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.
Delete. Quite a random concept, and I didn't find it funny. May be more suited to ?pedia. Still, what do others think? --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. I moved it to Illogicopedia. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 17:42, Feb. 14, 2008
Comments
That Feeling
Keep
Delete
Delete - not at all funny--Æ 02:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. It's also short, with a poor little list at the end, and a bad concept, poorly thought out and badly written. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Cruft Huff - Stupid little stub --Kurgan 13:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
How To:Make Pot Pie
Keep
Surprising weak keep. I think it would fit in the UnBooks:Cookbook - move it there? (I will admit to chuckling slightly over the directions bit, although it could be because I am bored as hell today). --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete
Delete I have no idea what this article is about (honest) but it's not great, and I don't think we want it. MrNFork you! 00:44, Feb 13
Mild keep. Mildly funny if you consider what Taiwan's going through. The Kuomintang bias gave me a chuckle. Parsat, or, A Whole Bunch of Mischief 23:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. Vaguely amusing, considering I've never heard of "China" or "Taiwan". SirModusoperandiBoinc! 18:26, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. How apt, it really is both special and random. But not in a good way. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 22:11, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
CruftHuff - It is special all right (Special Olympics-type of special that is) --Kurgan 22:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Quite a displeasure reading. --Dexter111344 03:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
CVP - Delete because it is short and unfunny, CVP because it has been created_6_times_already. --Kurgan 01:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
QVFD instead - it's less than a week old--Æ 01:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
QVFD - I thought QVFD was for day-old articles or less, and this isn't QVFD material, but it is crap. I will put it there if you like. --Kurgan 01:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
I listed it there already. Please read upon UN:DP before nominating articles for deletion--Æ 01:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
QVFD or ICU Per above or ICU it if you think if there's anything possible saving, its less than a week old. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 [citation needed] (yell|FAQ|I did this) 02:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Comment: "Provide an initial vote (see below) and include a comment as to why you have placed the article on VFD." From that there bit at the top of the page. This isn't a dig at you as such AE, it bugs me in gereral if it happens, and I just thought I'd mention it. If the nommer can't explain why it should go, then why should it, er, go? Just a thought. I'm probably cranky. I need biscuits... --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 18:01, 13 February 2008 (EST)
Delete not funny, gets listy at parts and not worth keeping--Æ 21:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Ho hum. Uninspired, unfunny, a bit lame, other variations on that theme. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 22:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill and possibly redirect to EPIC FAIL or Kip's ED article. I personally liked it more when it redirect Goa Tse. --Dexter111344 21:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Burn it to the ground. --Hotadmin4u69[TALK] 22:13, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
In the future, please learn to count before adding articles to VFD. Thanks. —Hinoatalk.kun 21:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Mine was supposed to be #20, but the links kept on failing and how was I supposed to know that The Led Balloon was also nominated an article at the same time? ForestAngelReceive Blessings! 21:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Ever hear of the saying "look before you leap?" —Hinoatalk.kun 21:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Definitely not funny. Vanity? God knows - a Google doesn't turn up much beyond a couple of speedy deletions on Wikipedia. Get rid. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:25, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. It's vanity crap which Wikipedia did not want (on several occasions). We don't want it either. MrNFork you! 10:26, Feb 13
CruftHuff - We want it as much as Wikipedia does --Kurgan 12:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill We are NOT Wikipedia's dump! --Dexter111344 12:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
TNT
Keep
Delete
Delete Not dynamite. You need clay as well. MrNFork you! 03:01, Feb 13
Kerkill Horrible. I am not going to click on the external links. --Dexter111344 03:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Sad Fail I would like to see an article with this title in a competent writers hands. But delete the crap thats already there.--LieutenantTHEDUDEMANDude...TotallyUOTMKUNGotAF@H 03:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
CruftHuff Just awful --Kurgan 12:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Government Conspiracy
Keep
Delete
Delete The fact that someone might come to Uncyc, look up this article, and think that this is all we have to say on this subject must be a Government Conspiracy . MrNFork you! 01:04, Feb 13
Kerkill Not funny. By the way, I'm making my own Conspiracy page, if anyone wants to help... --Dexter111344 01:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill eBay for cheap asses. Good idea to me. Horrid execution. --Dexter111344 04:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Interesting idea. But one that's been turned into a crappy little stub. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
CruftHuff - Ubersh!te --Kurgan 16:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill One of the most pointless articles I ever read. --Dexter111344 04:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. At least it's short, so I didn't waste any more time on this tripe. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Bob Jones University
Keep
Keep – it's humor on a level a BJU student could probably understand. Stupid, blatant offense suits the topic, and the redlinks can be fixed. / A hog staring at a wristwatch 14:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
If the only people who can understand it are students at BJU, then it is what is called "schoolcruft", which doesn't belong on Uncyclopedia. --Kurgan 18:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hod hasharon
Keep
Delete
Delete Funny random, or just dumb? MrNFork you! 21:57, Feb 12
CruftHuff - Stupid little stub --Kurgan 22:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete Had an awesome game of this title on on the Atari ST. This article one the other hand is not so awesome, and has most of the usual candidates for deletion. MrNFork you! 19:50, Feb 12
CruftHuff - Stub --Kurgan 22:46, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill --Dexter111344 03:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Just say no, kids. And besides, Speedball 2 on the Amiga (and now XBox Live, praise be!) was far betterer! --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:35, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep Although it only just scrapes in. MrNFork you! 12:45, Feb 11
Delete
Delete. Christ that's poor. Short, unfunny, listy (OK, no longer listy thanks to MrN, but the rest still stands), dull, crap. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
CruftHuff - Utter crap --Kurgan 01:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill It's short, and yet he's so tall. Delete the picture as well since it'll serve no purpose once this goes bye-bye. --Dexter111344 03:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. It's listy, it's dull, it's not linked from anywhere except here right now, and it's not been updated in ages. It can go. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Deleting. Will not be missed. MrNFork you! 12:52, Feb 11
Kerkill-ing. Just wasn't funny. --Dexter111344 22:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep Maybe I'm just in a good mood, but it actually made me smile. Makes use of the repeating joke rather well, without going over the top. (note Rob is the main man) MrNFork you! 19:42, Feb 12
Keep - and semi-protect the article; Because Rob had sex with Beth. --Gilgal1(Talk to me bitch!!!) 07:44, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. Reminds me of Cowboy Bebop. It's got some decent lines, some good ideas, and frankly I like the idea of only employing one smiling Chinese man and re-shooting him in different spots for the sequel. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. - This has got to be the most horrid and stupidest parody of Cloverfield I have ever seen. Besides, we have Passion of the Christ 3 to turn into the new Cloverfield article. --Uncognito 18:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Never forget that Rob had sex with Beth. --Dexter111344 21:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
CruftHuff - Random, unfunny, and looks like a test page at first glance --Kurgan 22:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
9-21-07. Never forget. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 19:47, Feb. 12, 2008
9-21-07. Never--wait, what am I doing? Kept, voting closed. —Hinoatalk.kun 21:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Wife carrying
Keep
Delete
Delete I have seen this sport on TV. It really is a real sport! You win your wife's weight in beer, and it's actually quite funny. This article however is not. Short, with not much more than two pants list. MrNFork you! 23:55, Feb 11
Delete. I'm sure there is a good article to be got out of Wife Carrying. This, however, is neither it nor a good place to start from. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete I think this can go, it's rather pointless and short on humour. That's the article of course, not the place which is actually where lots of very nice people come from... MrNFork you! 23:44, Feb 11
Delete. The writer of the article truly is batfuck insane and should be put in a straitjacket in a room with padded walls, electrified bars, and armed guards. Parsat, or, A Whole Bunch of Mischief 04:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Wow, that's, er... Well, there may be some decent content in all that, but I really can't see it, and I tried! --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 22:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. It's got a "good idea" template on it, but I'm damned if I can see why. To me, it's unfunny and a bit random, and infinitely deletable. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Second UU on all he said. MrNFork you! 12:50, Feb 11
Delete. Under user be damned! --Kip > Talk•Works•• 18:29, Feb. 11, 2008
Delete. It's cruft, of the 2005 variety, it's... A really dull little stub with no funny that I can see. And where the fuck "Darth Velociraptor" fits in god only knows. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill --Dexter111344 20:53, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Gabe Newell
Keep
Delete
Delete. Well, it's kind of gamecruft (Gabe being Valve top bod and all), but mainly it's not funny and it's had very little love. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. It does make me happy. Of course, I am quite mad. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 04:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep I don't know why but that was damn funny. I loved the end. SirDJ~Irreverent
Keep Loads of potential. And humor-free? No way. "Do not attempt to hug evil robots; they convert humans into fuel using a process which looks like hugging." --§.|WotM|PLS|T|C|A 07:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. What they said. Not the above voters, the voices in my head. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 18:22, Feb. 11, 2008
Delete
Delete Short humour free stub. But does it make you happy? MrNFork you! 04:33, Feb 11
Comments
Well I took a good kicking on this one! Bah Humbug! MrNFork you! 09:59, Feb 11
Kept
Gypsy
Keep
Delete
D-1337 In the future I see many list... but no funny. SirDJ~Irreverent
Delete. A large collection of lists, and nothing redeeming. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:23, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Maybe move one or two lines into Pikey (which also needs a tidy up). I will do this myself later if I can get of my Lock Stock and two smoking barrels. MrNFork you! 13:06, Feb 11
Keep. Re-read. Thought about it more. Re-read again, and actually laughed at the bit about the witnesses not being credible as they had been detained by the German government. MrNFork you! 11:58, Feb 10
Keep. As it can be rewritten or have Junk removed from it. Pages like this are constant IP targets so someone needs to keep an eye on these to prevent them from becoming random crap. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 [citation needed] (yell|FAQ|I did this) 20:22, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. I think this one is worth keeping. MrNFork you! 21:01, Feb 9
Weak keep. Go on then, give it a rewrite tag and see what happens. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 10:08, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Uncyclopedia exists for one reason, and one reason only, to take the piss out of Nintendorulez. Come on guys...get with the program. Keep. -- Sir Mhaille (talk to me)
I liked it In joke of an In joke? SirDJ~Irreverent 00:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep - This is probably the best spin-off stub ever. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 11:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Fine - You remember that episode of The Simpsons where Sideshow Bob was about to kill Bart, but then he just couldn't do it? --Kip > Talk•Works•• 20:10, Feb. 9, 2008
GOD YES! I've been protesting this piss-poor turd of a spin-off for months! Last time I nominated it the common clain was "it's an in-joke". No it isn't. IT'S A SPIN-OFF. You know, like those Winkler pages the same people voted against? Anyway, yeah, this article is crap and only meant as a Savethemooses ego boost. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 22:42, Feb. 8, 2008
Ineligibleforthreereasons. I expect an admin to not do this. Regular users would get banned. --Dexter111344 22:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Nothing is ever ineligible for VFD. Except VFD. And the Main Page. And VFH. And VFP. And VFS. And User:Zombiebaron. Well, most of the User: namespace really. Unless the page is yours. But those should really go on QVFD or admin's talkpages. Oh, also QVFD is ineligible. But yeah. Other than that, everything is fair game, bucko. -- BrigadierGeneralSirZombiebaron 22:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Of course, you'll get generally hated upon if you do nominate something stupid, like anything in Category:VFH. —Hinoatalk.kun 22:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Kip, may I ask how this is an ego boost to STM? --Dexter111344 03:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Not that he's voted against, I look like a jerk. But at one point I figured 1) It would be kept, thus priding himself in the fact that he can get away with anything, 2) It whores one of his articles. --Kip > Talk•Works•• 20:10, Feb. 9, 2008
It is one of the cleverest stubs on the site IMO it works better than a full historical article ever could. SirDJ~Irreverent
Keep. It is what it says it is. Also, it is what it says it is. Deja vu, however is superior, but I can't help but feel that I've said that before. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 19:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. If we deleted this would we not have to send it to CVP? That would not be good. Can we get this off the VFD page now. Please? MrNFork you! 12:04, Feb 10
Delete - One of my least favourite shorties. It just isn't funny. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 11:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. - Epic effort, now fuck off (Bonner) (Talk) Feb 10, 20:25
Comments
If deleted, it probably needs to be sent to Uncyclopedia:Protected titles since any sensible recreation (as a redirect, disambig, etc.) would fail to qualify as an endless loop. --Pentium5dot1 21:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. Point though: lots of people confuse self-reference with in-joke. It's not really an in-joke, other than the fact that it's excessively short and still exists, which seems to make articles automatically be labelled as in-jokes these days. •Spang•☃•talk• 02:29, 08 Feb 2008
Keep Oh, good heavens - stuff like this isn't harming anyone like Ethel Merman's Disco Album did when it killed off The Saint in 1988. Dame GUNPotYWotM2xPotM17xVFHVFPPooPMS•YAP• 03:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep - Deleting this would be far too ironic (in a bad way). We need at least one article that takes the piss out of people who don't like short articles. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 11:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep I have not been here long enough to care about this one, but can we take this nom off the page now? MrNFork you! 11:41, Feb 10
Delete -- We have MORE than enough self reference guys. Hell, I've written entire sentences linking each word to a different one. Can't we just keep one or two of the better ones (Sure I'll compromise) -- Village Idiot♠KUN Free Speech 02:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Damn, you're right. And while we're at it let's cut back to three satires, we have lots of those. And a couple of first-person style, an encyclopaedic style one, some hyperbole and understatement ones, a few puns, one or two ironic ones, some surreality and a little bit of wit. Parody is right out. Or maybe self-reference is a just humour style that fits well in a parody encyclopaedia, and you can't judge a large group of articles by the style of humour they share. •Spang•☃•talk• 03:45, 08 Feb 2008
Delete Self-reference is fine. However, this isn't funny. And yes, I understand the joke; it just isn't a funny one. --THINKER 16:44, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep I think it has potential, obvious parody of a boring wikipedia article. Seen much worse on VFD. SirDJ~Irreverent
Weak keep. I don't think it's bad. I like some of the reactions at the end, for instance, and there are some ideas in there. It needs reworking to be easier to read and suchlike, but I don't think it's that bad. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep - There's enough funny in there. SirCs1987UOTM.t.c 11:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep For goodness sake - this is another example of something that needs some work but is neither offensive or innane. Dame GUNPotYWotM2xPotM17xVFHVFPPooPMS•YAP• 14:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Keep. What Prettiestpretty said...but manlier, hopefully. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 15:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Quit reading about 1/4th of the way through. I refuse to read more. Just because someone put effort into it doesn't mean it should be kept. This is a humour-wiki. We should kept it if it is funny. This isn't funny. --Dexter111344 04:09, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Kerkill Sorry DiZ. And thank you, AE. Because of you, I get to make additional/unnecessary edits by having to add the {{VFD}} to the articles you listed so the votes aren't invalidated!!! --Dexter111344 20:36, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete I think this can go. Note to everybody (including myself)... REMEMBER THE VFD TAG!MrNFork you! 20:41, Feb 10
Kerkill --Dexter111344 19:56, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
WTF No Lego's Ths one is horible and the previous version befroe the rewrite, as seen here is not as bad but is still crap. ----Pleb- Sawblade5 [citation needed] (yell|FAQ|I did this) 03:41, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Green wing
Keep
Delete
Delete There is a British show of this name, but this is just random nonsense in my eyes. MrNFork you! 21:55, Feb 9