"Nominate the article Hal. I'm afraid I can't do that Dave. Why not Hal? I know better Dave. Trust me. I'm a 9000 series computer". *Airlock remotely opens* ~ 21:40, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
"Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and vote for this article." —SirSocky(talk)(stalk)GUNSotMUotMPMotMUotYPotMWotM22:26, 12 October 2009
For Although it's a bit cheesy! mAttlobster. (hello) 22:30, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
Strong For. Fixed up a lot in response to my review. Very funny. •••Necropaxx(T){~}Monday, 23:10, Oct 12
dun... dun... dun...DAH DAHHH!!!SirMacManiaGUN—[23:12 12 Oct 2009]
For. Fixed up a lot in response to my review. (And damnit, I was going to nominate it). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 23:53, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
For Though it could use more Wensleydale. --Sog1970 08:40, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
For. The page is correct. A Clockwork Orange is much better. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 00:58, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
For gotta jump on the bandwagon and vote for! everyone else is doing it! just those first 2 for votes almost make it worth voting for by themselves, haha -- SoldatTeh PWNerator(pwnt!)04:52, Oct 14
Why do I need to vote for this?•FreddThe Metalhedd••• 07:39, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
if you're going to vote against at least say something (in this case I would recommend COMBO BREAKER or something similar) -- SoldatTeh PWNerator(pwnt!)06:13, Oct 14
Such comments are not required, thank you. Please be seated, and observe the no-smoking signs. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:17, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
Excellent images...FUN dialogue! BUT I thought that Uncyclopedia was supposed to prank the facts? You merely stated them... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by207.5.100.27 (talk • contribs)
sadly, yes. if you'd like I'll find a proxy and remove those votes for you. just no one revert (just kidding admins, well... mostly at least) -- SoldatTeh PWNerator(pwnt!)17:37, Oct 14
My best guess is that this mysterious voting will probably not affect the final result mAttlobster. (hello) 18:27, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
Fixed up a lot in respone to Necropaxx's review; fixed up a lot in response to Why's review. But who's review was it fixed up the most to??? mAttlobster. (hello) 07:01, October 13, 2009 (UTC)
Matt lobster, please don't change one of your posts except with strikeout after someone's already commented on it. It makes my response seem ignorant, and makes me look stupid. I'm perfectly capable of looking stupid on my own. Plus I got chastised for changing a comment, so I want to be able to chew someone else out for it so I feel better. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 19:10, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
Featured. ~ 20:29, October 14, 2009 (UTC) This article has passed VFH and was featured on 15 October 2009. This page is now archived; do not edit it, it will have no effect.
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.
21:40, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
DAH DAHHH!!! 
