Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Rules and procedures:
- Before doing anything else, make sure that you are well versed on Uncyclopedia's deletion policy.
- If you're too lazy to read the deletion policy, please, at least, carefully read this list of rules.
- But seriously, read the deletion policy.
- Do not put anything up for VFD that is not appropriate for VFD.
- Abusers of the policy will be abused by the claw end of a hammer. You have been warned.
- If you have an article that meets the criteria for VFD:
- Check the revision history of the page. It may have been vandalised, or just badly edited over a long period of time. If so, find a better version and revert the article. It may not be suitable for deletion.
- Add
{{vfd}} to the article in question. Failure to do so may invalidate the vote.
- Provide an initial vote (see below) and include a comment as to why you have placed the article on VFD.
- If you are here to vote on the deletion/salvation of articles:
- Thank you.
- No, really, thank you very much.
- Edit the section for the article you are addressing.
- Pick a space under the appropriate heading (Keep, Delete, Comment), add your sig/comment preceded with a *
- * - Creates a bullet for your entry and makes sure that things are formatted correctly (do not put a space before the *).
- Comment - If you care to, leave a comment, even if it is as short as "The article is not at all funny". Votes without comments are less useful in analyzing the quality of an article.
- --~~~~ - Sign and timestamp your vote. Unsigned votes will be removed without prejudice.
- Do not revert edits of the administrators.
- If you are neither an administrator nor a designated poopsmith, do not remove anything from VFD; doing so will get you banned for a very long time.
VFD: Where bad articles go to get
recycled.
Pages for Deletion
Make sure that you have read the rules (above) and the deletion policy. Please don't nominate Main Page or Votes for Deletion; that joke has been done so many times we might just beat you with a nailbat before we tear our hair out in frustration.
This also applies to Uncyclopedia In jokes (see: Category:Uncyclopedia In-Jokes).
To add an article, edit this section, and follow the directions in the comments.
Don't flood VFD full of articles, or at least leave a space between your nominations.
If you increase the number of articles on VFD to over 20, you will be blocked for 1 day, no exceptions. This means do not increase the number of active votes on VFD to over twenty. Inactive votes are shown with either a red link (where they have been deleted), or with the 
Closed nomination tag to indicate that the article has been kept. You have been warned.
If VFD is full, or if you are an IP or a user of less than 4 days, and you want to report something as potential rubbish for us to vote on in the future, please proceed to the Poopsmith's Lounge. Just remember not to sit on the chairs.
Please remember to check an article's history, in case of recent or long term vandalism, before nominating an article. Also, check the article's talk page and 'What links here' for prior nominations. If the article has been nominated before there will be a link from a VFD archive page.
| Keep |
 Keep. Very stupid in places. Very clever in others (Bigfoot Dating Ad, which I thought was going to be stupid). It's obvious what the stupid places are and how to fix them. Spıke ¬ 19:10 12-Nov-09
|
| Delete |
- Delete. The history of this article is really quite remarkable. It's been rewritten and rewritten and rewritten - about five times in the last year alone. And every single version is shite.
 pillow talk 18:27, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Fun fact: we huffed seven shitty versions of this article, and then in 2006, we decided to let this one stay. I don't know why... pillow talk 18:24, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Thursday, 18:26, Nov 12 2009
 Delete. Big typography is its only joke. Spıke ¬ 19:14 12-Nov-09
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
 EXTERMINATE! Because it's fucking retarded, fucking disgusting and utterly pointless. —Sir Socky   (talk) (stalk)  KUN SotM UotM PMotM 11:46, 11 November 2009
- Delete. "Vandalism" sums it up. Spıke ¬ 12:11 11-Nov-09
- Delete. - No need to keep this junk around, poor hamsters are hard-pressed as they are to keep this site going... -- DameViktoria
  - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 21:30, 11 Nov
- Delete. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:53, Nov 11 2009
- Delete. I dot like it and niobody does because it is gay and stupid and ugly and retarted and fat. pillow talk 18:21, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Best deleted and left behind the bike sheds. --RomArtus (talk) 19:16, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Would somebody enlighten me to exactly what makes this different than any of the other vandalism archives? It doesn't seem there would be any good reason to delete just one of them... -- Also, penis. 20:57, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- My guess is that deleting #6 would leave a hole in the archives, which would be vandalism in and of itself. So this vote is really just an avant-garde sort of neo-vandalism designed to use the institution to vandalize its own byproducts: the sequestration and containment of undirected vandalism. Bravo, Socky. Bravo. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 23:13, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
- RAHB: Mordillo's pretty consistently ruled that you have to take pages one at a time... and... so, since I think this particular page has no redeeming value, I favor deleting it. We can get to the others later. pillow talk 23:21, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep. Gee guys, didn't realise Uncyclopedia was becoming so strict about taste! Just cos' you don't not all appreciate the subtle humour doesn't mean it should be deleted. How about suggesting ways it could be improved before calling for its destruction. Digi 20:17, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. I can't say I'm a huge fan of the article, but don't think it's too bad.
 Father WHY??? 08:49, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Because. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 16:34, 11 November 2009
- Keep. Per Socky. MrN
  20:57, Nov 11
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Juvenile sex jokes in their lowest, unfunniest state.--Count of Monkey Crisco 22:41, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. In the quaint old days, they would say this is in bad taste with no redeeming qualities, certainly not the second half, a slapped-together news report about reaction to the lack of taste in the first half, which adds more bad taste. Spıke ¬ 23:24 9-Nov-09
- Deleeeete... I'm keeping the picture, though. ---Pelargonium
 (Talk)
- Delete. Totally inapropriate and we wouldn't want to offend anyone now would we? -OptyC Sucks! CUN18:04, 12 Nov
|
| Comments |
- This is one of those articles that may actually predict what will happen with a future Porn Version of Strictly Come Dancing or Dancing With the Stars. Unless...it has already been made...--RomArtus (talk). 13:19, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
 Comment. @Digi: My suggestions for improvement would boil down to "See this section? Get rid of it and try again." repeated five times. Each section is pathetic in its own little way, from the dry and unnecessary section one, the dead horse beating section two, the nothing-but-list section three, the not completely awful but grammatically lousy section four and the desperate for content section five. It's a bad idea, badly executed. Whether it's tasteful or not doesn't figure into it.
- Abstain. I can't read it, because I'm at work and there's a giant picture of a naked girl at the top. pillow talk 18:17, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Today is Operation: Emo-Hitler. Time to delete all the cruft that links to Emo-Hitler. This is such cruft. --Count of Monkey Crisco 22:16, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- My new article on Baha'i links to Emo-Hitler, and you'd better not complain. Spıke ¬ 19:02 12-Nov-09
- Delete. As an article , it has a few sane moments but quickly reverts to a non-flying Randumbo given half the chance. --RomArtus (talk). 09:40, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:47, Nov 11 2009
- Delete. And: I approve of Operation: Emo-Hitler. pillow talk 18:16, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Deleting articles that refer to Emo-Hitler is again trying to kill a beast by clipping its toenails. We recently VFD'ed Hajime Socialist Republic as an unfunny piece of some guy's personal alternate reality universe. Today I stumbled on the central piece, HZ Corps., and nominated it for deletion while it was being edited. (Nomination correctly disqualified for technical reasons, though he seems to be misusing the WIP tag.) Modusoperandi has written to the author about why his articles are mysteriously disappearing and how to get them into shape. Likewise, here Emo-Hitler is the smallest of the problems. The larger problem is that the author will continue writing cruft, even though articles keep mysteriously disappearing, unless someone steers him in a funnier direction so we don't have to play catch-up. The problem with Emo-Hitler is the impression that dropping outrageous names is writing comedy. Spıke ¬ 22:53 9-Nov-09 post-edited
- Which author? Every Article in Project: Emo-Hitler has had a different author. I think Emo-Hitler is funny to morons, morons write cruft so The link page on Emo-Hitler is just a handy hunting guide for cruft. --Count of Monkey Crisco 23:53, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- It is a wonderful world when morons wear such a badge on their foreheads. Spıke ¬ 23:57 9-Nov-09
- The article itself has a theme (albeit a made-up one), is about something (and about everything, and thus about nothing), and is mostly babble. But I won't vote Delete (yet), on the strength of those elephant illustrations. Spıke ¬ 00:01 10-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
- Keep. Crap keep. Remove the rubbish and it may live on in my view since 99 red balloons and Nena's unshaved armpits live on in the memory. Perhaps Nena helped bring down the Berlin Wall. --RomArtus (talk). 14:03, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete We still have more than 25,000 articles. We're obviously not deleting enough. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 01:08, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- What the hell...? ---Pelargonium (Talk)
- Delete. --Count of Monkey Crisco 10:29, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Notable subject matter, but this article is too bad to hide behind that excuse. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:44, Nov 11 2009
- Delete. You can't just name a celebrity, poop out a hundred Internet memes and Uncyclopedia in-jokes, and call that an article. pillow talk 18:13, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Compared to Zach de la Rocha, this isn't a stupid concept (except for Sections 3 and 4) but a topical article with stupid jokes. Spıke ¬ 12:51 9-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
- Keep. I had to get all the way through the horrible intro to realize that it was demonstrating hubris, and pretty well. And "believing oneself to be of particular excellance" [sic] is excellant irony, though the author won't know. Yes, it's short and dumb, but kind of cute. Ditto on the list. Spıke ¬ 01:53 8-Nov-09
- Keep. Same as SPIKE. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:41, Nov 11 2009
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Short. Half of it's a list. ---Pelargonium (Talk)
- Delete. Really an intro and a list..and that's it. --RomArtus (talk). 14:31, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Weak delete. Not the worst article ever, but unfunny and honestly kind of annoying. pillow talk 18:10, November 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keepish A little funny and based on a real "haunted" mansion. --Count of Monkey Crisco 20:08, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Dittoes; it's not free-association babble but oddly describes something real. Spıke ¬ 12:10 10-Nov-09
|
| Delete |
- Delete. NOT FUNNY. pillow talk 18:21, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Written in the style of ED and just not really that funny.
 » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 01:16, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. It needs exorcising. --RomArtus (talk). 14:07, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 00:17, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Neh • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:37, Nov 11 2009
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Mighty Keep. On grounds of notability, being one of my favorite bands and the relative non-suckiness of the current version. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
 • 11:36, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
- Mahm00shA, you seem to have a little time to improve this article to meet the standards of a reader like Romartus. Will you try? Spıke ¬ 01:18 7-Nov-09
- No, thanks. Band articles are not exactly my forte. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 • • 05:50, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Well, I edited it. (New intro, deleted the "Discography" list, lightly edited throughout, no references to the author.) I know nothing about the band but claim the article is no longer an eyesore. (Anyone have photos?) Spıke ¬ 12:19 7-Nov-09
- I think it has been cut down too much now + no photos either. Radical surgery indeed !--RomArtus (talk). 14:10, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Put back the Discography if you like, which is the bulk of the liposuction. But it's just cheap plays on words. Spıke ¬ 17:27 8-Nov-09
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Gawdawful bandcruft that will probably never receive the rewrite that someone requested at some point. pillow talk 18:12, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Unfunny and it is listing badly on one side. Besides fans - who else will want to waste time reading it for any possible humour ? --RomArtus (talk). 18:37, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- But if fans found it funny (and if fans found that it related to anything) (and I'm not saying it does), wouldn't it be okay? Spıke ¬ 18:42 5-Nov-09
- If someone wants to write an article about a band (for example) and only wants to appeal to hard core fans , they can do it somewhere else. Same for a mad Star Trek fan as well in my view.--RomArtus (talk). 19:00, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Time for a fan opinion! As a hopeless Nightwish fan, let me point out that notability != humor. Liking the article's subject does not excuse the suckiness of the article. As a Nightwish fan, my
stonevote has been cast. » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 00:57, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Nuke. I'm a NW fan too, but I would still like to see a -decent- uncyc page about them. Something that invokes laughter. --Dark_ApostropheThe Memory Hole 02:12, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 00:04, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:34, Nov 11 2009
|
| Comments |
- It does suck. The first sentence of the intro says so. And it invites the reader not to continue. I did, and encountered everything from self-absorption to coding errors. Spıke ¬ 01:54 6-Nov-09
- Make that three. » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 01:33, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep This is used on some pages. I certainly don't want it used on any more pages, but it's fine where it is. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 14:00, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. It's not bad, it doesn't hurt anyone, it can have it uses. ~
 14:35, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Completely harmless. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) KUN SotM UotM PMotM 21:50, 11 November 2009
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Useless template. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Hardly used and annoying. Transclude it where it currently exists and nuke it from orbit. pillow talk 23:13, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Nuke. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:46, Nov 4 2009
- Can't we just ban everyone from making templates without permission? It's not like they're ever funny and only a tiny proportion are actually useful. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
     12:17, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 23:58, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- This set of templates seems to facilitate intrusive, garish graphics. It isn't "useless"; I simply don't like the use (any more than overuse of fonts, or "ransom-note typography"), but that's a policy question I'll leave to youse. Spıke ¬ 11:08 2-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
- No. I've spoken to several people and they all agree it's useless. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 00:09, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Looks like a useless template. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete We don't need this. Just subst this into the page where it's used. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 18:08, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Subst into the ED article - maybe - but I'd hate to see this used anywhere else. pillow talk 22:35, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:42, Nov 4 2009
- delete. allows for repetitive unfunny pointlessness. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 23:55, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Comment. Can't see a reason people would use it. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Potentially useful to tile a background image, as I tried to do recently (Forum:CSS background-image). In actual use only in one article, which would improve immediately by not doing so. Spıke ¬ 10:52 2-Nov-09
- Nope. Useless. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 18:08, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- I set out to be italic and delete the section of Encyclopedia Dramatica (Website) that is the only use of this template, rendering it less of an eyesore and making this template an orphan. But ED is protected. VFD for it, perhaps? Spıke ¬ 18:10 5-Nov-09
- There are limits of being italic and I encourage you to never delete a template from any pages it resides on while it's on VFD. ~ 14:34, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
Archived VFD Discussions
Closed nomination tag to indicate that the article has been kept. You have been warned.
