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
set to hang with Saddam Hussein.
Self-nomination regulation: self-nominated articles (i.e. you write an article and then decide to nominate it yourself) no longer require a pee review. Pee Review is still highly recommended for newer users. Do not clog up VFH with poor quality self-nominated articles... or else.
VFH is not a discussion page. If you'd like constructive criticism for your article, please submit it to Uncyclopedia:Pee Review.
For. An excellent article, though I can't help but think PerfumeRepair was going to add more to the article but never got around to it.--HolUp (talk) 09:01, January 10, 2017 (UTC)
Against Votes: 0
No against votes
For those born in the mid 90s (that's me), this article might bring back some good memories. Anyone older or younger than that will be confused about the subject material, heh.--HolUp (talk) 09:01, January 10, 2017 (UTC)
Strikes me that PerfumeRepair watched one episode and wrote a wisecracking blog. I haven't watched the show but don't see much of a comedy strategy here. Stereotyping in the Intro ("token" vs "farmboy") falls flat. Nominator mentions two good reasons not to feature it. Spıke12:54 10-Jan-17
I don't know what the author (lapsed Admin Black flamingo11) is doing with this. (Is it he nominating? Be a flamingo and log in!) The history of the year 2594 in the Intro suggests the main comedy strategy is randomness, seasoned with race stereotypes. Spıke18:21 8-Jan-17
Against. Nearly VFD-worthy; unexceptional ramble about a nonexistent thing. Nothing has been done since ThruthinessBee wrote this in 2007 except that his red-links have been removed. None of the portion that would appear on our main page would inspire anyone to click on it. Spıke18:05 8-Jan-17
For. Feature this because this is the only mass collaboration going on at the moment: Created by David202, an outline added by UgurGumushan to be fleshed out by Bludud202, who also lives at 202; Romartus and I also got our licks in. Spıke02:12 4-Jan-17
For. One of Spike's earlier pieces and PLS winner, then expanded and reworked to something bigger and better, but oddly never nommed. The previous edit was by PuppyOnTheRadio (Talk). 02:30, December 31, 2016 (UTC)
Self-For. Thank you! This has stood the test of time, although there now famously are clocks in baseball. Spıke02:50 31-Dec-16
For. Expanded it somewhat. I'm still a few hundred mitzvot short of the full list, but it'll do. The previous edit was by PuppyOnTheRadio (Talk). 02:03, December 31, 2016 (UTC)
Against Votes: 0
No against votes
Very hard to slog through, from the passives in the first sentence to the Bible citations in the second. The payoff is that Biblical commandments are mostly ludicrous (which could be funny) or that Bible-quoters are hypocrites (which dances on the line of advocacy). Keep working on it. Spıke02:26 4-Jan-17
For. At least our news is proper news eh? EStop⚓ 17:43, January 7, 2017 (UTC)
Against Votes: 1
Against. This is a checklist of things fake news does, followed by an example; this reads more like a definition for undictionary. From the title I was expecting something over the top and close to ED territory like Pizzagate, which would demonstrate how apparently libel laws don't apply to the internet or during election seasons. Irritable of contents (talk) 17:41, January 8, 2017 (UTC)
Although nominally related to the U.S. "Fake News" hysteria, the strategy of repeatedely stating a journalistic rule and then violating it in the same sentence comes across as mechanical as a "Page in the style of the thing it's about." Spıke02:30 4-Jan-17
Score:5 outlandish claims (proof left to the reader)
Spıke15:05 13-Dec-16 15:05, December 13, 2016 (UTC)
For Votes: 5
Nom & For. Written by Mhaille in 2014, copied off-site in 2015, rewritten recently by WeatherUnderground to be something more than gayness/pedophilia. 1 point in the Hall of Shame to WeatherUnderground. Spıke15:05 13-Dec-16
For. Aw heck, I shouldn't vote for an article that I edited myself, but Arthur C. Clarke predicted it in one of his novels. WeatherUnderground (talk) 18:13, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
Against It does a couple of things right like the land marks, but I don't think it's ready for featured quite yet. It should have a bit more history, it has too many celebrity cameos from the likes of Sauron and Jesus, and just saying the sports teams suck and their uniforms look like poop is pretty generic. It relies pretty heavily on comparisons to other cities as well like Manila, Boulder and Salt Lake City; rather than dealing more with Denver itself. Irritable of contents (talk) 01:10, January 9, 2017 (UTC)