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
put in the dishwasher.
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.
SpıkeѦ 23:47 18-Apr-15 23:47, April 18, 2015 (UTC)
For Votes: 3
Self-nom and For. Quasi-featured on the first try. Let's see if we can push through this thoroughly fun send-up of elopement on the second try. SpıkeѦ 23:47 18-Apr-15
For. Anton(talk) Uncyclopedia United 11:13, April 22, 2015 (UTC)
For. The perfect place to tie knots. Did you know the cow-hitch was invented there (before the archaic animalist Government's ruling about same species marriages). --EStop (talk) 10:25, May 4, 2015 (UTC)
Against Votes: 0
No against votes
'Comment. It starts well, with a larger than average capacity to make the reader laugh at mundane facts, but it is very short. |(get dtf) 21:11, April 19, 2015 (UTC)
Author assured me at the time that "Screaming" was not a punch line the reader would have to guess but a popular nickname for Sutch. Nevertheless, it still hits me as an article named Botox-faced Nancy Pelosi would hit you. The article is well-written, but its humor wrestles with its dripping scorn. Needs an Intro; the current Intro belongs in a section "Early life." SpıkeѦ 15:54 6-Apr-15
The intro summarises his life. The first line is a parody of Wikipedia article first lines and the rest describes how well known he is and what he was famous for. What needs doing? SirScottPat (converse) VFHUnSNotMWotMWotY 16:31, April 6, 2015 (UTC)
Just realized this, and realized what you are doing, which is not merely a foray into obscure British party politics. I added a couple of links to make this clearer. SpıkeѦ 12:26 7-Apr-15
I confess: I don't know what the title refers to, nor what the "historical document" referred to in the Intro is, if not the article itself. It is a fun read about old coots longing for the Good Old Days, but the above questions make me wonder whether it is yet another punch line waiting to be searched for. I'd prefer a real-world cover and not just a title with alliteration. SpıkeѦ 23:41 18-Apr-15
Comment. "Broken Britain" is a well known expression and the historical document is the article itself. Giving "Broken" a capital b is a bit misleading I now see: perhaps it should be moved? ~EveryOtherUsernameWasTaken(dtf?) 18:48, April 27, 2015 (UTC)
Better to delete the word "Before"? as you have just created a redirect that assumes that this is what people will be looking for. SpıkeѦ 18:52 27-Apr-15
No because it takes the concept of broken Britain but is literally about before broken Britain. It wouldn't make much sense without "before". ~EveryOtherUsernameWasTaken(dtf?) 10:56, April 28, 2015 (UTC)
I disagree. The page title doesn't have to accurately describe the treatment the author is going to give the subject; it should be the subject the reader would search for. SpıkeѦ 12:10 28-Apr-15
To me, calling it broken Britain would obscure the joke a little and wouldn't reflect the content of the article. The text would seem innappropriate under "Broken Britain". Also I'm going to back-track on my suggestion to use a small 'b' because there is indeed a wikipedia article that shows it capitalised. ~EveryOtherUsernameWasTaken(dtf?) 16:27, April 28, 2015 (UTC)
Not all the way there yet. Started life with over-emphasis on Wacky Treaties, bickering scholars, and nonsense numbers. I'd like to see satire themes in addition to the move of magazines to the Internet, such as the conflict between delivering the truth and delivering what the page-flipper wants to see, magazines as a fashion item for the reader, or Boy Scouts hawking subscriptions to useless magazines as a fundraiser. Repeated reliance on Viz as an automatic joke will be lost on Americans. SpıkeѦ 12:59 31-Mar-15
I think Wikipedia has a really funny opening: "Charles Hollis "Chuck" Taylor (June 24, 1901 – June 23, 1969) was an American basketball player and shoe salesman/evangelist." DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 04:52, April 6, 2015 (UTC)
I had to look up what sneaker meant. I gathered it had to do with shoes. I guess over here we'd say "trainers". SirScottPat (converse) VFHUnSNotMWotMWotY 07:09, April 6, 2015 (UTC)
It has a funny concept, following I have a dream with the response, "Have you sought help?" But articles "in the style of the thing they are about" have one funny concept as well. This is good writing, but descent into insanity does not make for a funny read, and the portion that would appear on our main page unfolds especially slowly. I don't get the monkeys, nor the purported explanation at the end, unless it is to say that reality is insane and the crazy man is the only accurate observer. Now my head hurts as well. SpıkeѦ 22:05 22-Feb-15
Despite not having got it, you explained it better than I could! "Reality is insane and the crazy man is the only accurate observer" - that's quite it. The interpretations are not very clear, but that's deliberate: in my vision, the man, who always relied on logic, becomes crazy being unable to comprehend racial discrimination. The monkeys are an incarnation of the racial prejudice, but also the only "logical" way out of this mess for the main character: if we don't treat them like humans, than they can't be humans, can they? Anton(talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:12, February 23, 2015 (UTC)
Hence, by the way, the name of the article. The main character's insane dream and Dr. King's famous one actually coincide (which becomes more obvious towards the end). Anton(talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:15, February 23, 2015 (UTC)