Uncyclopedia:VFH/Mark Robinson

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Mark Robinson (history, logs)

Article: Mark Robinson

Score: 10.5 worst batsmen ever

Nominated by: PoliszSir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj KUN 01:20, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
For: 11.5
  1. Selfnom and for. It was pee reviewd a long time ago but later was corrected by under user. I think it's good and I will give it a shot. Under user told me that people love failures and this article is about the failure so I hope you like it. PoliszSir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj KUN 01:20, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
  2. Symbol for vote For. Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 01:41, 28 November 2010
  3. For. Funnybony Icons-flag-th Agnideva-small.jpg AGT-logo-small.jpg 08:32, Nov 28 08:32, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
  4. For. snicker David Gerard 17:41, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
  5. For. Sycamore (Talk) 17:45, November 28, 2010 (UTC)
  6. Symbol for vote For the love of the game Cricket gives baseball a good name. Aleister 1:27 29 11
  7. For featuring a cricket article during the Ashes. Timely and all that. Plus I put quite a bit of love into this one. --UU - natter UU Manhole 09:20, Nov 30
  8. For--Sog1970 08:30, December 3, 2010 (UTC)
  9. For. Mrowa 21:43, December 3, 2010 (UTC)
  10. Fohr 18:15, December 13, 2010 (UTC)
  11. For. Per improvements so now voting in favour. LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 07:25, December 15, 2010 (UTC)
  12. I know fudge all about cricket, but it made me laugh here and there. --Black Flamingo 15:35, December 18, 2010 (UTC)
Against: 1
  1. Somewhat meaningless if one does not know the sport... or sports in general, at least. But overall flow and presentation and prettiness make me suspect this isn't ready anyway. ~ Pointy *shifty eyes* (talk) • (stalk) -- 20101128 - 15:29 (UTC)
  2. Against. It's OK but I think it could have been more tightly edited. LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 08:10, November 30, 2010 (UTC)
    If either of you guys want to give it a mild tidy up to make it all shiny and lovely, I'm sure neither myself nor Ptok would complain... --UU - natter UU Manhole 21:20, Nov 30
    I really couldn't, since I'm so unfamiliar with the subject... might break things and never even know it. If someone else does I'll just abstain properly like a good little boy, though. ~ Pointy *shifty eyes* (talk) • (stalk) -- 20101130 - 23:28 (UTC)
  3. shit. -- 22:32, December 1, 2010 (UTC)
    Gotta love that constructive feedback. --UU - natter UU Manhole 09:47, Dec 2
  4. against. dont like it. -- 01:20, December 14, 2010 (UTC)
    Gotta love that constructive feedback. --UU - natter UU Manhole 13:39, Dec 14
    Votes "against" no. 3 and 4 are the same person with dynamic IP. Should both count? - asked Ptok rhetorically. PoliszSir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj KUN 17:12, December 14, 2010 (UTC)
  1. My own view is the biographical section could be shortened and the list of Robinson's 'triumphs' be the overwhelming main focus of the article. I understand why that has been put to explain who this guy is and setting the scene but perhaps some of that could be put in the footnotes. Or perhaps but the bulk of biography after the list of failures. Right now I feel the article as it is spends too long getting to the main central joke - which is funny on its own. Even, as another suggestion it be written in the first person so all the biographical stuff can happen whilst he is at the crease. Just a few ideas. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 23:50, November 30, 2010 (UTC)
    TBH, I probably agree with you - I was trying to work with it and keep as many of Ptok's original ideas as I could, and that would have cut out a number of them. It's his article at the end of the day, so that would have felt rude - I just tried to get it to a decent state, I certainly didn't envision it for feature when I was doing so. Glad some people like it. If you want to make those changes, Romartus, it would probably help! --UU - natter UU Manhole 09:47, Dec 2
    I'll let Ptok decide as this is his idea/baby, I am more surprised why a Pole has written a story about cricket! --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 21:53, December 2, 2010 (UTC)
    You know Poland has no cricket team? That's why I like cricket. That's the only sport in which Poles don't lose :P PoliszSir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj KUN 22:11, December 3, 2010 (UTC)
    I had a bit of a tidy and prune, Romartus. Any better? --UU - natter UU Manhole 14:08, Dec 14
  2. Symbol against vote Against. I just pooped in my pants. Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 09:36, 15 December 2010
    Gotta love that, er, sort of bandwagon jumping? --UU - natter UU Manhole 09:40, Dec 15
  3. Eh, it reads a lot better now... meh, whatever. I'll stay out of this, then. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 03:44, 16 December 2010


← 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