Uncyclopedia:VFH/Topaz

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:VFH
Revision as of 07:39, April 27, 2011 by Fnoodle (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


Topaz (history, logs)

Article: Topaz

Score: 14 less than vital, yet still interesting facts regarding the nature of topaz

Nominated by:
For: 17
  1. Nomination and a vote for. - T.L.B. Baloon WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 20:07, Oct 25
  2. For. Clever! Andorin Kato 20:15, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
  3. For. I likes it. FreddAin't Dedd 22px-Flag_of_Egypt.png 18px-Foxicon.png 20:42, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
  4. It's NOT sentient! Cheers for the nom. -RAHB 01:31, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
  5. For. Fuck yeah, conservation of mass. -- monika 01:51, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
  6. DIG How could topaz snub jazz-fusion?! Oh right...it's topaz... --THINKER 06:25, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
  7. Topaz pride! Necropaxx (T) {~} Monday, 08:04, Oct 26 2009
  8. For. ChiefjusticeDS 10:53, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
  9. Yesh! Sir SockySexy girls Mermaid with dolphin Tired Marilyn Monroe (talk) (stalk)Magnemite Icons-flag-be GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 17:32, 26 October 2009
  10. For. -- Soldat Teh PWNerator (pwnt!) 17:57, Oct 26
  11. For. --Docile hippopotamus 09:08, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
  12. Weak For. Along the lines of what the DJ said, but less negative. Also, another picture would have been nice, I guess. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 16:04, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
  13. For. But please, it does need another pic. --William Topaz McGonagall 12:18, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
  14. Weak For Nothing REALLY great, but OK. PoliszPtok-BentonicznyTalk to Pole 19:58, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
  15. for. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 20:06, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
  16. For. Where the Wild Colins Are - LET THE WILD RUMPUS START! 07:40, October 29, 2009 (UTC)
  17. For. Made me laugh enough for a yes. Not a glowing endorsement, I know, but topaz doesn't glow. --Globaltourniquet GlobalTourniquetUnAstrologer, UnJournalist, shameless narcissistic America-hating liberal atheist award-winning featured writer 08:19, October 30, 2009 (UTC)
Against: 3
  1. Weak against Eh, the whole concept exhausted itself by about midway through. At least in terms of laughs. Felt like a less funny Slate industry in Wales. This is all personal opinion though, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the article. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent Icons-flag-au Noobaward Wotm Unbooks mousepad GUN 03:40, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
  2. I don't think it works repeating the subject title in the article. It sort of gets on your nerves for no real comic return in my view. Trim or cut those out and then it might work a lot better. LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 19:26, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
  3. Weak against. I enjoyed the article at first, but it became repetitive for me as I read on, and by the "Topaz mining" section much of it didn't seem funny to me. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 22:01, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
Comments
  • Correction. The Atheliamwe people do have nipples, but they are inverted and flesh toned, and thus do not qualify under most nation's obscenity laws, but do under most nation's laws of biology. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 18:28, October 26, 2009 (UTC)
    • BOOM! -RAHB 01:32, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
      • Thanks. Now I understand why Barbie and Ken are the way they are. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 01:39, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
        • Exactly! -RAHB 01:54, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

VFH

← 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
projects