This page is an archive. The contents have been moved from another page for reference purposes only, and should be preserved in their current form. Discussion or voting on this page is not current. Any additions you make will probably not be read. The current version of this page can be found at Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion.
Keep How is it not a real userpage? Userpages are just where people can go to tell the community that a certain user sucks! And I don't think either one of these guys get on anymore anyway... Mr. Briggs Inc. 11:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC) Eh?
Weak keep. Userpage of a non-banned user. Granted, that user is inactive, but there's no real reason to delete it, is there? Unless americanadian complains, but then, he's not been active himself as Mr. Briggs notes. Mind you, I suspect no-one will miss it if it is deleted. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 13:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Week Keap I didn't know that Peer was a real person at first. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 16:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Procedural nomination (moved from QVFD). Not a real userpage. The article in its present state is an old attack page much like Fisher Price or Mr winkler is GAY. I don't want this to become yet another abused (and abusive) in-joke, so I would prefer to have it rewritten as something worth linking to from Peer, in much the same way we have 127.0.0.1 and User:127.0.0.1. My hopes for that aren't too high, though; hence Weak Delete as nominator. Pentium5dot1 08:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete and Rewrite Naturally, it needs to be rewritten to make fun of that guy that keeps kicking everybody on IRC. On another note, why is everything compared to Fisher Price, Winkler, and urineipods? Fisher Price is becoming less special with each passing day. :*( --Kip > Talk•Works•• 08:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Reply toKip the Dip's delete vote: Why? Well, it's because of UN:CBN and the whole "Net Authority Violator" mess... Pentium5dot1 08:51, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. As a general rule of thumb, most articles purporting to chronicle future events are poor. This is a shining example of that rule in action. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 13:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
United States presidential election, 1792
Keep
Delete
Unlike the rest of the Presidential Election series, this article sucks--Æ 19:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. For the first line, I wondered why this was here. Then I read the rest. Random, unfunny, bad stuff. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 13:21, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Dion --Kip > Talk•Works•• 07:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Unfunny and mostly a list. Consider redirect per Pentium5dot1. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 13:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
If the decision is to delete, could we consider a redirect to Music? Pentium5dot1 08:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Ice-T
Keep
Delete
Delete. I haven't put anything up here for a while. But this namedroppy, unfunny, redlinky, Norrised stub deserves it. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 09:54, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep. This is getting repetitive. Just rewrite it with entirely new content, it'll still count as an article you wrote. It worked for me with Pillow Fighting. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 20:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep. It's not bad. When you write something better, leave a note on the lolcats talkpage asking if anyone minds if you overwrite this version with yours, wait a week, and if no one cares, copy yours over. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 10:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep it Alive Good Article if you write something better follow the instructions per Modusoperandi --—The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
delete. i realize this was nominated and kept a few months back, but its another one that i have a concept for that i'd like a fresh start on. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 05:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
I have no idea why this was kept, myself, but if it was, why not start your version in your userspace and move it when it's ready? --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 10:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
i have actually started throwing some ideas around in my userspace, i just went with the logic of 'if i had got to this article with the random button, would i VFD it?' if it's kept, i can always put my article under a different name and throw a {{whoops}} onto it. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 17:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Suggest redirect to LOL (no merge) until a rewrite is completed. Pentium5dot1 22:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete - It's not that good, wouldn't you agree? We can always rewrite later--Æ 19:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete I don't get the joke here and I don't understand what can be kept here. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
weak keep. seems like a rewrite would suit this one. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 20:37, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete. Half of it's a list and the rest is cruft. -- 20:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it's not as bad as it looked at first. Damn skimreading. If someone could rewrite it that would be great, but that doesn't tend to happen often with VFD noms. -- 20:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. I usually like to give articles with good ideas a chance, but I don't really see it in this one. Maybe I need new glasses. –SirSkullthumper,MD(criticize•writings•formspring) 23:24 Dec 11, 2007
Delete. If someone comes along and wants to rewrite it, feel free to change this to a weak keep, but in this state, it should go. I didn't really see anything funny in it, and having to read that much text in the quote font makes me go crosseyed. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 09:40, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Weak Keep This one issn't that bad. It seems to be a better list thant others I have seen here. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep The great permissive dude takes pity on this article (even the lists would be okay, if they were fit in better)! Right-wingers need mean-spirited laffs too! Mr. Briggs Inc. 23:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC) Eh?
BURNINATE! Pointless shit. MNM5150 23:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Comments
Keep. Nomination withdrawn. MadMax 20:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Chuck Norris vs Jack Bauer
Keep
D0 N07 Del33t - At least I got over my band obsession, now OblongLobster needs to get over his Chuck Norris obsession. - User:Slavemaster2 - 7:24 PM ET 11 December 2007
Delete
Delete I can't believe I just read the whole of this. mAttlobster. (hello) 21:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Jack Bauer is the new Chuck Norris. You've been warned. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 22:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep. Just the guidelines are really stupid. Parsat 21:15, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Delete - Even for a Chuck Norris article this is bad. Really bad. mAttlobster. (hello) 21:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. "Just the guidelines are really stupid" - The Guidelines are 80 percent of the article. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 22:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
This article does not fit with the spirit of the Chuck Norris article. People get very upset if you try and delete Chuck Norris/Facts even though not one of the facts are funny and they're available elsewhere on the internet.. I think each of the articles in the disambiguation should be deleted or not on their own merit. mAttlobster. (hello) 22:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I know it's a little late for me to apologize since this has already been deleted, but sorry for not actually reading each and every one of those articles in detail. Pentium5dot1 01:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete—I went to this page expecting... I'm not sure—something British (don't ask). What I found instead was awful. Were its makers even trying? HansJohnsonas in "keep ya hans off my"(cover your eyes!) 07:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete Although those two green guys looked British. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 10:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
delete. i want to write an article entitled 'cactus', and promise to write one one hundred times better than this.--SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 02:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
You could always just rewrite it, but starting from scratch is also good, and this article is shitty, so delete --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 02:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Me Neither This is also a orphan article as there is no links there and is pretty random and stupid. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added bySawblade5 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete--WillMcC 23:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC). I'm sure some of the NZers (myself included) among us could do much better than this. It's got bad MS Paint artwork, bad capitalization, and more.
Abstain - I can't vote against the deletion of this, but i can't vote for it either because this shit made me laugh, hard. It was the picture....--Major'GUN' Ggarfield, Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 17:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
delete. the rare 'really long article that shouldn't be'.--SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 05:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete. Partly because I hate the BBC Radio 2 DJ of the same name, partly because this is a long, rambly, unfocussed, unfunny article. --SirUnder User(Hi,HowAreYou?)VFHKUN 09:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Merge the good bits with and redirect to R.E.M. unless someone wants to develop the 'REM sleep' idea. -- HindleyiteConverse 13:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Merged and redirected. Not sure what the procedure is now...we've got a redirect page on VFD... --THE 13:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete
Del33t - We have two articles about the same band, and both of them are crap. - User:Slavemaster2 - 8:07 AM ET 9 December 2007
I'm not a massive fan of REM but I don't think this sucks. -- HindleyiteConverse 13:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Week Keep not too terrible. I merged the contents of the other REM article into this 'un and barely changed anything. Not too bad. --THE 13:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Keep, but just barely. Could use a rewrite tag, maybe? -- Spillin DylanTALKEDITS21:14, Dec 9
Comment. The article is actually about real-life British serial killer Rosemary West, although I do think the article could be a lot better. MadMax 03:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Something as terrible and wrong as Prussian Blue needs an Uncyclopedia entry. This just needs a little conceptual polishing.--Count of Monkey Crisco 17:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
But the problem is that the article is currently bandcruft. If it were rewritten to be about the chemicalPrussian blue, it might be an acceptable article. Pentium5dot1 05:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC)