Uncyclopedia:VFH/Akira Kurosawa

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Akira Kurosawa (history, logs)

Article: Akira Kurosawa

Score: -3 brilliant masterpieces

Nominated by: Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 07:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
For: 1
  1. Nom & For. This has been on Pee Review for over a week, and I'm anxious to get some feedback. I'm not exactly a patient person, for those of you who don't already know. Anyway, in my own opinion, this is just as good as my other cinema articles, and I'd like to see if you all feel the same way. Vote away. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 07:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  2. We cant say against to Guildy Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool Egypt_orb_spinning.gif 08:37 May 31 '09
Against: 4
  1. Against. I've stopped giving the prolific Guily my auto-seal of approval. This is a well-written, nicely formatted article, but it was unfortunately very forgettable and without any humour for the drive-by reader with no subject familiarity. David Lynch was a funny article; this is a formulaic rehash. IronLung 09:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
    The fact that the article is written in the style of Japanese people talking in a bizzare and over-stereotypical manner wouldn't be funny to someone with no prior knowledge of Kurosawa? —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 18:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
    It's a nice touch, but not funny. I read your article completely stone-faced, which is not the normal reaction one would have to a Guildy article. I take this to mean that the "obscure director" format has got tired. IronLung 22:18, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  2. Not pee reviewed! Uncyc has rules, man! Without rules, where would we be? WHERE? But seriously, yeah, self noms without reviews.   Le Cejak <14:38 May 31, 2009>
    Er... It's okay to self-nominate if the article has been on Pee Review for a week or more... Unless you guys changed the rules in the few weeks I disappeared. /goes and checks. Nope. Rules haven't been changed. 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 least spend a week on Pee Review if you can't get anyone to look at it). MegaPleb Dexter111344 Complain here 19:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  3. Against. Littleboyonly TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly 00:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
  4. Self-Against. Based on the less-than-warm welcome I expected. See my comment below. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 01:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment. I thought you could self-nom after your article's sat on Pee Review for over a week. If not, my bad. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 18:29, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

  • Abstain. per IronLung Mnb'z 11:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Abstain I know the subject and I like the way this article deals with it but um, well those dots kinda interupt the flow of the article. User:Zeitgeist/sig 19:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  • This is very close to being a feature, but I'm holding my vote till I'm more certain about this. Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
  • Author's Comment: This is certainly not the reaction I expected. If you all feel that this isn't up to par, I'm going to re-rewrite the whole thing from scratch. Akira Kurosawa is my favorite director of all time, and his article here deserves nothing less than a feature in my eyes. I already have a completely new concept I plan on implementing for my re-rewrite, which I should hopefully have done soon. In the meantime, I beseech you all to vote against to get this off the queue. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 01:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)


← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH

Personal tools