For. The more I read it, the more I saw in it. And it would be a terrible action to leave an article with its soul and not to vote for it. No, I am joking, but it was a really nice one, even if I left such a comment! Anton (talk) 17:58, February 19, 2014 (UTC)
Against. As before. The article resembles polemics, not news; it deals with an internal dispute at another website; and featuring it will tend to get Uncyclopedia cited as "independent" opinion supporting one side in that dispute. SpıkeѦ 16:31 19-Feb-14
I don't know. I agree that even a humour article should have a point of view to defend. But this one sometimes seems too factual. Yes, the situation is ironic, but to write a humourous article, I think, you should do a lot more than just recount it. I found many sentences too "true", as if you were just telling the reader what was happening in order to make him understand a "big" joke, which as I understood was just the situation itself. Maybe I am wrong though, and your comments will be welcome! Anton (talk) 17:07, February 19, 2014 (UTC)
The nomination was not successful. I don't think this is going to make itRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® This article did not pass VFH and was removed on 11:34, April 16, 2014 (UTC). This page is now archived; do not edit it, it will have no effect.