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
excluded from the future.
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.
Spıke¬ 12:21 22-Feb-14 12:21, February 22, 2014 (UTC)
For Votes: 2
For. New Uncyclopedian Thaurin sought to render a bawdy web post in article format (see its talk page), but Mhaille contributed some culture and I toned down Thaurin with his assent. Can and should be taken in additional directions, double entendres welcome. Spıke¬ 12:21 22-Feb-14
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. Spıke¬ 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 slow start needs more work. Intro suggests the strategy is not Funny but merely Untrue, and the parade of isms doesn't help. If it is not that geology is funny but that conservatives are ridiculous and here are the untruths they believe: That is a hard sell to the passing reader of our main page. Spıke¬ 13:23 3-Feb-14
Thanks for the pointers. I tried to put as many jokes as I could into the article. The main point of it was to mock a fundamentalist encyclopedia's page of geology. Also the geological timeline in the article is based on the real geological timeline's names with puns in it and set to biblical timespan. A poke at the absurb use of relics in Catholic Churches is sneaked in as well. SirScottPat (talk) VFHUnSNotMWotMWotY 18:23, February 3, 2014 (UTC)
Comment. Is there any way to change the volcano image (with a face in the smoke)? Anton (talk) 11:13, February 20, 2014 (UTC)
selfnom&For After much work this seems ready for prime time. Lots of pics to prove the claim, which is still satire on several levels (A guidebook to faces in the cloud???). Thanks for a read and a look. Spooky action at a distance. Aleister 14:24 18-1-14
Against. After much work, the point of this scholarship is still to use us as a disk farm to support a blog on another website (to which our traffic is diverted at the end of the article) and to conduct a worship service for American civil rights icons. Yes, it is partly satire, as everything author writes is satire; but everything he writes does not deserve the main page to the exclusion of an article that might be of interest to the average reader. Spıke¬ 14:31 18-Jan-14
This page may be unique on the web, real-time discoveries of images in the cloud of one of the two or three most iconic photographs of a very major era in world and American history which all arguably can be related to the event, with all the images looking down upon the marchers. Yikes! And SPIKE, none of that regarding my motives is true (again). I direct to the other page because some of the data and photographs on this page was created there by others, and that seems only fair - fair is flair. And what have you got against civil rights icons, did one scare you in the crib?Aleister 16:19 20-1-14
This is a small compendium of HTBFANJS advice drawing from a few of my own examples. I hope readers enjoy reading it as much as I did toiling over it for 4 years. Cheers all!!!--Funnybony 16:58, Jan 12
But I think the target audience is readers of HTBFANJS — in other words, we insiders — not chance passers-by to our main page, on whom a lot is going to be lost. Spıke¬ 01:07 15-Jan-14
I see where Spike is coming from and yet find the article extremely funny. I'm sure 3 days or so up won't cause too much bafflement. SirScottPat (talk) VFHUnSNotMWotMWotY 17:35, January 17, 2014 (UTC)