Strong For Cajekski delivers a piece with 31 layers of metaphysical pie. And Liverfailure3 or whatever can go suck it. --SirDJ~Irreverent 11:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
SF I had fun writing it, but it's not pee reviewed. Le Cejak•<2:51 May 24, 2009>
For.. A Zog of an article.--Romartus 09:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Weak For. As someone who knows a great deal about the pretentiouscinema of foreign countries, I didn't find this as funny as I thought I would. Still damn good, though, don't get me wrong. —UnführerGuildyRittervonGuildensternenstein 16:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Comment. I won't vote against it, but I'm not voting for it because it doesn't open wth a short summary of the term. That's a MUST! :P Dorsalfrog Prime 01:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Featured. ~ 07:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC) This article has passed VFH and was featured on 29 May 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.