From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

11-Wide (history, logs)

Article: 11-Wide

Score: 10 useless plays

Nominated by: IronLung 02:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
For: 12
  1. Symbol for vote Nom & for. The ultimate tactical formation! IronLung 02:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. Sure And Kansas City Washington will never be the same again. -RAHB 04:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  3. For. One of the better sports articles MafiaHatBlack.gif Mr. Lavrenti "Digits" Hex 04:33, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  4. For. An old PLS goodie. Necropaxx (T) {~} 15:53, Apr 20
  5. For. Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:01, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  6. Very strong for. I didn't realize this wasn't already featured. My brother-in-law cracked up reading this one. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 17:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  7. For. I went ahead and did a little tidying of the language this morning and will blue-link later. I'm on board now.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  18:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  8. soitenly. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 19:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  9. Extreme For Funny = Win. Just as, Using the 11-Wide = Win. Woody On Fire! Wood burningTalking Woody Stalking Woody 06:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  10. Symbol for vote For. Nice article. Zeitgeist 14:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
  11. For. I'm not a fan of the sport. But I get what the article is about - it doesn't take much effort - and found it funny. Plus, most of the misgivings I had about it in last year's PLS have been recently addressed, making it a very good article. --UU - natter UU Manhole 10:02, Apr 29
  12. Symbol for vote For.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:17, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Against: 2
  1. Against. I really like the idea, but there's too much wrong with this. No links, the tone is inconsistent, and the 11-wide formation is clearly a punt-block defense. If this is fixed up then it's got my vote for sure, but as it stands now no way. —Sir Guildensternenstein 18:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  2. Against. I just didn't lol, sorry RAHB. -OptyC Sucks! Icons-flag-us CUN14:35, 29 Apr

Comment. The 11-wide image has got to be replaced with a chop showing that formation facing a defense and not an obvious offensive unit.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  04:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I was hoping no one would notice that... -RAHB 06:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Could always use a caption instead e.g. "....while a confused defence attempts a goal line block on the offensive 37-yard line" or something of that sort. IronLung 06:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
I'll look into a chop for you, the key is finding the right two pictures....and lots of steamy cloning tool action. Perhaps something like this. Just needs a minor caption rewrite about #9 FLA stunning #1 LSU early and often with the 11-wide.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  10:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Abstain. Don't watch NFL. Fan of real balls. --SoIwastolazytolearnGermanic.jpg-kun "whisper sweet nothings into thine ear..." 15:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Abstain. Don't watch NFL, so can't say the joke NFaiL'd... like that one :/ --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent Icons-flag-au Noobaward Wotm Unbooks mousepad GUN 11:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Abstain. Always preferred baseball myself, don't know enough about football, yadda yadda yadda, don't get the joke. -- You know what the music means... Our time is up. 20:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. I do like that prospective new image though. —Sir Guildensternenstein 18:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment DrS has done it again, and I'm adding his image to the article. The one there already though, while clearly being a defense running the supposed play, is one that I actually did myself using the same method as DrS did for his. The problem was that I had only noticed my error in chopping the wrong side when it was too late, the PLS deadline looming at the time. Not, as the source image clearly shows, a mere picture of a punt block. -RAHB 19:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Symbol neutral vote Abstain. No idea about this. Need to know the game better to understand it . Like perhaps the Brits writing about the LBW rule in Cricket. --Romartus 19:46, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

  • Comment As I said during PLS time, football is a mind-numbingly simple sport, and there's only a few things you need to know about it to "get" this article. A quarterback throws the ball, a receiver receives or catches the ball, a running back runs, and everyone else stands around and beats the living shit out of each other. The rest is explained well enough in the article. -RAHB 06:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
    • And, all of the basic American Football terms have been blue-linked to Wiki-pee for non-fanatics or those unfamiliar with the sport to reference. Anyone who understands rugby knows what running the ball or passing the ball entails--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  08:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. Someone tell me if it has any typos and obvious badness. If not, why not put it on front page? Style Oranssiviiva Guide 14:57, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH

Click to feature this article
Always check the feature queue first.
Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article.
Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.
Personal tools