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 VFD.
Assimilate. There can be only one. --Dame 17:36, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Comments
Kept Actually, I'm going to break every rule in the book (there is no book) and close this one. Bring it back when colonization is done... MrNFork you! 18:37, Mar 30
Disintegrate. Saberwolf116 15:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Kerkill Short, unfunny, and hasn't even been edited since 2006 (excluding the addition of {{VFD}}, of course). --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 17:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Give it to the muck spreader. --Romartus 19:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete.. Besides all its other obvious sins - this article is simply a good example of random writing - or what I call - the string theory of humour where you attach unrelated ideas and think it will make OTHER people laugh. --Romartus 19:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. That's helping Dex. Cheers. MrNFork you! 14:23, Mar 30
Comments
Where's the {{VFD}}? Oh wait... IT'S NOT THERE!!! Read the deletion policy before posting here. Nom closed. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 02:15, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Don't vote keep soley on the basis that someone forgot a VFD tag. It is easier to insert the tag yourself than to change your vote. And, its less of a formatting mess too. --Mnb'z 01:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Nom OH MY GOD THE VFD QUEUE IS GETTING LOW QUICK SPAM RANDOMPAGE AND FIND SOMETHING TO NOMINATE --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 02:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Idea is good but not this article. --Romartus 07:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
delete. Changing me vote... Did not notice the pantsness... MrNFork you! 16:59, Mar 30
Comments
I'd be more sympathetic to this article if it were actually about Virgin Mobile, but instead it's some randumb tale about selling grade D virgins for eating and sacrifice. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 16:15, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Keep I reverted back to a version in 2007 before people who think that racist ranting = funny. Note... Being Racist is OK in Uncyclopedia, but you have to be more create than that. MrNFork you! 16:35, Mar 28
Imperial Colonization.Saberwolf116 19:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Keep It's horrid because the land is horrible. Ace Attacker 04:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete
Delete. or rewrite. Seriously horrid.--A.Z?MUN123 •T•C•E 16:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete..'Thailand is a country in central Africa'..Ha ha ha - so funny (!!?). Come on - a blank space is better than this stab at being humorous. --Romartus 18:57, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Did you read the whole article? This article has over 700 edits and a history which goes back years. Throwing all that away is surely crazy. MrNFork you! 19:05, Mar 28
Comments
I did read it . If it has 700 edits and has been nominated for deletion - then obviously all that labour was in vain. It is still a pig with lipstick right now and I can't see how it can be rescued. --Romartus 19:10, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete So I tried to fix this article, and found that by reverting a load of bad edits there was nothing left. Take a look in the history. There are two reverts prior to what is there now, and I think all the versions are pants. Let's get rid of the lot. MrNFork you! 04:16, Mar 28
Kerkill Wouldn't have been funny had I invalidated this entry cause no one placed the {{VFD}}? --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 22:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
"Vanity"? "don't know"? You guys are missing out on some good music. --monika 02:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I never said vanity. I know he's a legitimate musician. I'm just not very knowledgeable of them. Regardless, I really see no way there is humo(u)r in this. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 02:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I tend to assume band=vanity. I'll reread it, but if I don't change my vote it's because I agree with Dexter. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 02:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I never said it was a good article... Honestly, if KOMPRESSOR wrote a vanity article on himself, it would be a lot better than this. Better and more capitalized.--monika 02:35, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. I actually thought it was kind of funny, until I found out that "Babies on Spikes" really is an Eddie Izzard joke and that this article just sort of reports on the joke and adds nothing to it. Well, that's lame. pillow talk 00:31, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Weak Keep This is a stub but a vote to keep.--Romartus 09:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Weak Keep & rewrite tag I think this has some potential for a later rewrite, and having a stub would probably attract more rewrite fairies than a blank slate for this one. --Mnb'z 17:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Kerkill I really don't like this one though. Only thing that is any good from this is Bob the Terminator. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 13:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete I was going to touch this one up, I really was, but now I think it's best to let it die. The concept is redeemable, but the images suck hard. To rewrite it I'd have to throw out the images, and there goes the article. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 06:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. I suppose the idea may be worth an article, but I see nothing in this worth keeping. --UU - natter12:37, Mar 23
Delete. This is not suitable for a rewrite tag as it's a made up thing. For made up things {{fix}} can be used, although I don't recommend fix be used much as it's more fair to bring the page to VFD. After 30 days the fix page might be huffed. Some of these admins are crazy mad huffing machines ya know. MrNFork you! 23:48, Mar 24
Bear in mind though, that on VFD, it'll likely be deleted in less than 24 hours. Which is more fair now? •Spang•☃•talk• 01:33, 25 Mar 2009
VFD because chances are that no one will actually even look at something tagged with {{fix}} before one of the more deletion hungry admins huffs it after 30 days. Personally I usually only tag {{fix}} onto things which have recently slipped through ICU. MrNFork you! 01:45, Mar 25
Comment
"Crazy mad huffing machines" my ass. ZB was. Famine kinda was. I would be. Others, no. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 23:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
You'd have to kill me first! Serious. I. Don't. Wannabe. A. Goddamn. Admin.. EVAH!!!! Periods. Are. So. Cash. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 19:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I'll be an admin. I wouldn't actually ever use the new tools, but it's fun to sort of be able to intimidate people with the title. pillow talk 18:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept I will slap a {{fix}} onto it. MrNFork you! 23:27, Mar 26
Comment. Should be moved to undictionary and trimmed perhaps. --Romartus 15:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your suggestion regarding Smartichoke! When you feel an article needs fixin', please feel obligated to make whatever changes you feel are needed, (even though they'll probably be reverted 5 seconds later). Uncyclopedia is a wiki, so almost anyone can edit almost any article by almost simply following the edit link almost at the top. You don't even need to log in in most cases! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Uncyclopedia Cabal encourages you to be italic. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly, and your 6 month ban will fly by faster than you think. If you're not sure how editing works, check out proper wiki formatting, or use the sandbox to try out your vandalizing skills. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 19:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. Perhaps an unbook section piece. The title and idea isn't bad. --Romartus 15:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Form 99a-Int
Keep
Keep. It's crap by itself, but put all these stars together and you get the constellation that is a ball of red tape, glowing silently above the lake of mixed metaphors. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 19:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Batman keep By the way, Batman keep is the strongest keep imaginable. But this is great. I love the whole series. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 20:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Delete the lot if this is what they look like. Five lines maketh not an article . --Romartus 15:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete Not funny. Making a game out of this is a good idea, but whoever put this category together is doing it wrong. pillow talk 17:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Comments
This appears to be functionally part of a game. Could we move this to the Game namespace or at least userfy it somewhere? --Pentium5dot1t~^_^~c 17:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and moved some pages. But I can only move so much in a certain amount of time. Damn anti-spam measure. —SirSocky(talk)(stalk)GUNSotMUotMPMotMUotYPotMWotM 16:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
Kept Thanks Socky. Make sure ya get em all... MrNFork you! 16:38, Mar 26
Delete. Not worth keeping. agreed. --Romartus 15:19, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Comments
Comment: No. No sweeping deletions like that. You want rid of them, nom each page the proper way. People have had to do it before, including Hype with his HyperVFD idea, MrN on his quest through shortpages and others. No VFD shortcuts. Don't be lazy, there's been plenty of room on VFD of late. Poopsmiths: leave this up a little while so folks see it and stuff. Ta. --UU - natter15:26, Mar 25
Well, although I would have voted to keep these, I like Socky's idea of category deletion. Especially when all the articles in the category are written by the same person at the same time, so it's like one big article spread out over several pages. If anything, move these pages to the Game namespace. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 19:07, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
One of the main reasons for doing things properly is the VFD template - adding it to the individual pages so anyone watching them with a interest in them can pipe up on here to save them if they want. Might not work so well with category deletion. --UU - natter10:23, Mar 26
Delete. How did I miss this when I went through short pages? Ah, I remember now. Dexter's mom was sucking my cock at the time. MrNFork you! 14:39, Mar 26
Delete. Wow, that's an unfunny stub. Surprising, when you see who started it way back when, but I can't see the point in keeping this. --UU - natter12:55, Mar 25
Delete.. Shake bottle of 'Insect Death' - and spray at this article. --Romartus 15:38, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Pretty pointless article, not edited for a year, not linked from anywhere, not loved, not funny and not likely to improve. Get rid. --UU - natter11:47, Mar 25
Delete. Is this a Kiwi inspired article ?. How many NZ's have put an article on uncyclopedia ?? This may be the only contribution from 'down there'. --Romartus 15:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Kerkill I get home and what do I see? An invite to be poopsmith and lots of crap! Bastards, the whole lot of you. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 19:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Comments
Wedgie
Keep
Delete
Nom Awful --Asahatter (annoy) 09:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Stubby Stub that must have slipped under the radar. --Romartus 10:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
very keep - This a pretty notable book (I read it at school) - I think it's more of a rewrite case.--Sycamore(Talk) 20:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Please see the VFD section in my essay for my thoughts on these types of votes (Keep/Rewrite votes). —SirSysRq (talk) 23:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know this "SysRq" guy? Not sure I have seen him on VFD b4... MrNFork you! 01:27, Mar 25
Delete
Delete. Nom and 4! Sorry ~ Rbpolsen♦☺ 15:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Good GOD! Horrible. So many violations of HTBFANJS it's just sad.Saberwolf116 17:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Kerkill I haven't read Animal Farm, but I have read 1984. This just isn't funny. At all. Poor Crabby... --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 20:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Reload and try again... MrNFork you! 22:13, Mar 24
Delete. A stub and a list and one mostly-not-terrible line. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 01:11, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Comments
I never read the HTBFANJS guide. Does that mean all my articles need to be deleted? Gift comes without guidance too, y'know. ---kun "whisper sweet nothings into thine ear..." 20:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
What I meant, Nachlader, was that things that are stupid and unfunny with no redeeming value need to be deleted. Pointless Drivel.Saberwolf116 21:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Syca - I know it's notable. George "Fucking" Orwell wrote it. I just haven't read it. I highly doubt any of what's currently there would be used when rewritten. Let's kerkill it and press restart. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 21:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. This article has a lot of links. Delete this and all the others will have to be changed. --Romartus 09:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
So redirect it to Jebus then. Or get Mnbvcxz's bot or MrN9001 to change the links. Job done. Having a lot of links isn't a reason to keep of itself. --UU - natter11:35, Mar 24
Musical Movie
Keep
Delete
Delete. yet moar moviecruft. --Mnb'z 14:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete.. I am not clear on how crablogger managed to set up an entire jokeless "fictitious movies wiki" without anyone noticing. pillow talk 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Abstain. Are these pages breeding like rabbits ? Delete one - and three more spring up ? . Shame the writer spends so much time on a fundamentally weak spoof. --Romartus 15:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Most of these articles are the work of Crablogger, who retired in late July of 2008. Basically, he created this series, and the even worse "Slappy's Angels" without anyone noticing. The worst of the Slappy's Angels" articles were vfd'd rather quickly, but a few slipped under the radar, and most of the "{insert adjective} Movie" articles weren't deleted.
That is normally how wiki's work; alot of crap can accumulate without anyone noticing, and "deletion jihads" often miss stuff, or only get the worst.
Keep.WAIT? What? STOP!"Should be trimmed down and merged with Windows XP(?) " What the hell does that mean? This is VFD. We delete pages here. The way it works is you do the merge first, then bring the dead page here afterwards. What are you guys who are voting delete Talking about? If this page is deleted, who is going to merge it with anything. ? Hold your horses guys. MrNFork you! 10:19, Mar 21
Keep per above. Also, when making a nomination, add {{VFD}} to said article instead of making me do it. I had to add VFD tags to EVERYONE of them. These could have simply be made invalid noms if I hadn't. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 13:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Keep for now per MrN9000 --Mnb'z 17:07, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
MrN, that logic seems a little bit selective. You could say the same thing about articles that get moved to the userspace because individuals want to work on them while the community wants to delete them. If the page gets deleted, who's going to move it anywhere? Maybe we should agree to treat articles to be merged the same way we agreed to treat articles to be userspaced, so we don't end up keeping articles that don't deserve it. (Also, if we merge first and shoot later, then if the article does get kept by its own merit, we have two copies of the same stuff floating around because of the merge.) --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 02:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
The difference is that when something is userspaced, it still exists on the wiki. It is quite hard to merge two articles when you can't look at one of them :) Articles are generally merged by reworking/editing one of the two articles; the merger has no reason to mirror his/her edits on both pages. After the content is merged, the bad/dead page is brought to VFD for deletion (or deletion & redirection). --Mnb'z 04:17, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Still, moving an article off the mainspace before it's voted for deletion is a big no-no. After the content is merged, it exists on the bad page and the page it was merged onto, creating redundancy, especially if the bad page is kept. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 04:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. MrNFork you! 04:57, Mar 23
The policy for moving pages to the userspace is first get a vote for deletion and then move. The policy (according to your vote) for merging articles is merge first and then get a vote for deletion. This is inconsistent. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 05:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Take a look at Uncyclopedia:Maintenance/Merge. We even have a merge template. You slap that on, and wait a bit. If anyone objects it can be sorted out then. The difference is that when a merged is done the history is still available should anyone want to change it back. When the page is moved to userspace it's effectively totally gone. Though it's still in userspace it will not be found by searches, or links to that page. VFD is not where you discuss the potential for merges. You do that using the {{merge}} template, and the talk pages of the articles in question. I hope that clears that up? MrNFork you! 05:53, Mar 23
(Just imagine this is indented to kingdom come) The merge template makes sense with totally redundant articles, like Asylum and Asylums. What I'm thinking, and what I think Col.swordman is hinting at, is the case where the good content should be salvaged into a relevant article only if the original article gets VFD'd. So, just like it's only necessary to move an article to userspace because it was VFD'd of the mainspace, it's only necessary to merge an article into another one because the bad article was VFD'd out of its right to exist independently. In cases like these, the vote for deletion necessitates the merge. Does that make sense? --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 06:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, I think I understand your line of reasoning. Basically, you want a vote on deletion, then keep the article until someone can merge the good material into Windows Vista, and then delete the article. However, that is not how the merging process works. If you see a stub that should be merged into a larger article, the standard process would be to put a merge tag on it, maybe leave some talk page comments, merge the article if no one objects, and then put the stub on VFD. That method is alot "cleaner" for several reasons, mainly, your proposed way would leave a condemned but not yet deleted article floating around in mainspace.. --Mnb'z 06:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
A vote for merge? Na. Why not just use the talk pages? The point is that there will be a VFD vote anyway when the dead page is sent here and any objections can be dealt with then. With the proposed way, what happens if someone removes the merge template or edits the article before the merge is done? It could sit with that template on it for months. There is also no way of stopping anyone adding the merge template without following the proposed new procedure. MrNFork you! 06:46, Mar 23
OK. It seems that I have stirred up a fair bit of debates here. I am not saying that we should definitely merge this piece or any other piece with a certain article. I am just letting you guys decide what is to be done with it. Articles this big require a lot of time and energy to trim down, and if it does indeed prove to have no salvageable value, then there will be no reason for me or anyone else to spend any more effort on it. That's why I have put a question mark next my comment. I just don't want to save something that may turn out to have no value in saving. The logic is just that simple. -- The Colonel(talk) 13:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
In future, please only use VFD for articles which (in your opinion) clearly need all the content in them deleted. Not for any other purpose. It actually takes a lot of effort on the part on the community to make a VFD vote. There is reading, typing your vote, and archiving (which includes adding a template to the talk page when the article is kept). I suspect that effort could have been better used elsewhere. Like doing the merge for example... MrNFork you! 13:54, Mar 23
Kept BUT DON'T ARCHIVE YET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. I want people to read this so this does not happen again. VFD IS VOTE FOR DELETION. MrNFork you! 14:00, Mar 23
Wait... This isn't where we feature stuff? Vote For Da feature!? That's what this is. You, ma'am, are on the crack rock. --MegaPleb•Dexter111344•Complain here 21:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Keep. - Looks harmless enough to me...--Sycamore(Talk) 16:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Keep. On balance - keep though it is a bit loose as an article. Can the writer be encouraged to rewrite it a bit ??--Romartus 18:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Delort This really belongs on ?pedia. It feels too much like a madlib to be a funny kind of random. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 01:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
The writer was a "fly-by" account, which had only 8 edits over a two day period from the 9th-11th of April, 2007. --Mnb'z 18:49, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
No consensus after 5 days. Keepted. --UU - natter11:20, Mar 24
Musical Movie 2
Keep
Delete
Delete. moar movie cruft. --Mnb'z 14:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete.. Take the piano away. --Romartus 15:15, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete.. I am not clear on how crablogger managed to set up an entire jokeless "fictitious movies wiki" without anyone noticing. pillow talk 18:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. plot that goes nowhere, namedrop spam, related article spam, happens in the future, has cartoon characters as actors. Typical "Moive-cruft". --Mnb'z 14:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete. - Yeah these are just lousy.--Sycamore(Talk) 14:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete.. I am not clear on how crablogger managed to set up an entire jokeless "fictitious movies wiki" without anyone noticing. pillow talk 18:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Britain
Delete. . Stick it where the sun don't shine (like Dracula's bedroom). --
Thailand
Weak Keep This is a stub but a vote to keep.--
Comment. Should be moved to undictionary and trimmed perhaps. --
Abstain. Perhaps an unbook section piece. The title and idea isn't bad. --
