For. My latest rare-and-random appearance here and I came across this gem. Would like to see how it fares here. --El Sid,the lazy one • parlez-vous franglais? 17:05, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
God Help UsThe article is so-so, but accented the photo caption, which I laughed and laughed at. So to me the entire article supports the photo and caption. I'm an embarrassed paedophile to be voting for this, and know that I have I seem to have crossed over to the dark side. Hey, it's pretty bitchin' over here! WoW! Yeah, sure, pass me that, thanks. (OK, read it again, the article is pretty funny. Must be that my pov has changed now that I've crossed over) Aleister in Chains Dark side, MMX
For. A bit short, but very funny. HELPME 22:41, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
Conditional For. I changed my vote on the condition that the article has an image that's not a real child. I still think the article's a little short, though. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 22:46, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
For. Controversia, but yes. InMooseWeTrust 03:38, February 2, 2010 (UTC)
For. But the original version and picture made me feel a lot dirtier. T. Danger P-trow 00:46, February 11, 2010 (UTC)
Against: 7
Against the photo. I like the article fine and would vote for, even though it's a little short. But I don't like having a real-life little girl being displayed to the world as the victim of sexual assault, even as a joke. How would you feel if you were her mother or father?WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 22:20, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
I went ahead and changed the photo to a temporary one, see my comment below. If think Why? is correct on this one. Although a better cartoon can be found, this is just a temp. graphic.Aleister in Chains a few minutes after Why?s comment, MMX
Against. Not a feature worthy article in my view. RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 22:23, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
I strongly disagree, but I do prefer the article with the last pic. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 23:44, Jan. 21, 2010
Against. I think that there just isn't enough funny here to make a feature. ChiefjusticeDS 23:59, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
Against per above. It's kind of a one-hit wonder as articles go. Amusing but no feature. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 00:07, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Against. Didn't do it for me. ~ 08:19, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Didn't do it for you sexually, you mean? Eh? Eh?!•••Necropaxx(T){~}Friday, 17:01, Jan 22 2010
Ehhh... There was maybe one laugh. :/ •••Necropaxx(T){~}Friday, 17:01, Jan 22 2010
Against. Sorry folks, I'm just not feeling this one. It's a one-joke idea, and I personally didn't find the joke that funny. --UU - natter15:45, Feb 1
Nope In true Romartus style, I cannot vote for these as the geese were flying East this morning, and in the next town a dog gave birth to a serpent. Pup
Why is likely right about the photo. Maybe look for one of those Japanese drawings everyone is crazy about, go through a couple of dozen little girl graphics and one would fit the page. It's good to have a level-headed user around, even though he's a pain sometimes. Thanks for the keen visions of parents in shock. Aleister in Chains now, MMX
I think the new image is fine. And thanks for callng me a level-header user and a pain. I'll accept both descriptions. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 22:52, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
Statement by admin MrN9000: "Pictures of children on Uncyc is fine. Pictures of children in an article about paedophiles is very dodgy... That picture with that caption... No. Not a chance. That new image is much better." WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 23:44, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
New anime up, as a stopgap until the author chooses one. Aleister in Chains MMX
I like the other anime image better. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 23:54, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
The third one made me laugh. With the second image there is no way to imagine what's "in" and what's going on that's not seen. So I like the third, but it's actually none of our choices, but the author. I 'vote' for the third over the second. Al the phedo a minute or so later, MMX
It's the author's choice? Since when have we been respectful of authors? We don't need no stinkin' authors! (Seriously, it's usually the choice of whoever holds out the longest, unless an admin steps in it). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 00:03, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
Syndrome (I think) just put up a really funny anime. Better than the other two. Al MMX
If the article is about young girls who are unsatisfied with their molestations, why is there a picture of a happy drawing on it? I think I'm missing something here. It looks like this has something to do with some argument or something, but I'm not going to read it, because I don't really care. The image caption would be perfect if the image made sense. - T.L.B.WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 05:44, Jan 23
Led, if you go back through the article history you can see the proper image that made sense. It wasn't my choice to put some stupid fucking cartoon on it. -- coruscating Ape(absorb)(Riot Porn) 11:01, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
Yea, it was a lot more funny with the original image which Ape used. Shame using that image would have meant that we were using a real photo of a real child who can't defend themselves as a sexual object. Hea, if someone here has a young daughter, or sister who understands the context of this article and they want to use their own picture in it then lets do that. MrNFork you! 11:26, Jan 23
Just to be clear on what I just said above... My problem with the original image was the fact that (as far as I know) this is some random picture from the net, and we have no idea who the child in question is. Using this girl in this way cut all over whatever ethical standpoint I may have left because it's actually hurting that child. However... Being the sick bastard that I am I do totally agree that this image was by far the most funny of all those proposed. Using a cartoon was pants, and even using the current picture of Cyrus is pants cos she clearly knows what she is doing in that picture (in her pants) and so IMO is more than fair game. So... What we need here to make this article funny again is a real picture of a young kid. Wait! FTW are you talking about MrN??? Um. Well... Like you buggers don't have any pictures of yourselves when you were younger? How about a picture of your wife, g/f or mum when she was younger? It does not even need to be a female for the joke to work, although that's probably best. What I'm saying is... Scan through your own personal photo albums, and find a picture of someone who has now grown up and does not mind having their picture used here. For me, this would be totally fine from an ethical point of view. OK, it would be very hard for me to check if such a picture really was of a family member of the person who post it, but I think I would trust them, and anyway if I did ever find out that it was not I'm happy to trawl back through Uncyc deleting everything which they have ever done after they had obviously been blocked for life. So... Let it not be said that Uncyc is/or is turning into a bunch of pussies. We can have that joke, we just need someone to donate a picture. So... Who has some old photo albums? MrNFork you! 17:33, Jan 23
That is not your mother Socky. You are such a fibber. MrNFork you! 18:00, Jan 23
If I can find a way to get at my old family photos without my parents finding out I'm doing it I'll post up one of me. -- coruscating Ape(absorb)(Riot Porn) 18:21, January 23, 2010 (UTC)
What about It's Brooke Shields playing a 12 year old prostitute. Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 05:45, February 1, 2010 (UTC)
The nomination was not successful. rm 25% +7 QFA~ This article did not pass VFH and was removed on 09:41, February 16, 2010 (UTC). This page is now archived; do not edit it, it will have no effect.
For. My latest rare-and-random appearance here and I came across this gem. Would like to see how it fares here. --
Yeah Could definitely be expanded, but I love the idea. Ya know, in a legal way. 
It's Brooke Shields playing a 12 year old prostitute. 
