be Quasi-featured so long as it meets certain criteria.
Any and all violators of policy will be thwacked over the head with a broom.
Nominate
Self-nomination regulation: self-nominated articles (i.e. you write an article and then decide to nominate it yourself) must receive at least one critique via Pee Review before nomination (or at spend a week on Pee Review if you can't get anyone to look at it). Articles nominated by people other than the author can still be nominated at any time and require no review (though it is still recommended).
VFH is not a discussion page. If you'd like constructive criticism for your article, please submit it to Uncyclopedia:Pee Review.
All nominated articles
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 2 people who are not holding anything.
|
| Nomination:
| MrN 00:45, Nov 17
|
For Votes: 4
|
- Nom+4 Recently created by Ptok-Bentoniczny. If you like cricket you might like this. If ya don't I'm hoping you still do. MrN
00:45, Nov 17
- For Well... I wrote and I really like it. I think it's enough reasons to vote for.
Ptok-BentonicznyTalk to the Pole 20:38, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
- Nice enough. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 02:04, 18 November 2009
- For. Damiinhō 18:45, November 20, 2009 (UTC)
- Zieew Pippo 20:52, November 20, 2009 (UTC) :)
|
Against Votes: 2
|
- Against. I do know who Michael Holding was and I am a fan of cricket. But doesn't mean I think this is really a VFH contender though. RomArtus (talk) 07:20, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. Didn't do much for my bat or balls.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 17:04, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
Abstain. You know, with all these articles on cricket, I really should put forth the effort to learn about it................. ... Nah. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Tuesday, 02:42, Nov 17 2009
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 8 reasons to hate men
|
| Nomination:
| 15Mickey20
|
For Votes: 8
|
- SNF. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 23:22, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
- Strong For. I absolutely love the footnotes. They make a funny article into a hilarious one. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Tuesday, 02:16, Nov 17 2009
- For. Reads a bit like a weird school essay submitted by someone who got the wrong end of the stick in life. A VFH contender all the same ! RomArtus (talk) 07:07, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Let's fucking do this! Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 13:02, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I thought it was featurable before I did an unofficial Pee Review; it's even better now. Plus I'm love with the Queen (please don't tell the Pope).
Father WHY??? (confessions) 17:00, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
- Yes. This is good stuff. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 02:03, 18 November 2009
- Fuck yeah. The extreme feminine POV is hilarious in this article! ---Pelargonium
(Talk)
- For. History in a vest. mattlobster. (hello) 16:59, November 20, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 0
|
No against votes
|
| Comments
|
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 7 things those Pisans have got nothing on
|
| Nomination:
| —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 18:46, 11 November 2009
|
For Votes: 9
|
- It's a Pile of Socks. Enormous Socks. Of Genoa. WOOO! —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 18:46, 11 November 2009
- Oh, what the hey. It's well-written, and brought many chuckles. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:58, Nov
- It's short, but it works. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
05:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Charming --monika 05:53, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I vote for anything. :) • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 15:36, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Self-for. I kind of like this one.
pillow talk 23:15, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I found this really, really stupid. But also well-written and funny.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 05:34, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Not pants. MrN
01:56, Nov 14
- For. As a general rule, enormous versions of every-day items are hilarious. -- Also, penis. 21:36, November 17, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 2
|
- Against. Starts off well and then seems to be in a hurry to finish. Therefore looks at best incomplete or half an idea not fully executed. RomArtus (talk) 17:58, November 15, 2009 (UTC)
Huh EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 21:53, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
| Comments
|
- Abstain. I really like what's there and I think the article is more than funny enough to warrant featuredom. However, I'm greedy and want more. I think there needs to be one more section (perhaps focusing on the response of the Pisans or technical specifications). Maybe you could also do some sock equivalent of those pictures where tourists hold up the Tower of Pisa. It would be a shame to feature it before it is as good as it could be. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 22:44, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 6 infectious diseases
|
| Nomination:
| I'mthedaddy 14:42, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
For Votes: 8
|
- For Because deporting all our religious maniacs to the US seems have worked out. --I'mthedaddy 14:42, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- For. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:02, 11 November 2009
- For. It makes history come alive, which is pretty messed up if you think about it. Sir Modusoperandi Brute! Boinc! 17:59, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Self For Because I'm vain like that. --Sog1970 18:24, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I loved this article so much that it is now covered with my own pee. IronLung 19:38, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Brilliant --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
05:39, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Quality Soggy Lesson in History (pay attention at the back !). RomArtus (talk) 07:08, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
Five EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 21:54, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
Against Votes: 2
|
- Against. After reading this again, I don't feel that this should be an FA. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Friday, 08:24, Nov 13 2009
- Against. I tried to like it. Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 12:23, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 5 times ze Jews looked at me funny
|
| Nomination:
| ~ 12:14, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
|
For Votes: 9
|
- NF - a wee bit of history from Master Operandi. Read, children, and smarten up. You're all uneducated rednecks. ~
12:14, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Ja. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 12:28, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For the part of history they never tell you. And give a listen to Mordillo's amusing audio. Sir Modusoperandi Brute! Boinc! 16:15, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For. El Sid, the lazy one • parlez-vous franglais? 10:24, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Yesh. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:04, 11 November 2009
- For. I really liked it. ChiefjusticeDS 20:00, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- For Can we change the top date from 2007 though? --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
05:42, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. -OptyC Sucks!
CUN20:41, 14 Nov
- For. This is news indeed. Uh...
er... 19:25, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 4
|
- Against. Didn't find it funny.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 21:46, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. It's a decent article, but not FA worthy in my opinion. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 18:34, Nov 11 2009
- Against. RomArtus (talk) 17:59, November 15, 2009 (UTC)
Against. EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 21:55, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 7.5 Aspiring Prince-Consorts
|
| Nomination:
| If you never took part in the DofE, shame on you. Here's what you could have won. Sog1970 09:23, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
|
For Votes: 8.5
|
- Self nom + for Because rescuing hypothermic halfwits on DofE expeditions makes my life complete. --Sog1970 09:23, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 14:43, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For El Sid, the lazy one • parlez-vous franglais? 10:27, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Yup. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:05, 11 November 2009
- For. See the PEE review. ChiefjusticeDS 22:29, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- For. The first person to win this award was the Duke of Edinburgh as he was a penniless Danish-Greek prince with his arse hanging out of his trousers when he married Princess Elizabeth of Windsor Great Park. RomArtus (talk) 07:11, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For I'm voting for the three lines of this I actually wrote. The rest is the rantings of a diseased mind. --I'mthedaddy 09:15, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 04:23, 14 Nov 2009
- Semi-for. I'm liking the idea, I'm sniggering at the references, but it does go on a bit. -- Guybles CUN 14:02, November 20, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 1
|
Teh fuck? EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 21:59, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
| Comments
|
- All British humour is over the Duke of Edinburgh's head. Which is why we all love him so dearly. --Sog1970 18:29, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 11 people who cannot remember seeing any of his films, but think he's awesome nonetheless.
|
| Nomination:
| ---Matfen815 13:03, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
For Votes: 13
|
- Nom + For Let's hope this one doesn't get completely raped like my last two nominated articles did. ---Matfen815 13:03, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I wasn't really expecting to enjoy an article about this guy, but it was certainly entertaining. SuperBario 18:56, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. It looks better. I change my vote. InMooseWeTrust 19:23, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I have seen Glengarry Glen Ross (and he was awesome in it) and he was also pretty good in The Cooler, which I have also seen. It should be noted that he was also seen in that movie with him and Sean Connery in a runaway submarine with the overactor from Rocky Horror Picture Show and the underactor from Jurassic Park or something. It should also be noted that he's a shitty actor (he's got two expressions: "pursed lips" and "squint". Sometimes, when he's really, really acting, he combines the two). Sir Modusoperandi Brute! Boinc! 21:18, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I thought that was Bill Pullman too. Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 08:07, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Looks about right. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:06, 11 November 2009
- Sure. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 18:16, Nov 11 2009
- For.Now a supporter after the changes made by the author. --RomArtus (talk). 19:43, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
98% Bless Liked most of it, but was turned off by that "All your awards are belong to Arec Baldwin" picture Che } 01:56,12November,2009
- For. Why not? • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 15:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- He was great in that one thing.--You know what the music means... Our time is up. 01:11, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
- For That user everyone thinks is great but no-one can remember what he wrote
- For. Didn't grab me straight away, but the middle to second half made up for it. ChiefjusticeDS 13:50, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 2
|
- Against. To me, this article seemed well written, but was trying to go in too many directions at once, and I didn't find it funny.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 21:42, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
Against. The Christopher Lee/Clone story doesn't improve this and could be dropped entirely without affecting the rest of the article (it has shades of randumbo for me) . It is also not quite focused enough to bring out the main joke(s) as regards Baldwin either. RomArtus (talk). 07:09, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
Ugh EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 22:02, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 9.5 real men
|
| Nomination:
| • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Monday, 07:02, Nov
|
For Votes: 11.5
|
- Self-Nom 'n' For. I wrote this for PLS but only got an honorable mention. So I got it reviewed and the Chief says it's good to go. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Monday, 07:02, Nov
- For. The title fits better now. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 12:32, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. InMooseWeTrust 17:40, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I think I said what needed saying already. It amused me. ChiefjusticeDS 22:30, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Using cliche's to add classical humor, and it's readible without being boring. 146.186.13.199 14:27, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
For. This is the sh*t my father pulled on me when I was young. 146.186.13.199 14:28, November 10, 2009 (UTC) Much as I appreciate it, you voted twice. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Tuesday, 19:30, Nov 10 2009
- KA-BLOOOOSH!!!!!! .
Father WHY??? (confessions) 20:57, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Fish! —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:08, 11 November 2009
- For. You're a giant whore. Where the Wild Colins Are - LET THE WILD RUMPUS START! 02:39, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I liked it. Jam Man 02:46, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Phwoar But you should have seen the prize that got away! Dr.
Eight, no nine. Shit. I lost count. EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 22:04, Sunday 15 November 2009
- Fucking Funny Made me laugh--
WILL YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 08:52, November 16, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 2
|
- Against. Didn't make me laugh, sorry. Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 12:31, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. It is a bit like an UnBook really. No fish for me today. RomArtus (talk). 19:40, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
Name change I changed the name of the article based on 3 users' opinions at User talk:Romartus. They said it fits better. So alright then. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Thursday, 15:11, Nov 12 2009
Abstain. Not in love with it. Don't dislike it, and it's written pretty well, but I didn't really get more than a smile or two. One suggestion: if it's going to be an UnBook now instead of HowTo, I would unbold the phrase "How to fish" in the intro. Also, I'm not a fan of including pics with "Stock Photo" written across them. Che } 23:04,14November,2009
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 7 turkeys
|
| Nomination:
| —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:10, 2 November 2009
|
For Votes: 10
|
- Nom+For. Something about turkeys. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:10, 2 November 2009
- Turkey. Nice food. Nice cantry. Nice wezar. Byramids! • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 15:34, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- For. This was nominated last year, I think, but ultimately wasn't featured because it wasn't nommed near Thanksgiving. But now it's all good! • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Monday, 21:36, Nov 2 2009
- For. I enjoyed it. ChiefjusticeDS 09:01, November 3, 2009 (UTC)
- For. RomArtus (talk). 07:30, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- For. This article's a turkey.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 19:26, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
- I don't want anybody else. When I think about you, I touch myself. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 01:26, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. It's fresher now.--
14:58, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. InMooseWeTrust 17:48, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. However the newly added links are a bit distracting for me. Or maybe I had too much coffee just now. *twitch**twitch* ☊ⱧⱧ
Ⱨ☊ 14:50, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
Against Votes: 3
|
Against. What the? This article isn't funny. It could be extremely offensive to many people, and it just doesn't have any pizzazz or sparkle or edge to it. So, NO. --Invincibleflamegruemaster 05:27, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
- reluctant against due to the alarming lack of links. if this isn't corrected soon, i'll do it myself, because this article is awesome. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 22:15, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Go for it.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 21:32, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Well, it looks like DrStrange already went ahead with it. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 07:08, 10 November 2009
- I even added advice to resist the temptation to run over small children with a shopping cart like an SUV.--
13:20, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
Against. EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 22:05, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
| Comments
|
|
[vote]
(feature) (remove)
| Vote
| Score: 6 swirling toiletbowls
|
| Nomination:
| —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:07, 2 November 2009
|
For Votes: 10
|
- Nom+For. A nice article by DrStrange. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 15:07, 2 November 2009
- For • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
• • 15:40, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Almost a little too sciency..but it leads to Star Crap...so understandable — H. Peebles - D - HS
00:40, November 3, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Underplayed humour but it works. RomArtus (talk). 08:10, November 3, 2009 (UTC)
- For. El Sid, the lazy one • parlez-vous franglais? 20:08, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I found it very well-written and uncyclopedic, but a little low on humour. Then I got sucked in at the end and found it very funny.
Father WHY??? (confessions) 19:20, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
- For. InMooseWeTrust 17:52, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- For. MrN
05:13, Nov 14
- For. The humor's in the curious validations of an absurd hypothesis.--
12:23, November 14, 2009 (UTC)
For. EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank) 22:06, Sunday 15 November 2009
|
Against Votes: 4
|
- Against. I never laughed. This is almost a Wikipedia article, it's so dry. The only attempts at jokes I could see were passing Godzilla references. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Monday, 21:31, Nov 2 2009
- Against. Just couldn't get into this one. It is vaguely amusing in places but, never seemed to get any better than that. ChiefjusticeDS 08:59, November 3, 2009 (UTC)
- against as per those other againsts. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 21:45, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. It's well written but not very funny. Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 08:36, November 18, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
- Comment: That was my first mainspace article so I went ahead and gussied it up a little this morning--
14:26, November 14, 2009 (UTC)
|
See also