Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Debate)
({{VFDn|Dissociative Identity Disorder}}: VFD)
 
(7,473 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{deletiondebates|[[UN:VFD]]}}{{VFDRules}}
+
{{VFDr}}
  +
[[Category:Uncyclopedia deletion]]
  +
[[Category:Pages repeatedly nominated on VFD]]
  +
[[es:Inciclopedia:VPB]]
  +
[[id:Tolololpedia:PUP]]
  +
[[ko:포럼:세탁소]]
  +
[[pt:Desciclopédia:Eliminação de páginas]]
  +
[[de:Uncyclopedia:Löschen]]
  +
<!-- Do not edit above this line -->
   
=Pages for Deletion=
+
== {{VFDn|Never-Ending Story}} ==
{{VFDRules2}}
 
<div style="display: none;">
 
<!-- COPY, do not CUT, the below template, and place it at the TOP of the page, replace "ARTICLE NAME HERE" as appropriate and please remove the arrows and stuff. It's unnecessary to keep that stuff.
 
   
== [[ARTICLE NAME HERE]] ==
+
{{VFDg|time=08:19, June 10, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=~~~~~
+
|delnumber=4
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|delnumber=1
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} Image-free randumbo. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 08:20, June 10, 2015 (UTC)
}}
+
#{{Delete}} Never compose while on drugs. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:42 10-Jun-15</small>
Don't finagle with with the above template. Seriously. You may succumb to peer pressure.
+
#{{Delete}} Maybe it's only because I've actually never read the book or seen the movie, but I just don't get any of it. Except maybe the "Excerpt" section, but even that's not very funny, and certainly won't make any sense to anyone without exposure to programming. {{User:Chunkles/sig}} 19:25, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Felt like it would never end. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 08:22, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
And place the VFD tag on the page, dammit! Otherwise, we will scrape your balls with a rusty razor blade! If you don't have balls we are willing to improvise.
 
 
New nominations at the top of the page below this line; --></div>
 
 
== [[Unquotable:Litterbox]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=19:58, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=3
 
|delete=#{{delete}} Back in 2006, {{U|some user}} created a copy of the [[sandbox]] in quotespace. Literally. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 19:58, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} An alternate namespace no more needs its own Sandbox than, well, the F.C.C. needs its own judges and welfare system. Happily, this aberration we can get rid of without a union grievance. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:03 18-Feb-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} No need for this redundancy. The quotes on this page aren't even that funny. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:01, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes in Piratespeak]], [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Obfuscata]], [[Unquotable:Quotes in Gangsta]],[[Unquotable:Quotes in Français]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=19:37, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=#{{keep}} I like the idea of these other "languages", and the unquotable pages are classic examples of these other faux languages. Besides, removing these pages should be a decision put off until the fate of the Unquotable namespace is decided, since they are linked to on the main page of the Unquotable namespace, and would require a change to that page. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:36, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{delete}} Argh matey. This be unquotes in piratespeak. Shiver me timbers and hoist the mizzen mast. Make this land-lubbing article walk the plank and send it to Davy Jones's locker. Avast, ye scalawags: yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 19:37, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Could have sworn that ''Groundhog Day'' has passed, but I keep seeing the same page over and over. Nominator counted 37 pages in this namespace: How many are prank copies of the same text? (Don't spend time researching that question....) {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>19:41 18-Feb-13</small>
 
|comments=*'''Clarification.''' There about about 65 pages, 37 of which are "real articles". This type of stuff is not counted as a "real article". There are <s>two</s> three more repeats of the mainpage. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 19:47, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:'''Yikes!''' We have allowed more than one article per VFD nomination, provided you specify exactly what is to be deleted when nominating, and you don't mind having the vote be all-or-nothing. Hint, hint. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>19:55 18-Feb-13</small>
 
*::Iz admin, go ahead and do it. Other three are [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Obfuscata]], [[Unquotable:Quotes in Gangsta]], and the somewhat "different" [[Unquotable:Quotes in Français]] --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 19:59, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:::By consensus of the only voters so far, it is so ordered. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:09 18-Feb-13</small>
 
*:::PS--The Français page is a disambig over to our French counterpart, something we should not put ourselves in the business of doing except via the Sidebar; the Obfuscata illustrates something that should be a canon rule: The bonus points for "writing an article in the style of the thing it's about" should have a big red warning sign for the repetitive, the gratuitously confusing, and the otherwise very bad, which this one is. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:14 18-Feb-13</small>
 
}}
 
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes_on_Wheels]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=20:55, June 21, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=19:28, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Anon asserts on the talk page that the material is largely plagiarized from Monty Python. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>20:55 21-Jun-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} A somewhat pointless re-telling of someone else's joke without making it interesting enough to save. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 13:12, June 22, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 08:24, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} The only salvageable parts were the intro and what it is made of, but that's not enough to justify keeping the whole thing. {{User:Chunkles/sig}} 22:20, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=3
 
|delete=#{{delete}} another unquotable reskin. This was has formatting to make it look vandalized. Largely untouched since 2006. Apparently, adding "ON WHEEELS" randomly and repeatedly was funny back in 2006. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 19:28, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Did the <s>vandal</s> author know that a VFD template was coming when he wrote his SPAN with absolute positioning to overlay it? I had a notion to hack this prank away, but I hope and expect the entire page will meet its maker soon. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>19:30 18-Feb-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} This page is ugly, and really doesn't add much of anything, and isn't even close to another "language", doesn't teach n00bs anything either. It can go. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:40, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Dumbass]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Marx Shrugged}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=13:48, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{delete}} This is a basically a reskin of [[Unquotable:Main_Page]]. And by reskin, I mean text change. This is essentially the same article as it was in 2006. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:48, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} And the "text change" is to vulgar (not even original-vulgar but vulgar in the style of Dumbass). Amusing to the author (creatively named {{U|Some user}}, sigh), not clever for the reader. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:04 18-Feb-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} Dumb but not amusing. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:42, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
   
== [[:Category:Things Retards Believe]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=22:08, June 21, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=12:16, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Another category by which to slap a tag on an article that you simply dislike the subject. Used in userspace and, of course, on [[Fox News]]. A clever insult is one thing; saying retards believe it is drive-by listcruft. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:16 18-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} 2010 author {{U|Weri long wang}} writes the opposite of the plot of ''Atlas Shrugged,'' then reverses the title too, just to make sure no one can find it. There is no other humor than to invent an acronym of C.U.N.T. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>22:08 21-Jun-15</small>
#'''Yep''' per below {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:23 18 Feb 2013}}
+
#{{Delete}} Not funny. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 08:27, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
#{{delete}} Insult category. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Title good but following article crap. I will take a bold punt and suggest the writer has never read any Marx. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:38, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
|comments=
 
*Comment: While this has no value by itself, the subcategories themselves are worth keeping, and preferably in a common area. A rename to something along the lines of “[[This page does not exist|Category:Lies for the gullible]]” or the ilk would work. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:36 18 Feb 2013}}
 
*:{{Delete}} The subcategories will survive the deletion of this category, as will, of course, the pages in the category. Apart from the un-P.C. reference to "retards," this category is an epithet with no cleverness. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:05 18-Feb-13</small>
 
*::I know. I just think the deletion leaves a category gap. It's a stupid cat, though. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:23 18 Feb 2013}}
 
*:::Most categories are in multiple meta-categories, so category deletion does not create a gap. If this category is deleted, [[:Category:Ineffective Left Wing Propaganda]], [[:Category:Nasty Right Wing Bitches‎]], [[:Category:Political Bullshit‎]], and [[:Category:Politicians‎]] will no longer be sub-sub-categories of [[:Category:Retards]]. So it isn't destroying any information, other that a "People who politics I dislike, and therefore insult (immaturely)" category. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
}}
 
 
==[[Debate]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=13:46, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=3
 
|delete=
 
#{{delete|Delete and redirect}} to [[UnDebate:Main Page]]. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:46 17 Feb}}
 
#{{Delete}} Yes, do exactly that. Some day a student on the debate team will write an article with serious ridicule of that experience. That will beat the crap out of this long ramble that treats debate as yet another Wacky War. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:40 17-Feb-13</small>
 
#{{delete}} per above. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} per above. I lost interest in this article about halfway through, and couldn't be bothered to read all of it, it's that bad. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:51, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Mexican Canadian War of 1984]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Who Do You Think}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=13:42, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=14:08, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=4
|delnumber=3
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
# {{Delete}} as discussed on [[User talk:Aleister in Chains#Mexican Canadian War of 1984]]. A winner of the ''WTF and why is it here?'' award. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:42 17 Feb}}
+
#No redeeming value as far as I can tell {{User:Reverend P. Pennyfeather/sig}} 14:08, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
#{{Delete|Delete promptly.}} No one will ever look for this article (except Anon, overnight) and no one cares about author's random history-of-the-future (set in 1984 only because 1984 is a meme). {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:19 17-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} Not even ramble, but babble, and about a nonexistent character. No comedy strategy other than rant-at-the-reader. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>14:20 28-Jun-15</small>
#{{delete}} per above. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Baffling gibberish. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 14:39, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} Only after reading the talk page, did I kind of get the author's concept. The reader should not have to do that, especially if the piece is still no more amusing or comprehensible. Obscure nonsense. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:19, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
}}
 
 
== [[Unquotable:Charles Darwin]] ==
 
*Please discuss the global issue further at [[Forum:Crapspaces]]. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:50 17-Feb-13</small>
 
{{Votervfd|time=10:59, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=#{{delete}} I'm throwing this out to see if we want to trim back the UnQuotable project. I support its deletion, because scattershot lists of quotes are not funny. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 10:59, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*[[Unquotable]] is a parody of Wikiquote. This means that it's essentially a scattershot of lists of quotes. Some of these are okay, given that it's a very limited frame. Most of them are terrible. And [[Unquotable:Steven Wright]]<ref>Now deleted, independent of the issues discussed here; a cut-and-paste from an external humor website. -Spike</ref> has recently been recreated, and as with previous incarnations is pretty woeful. While I'd agree with a massive trim on these pages (which I went through and trimmed out a lot of these a year ago, but VFD'd few of them), the namespace has it's place. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|11:04 17 Feb}}
 
*:Just because Wikipedia does something doesn't mean we should copy it. An example is the fork's recent "UnVoyage" which is likely to turn into Ultra-Towncruft, if it isn't forgotten in a few months. While the unquotable format does parody an actual thing, it is not particularly conducive to writing good material. There is no good reason why there should be a quote page by Charles Darwin, and not one by, say Preggobear. I could create a quote page for Preggobear, but anything I can say there can be , and probably is, said better in paragraph format in the mainspace article. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 11:18, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*::Yeah, but if we tried to do a [[Captain Oblivious]] article it... well, you can see what I ended up doing with it. I've trimmed this particular page down now to remove some of the worst quotes. (Although I agree - I see no value in UnVoyage. It'll go much the same way as UnBestiary in the end.) {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:17 17 Feb}}
 
*:::My issue is that you are saving weak articles by moving them out of mainspace into a "crapspace" for lack of a better term. Articles like [[Captain Oblivious]] should stand or fall on their own merits, not hide their flaws behind a namespace. It would like moving '''Robotic ghost pirates''' to '''UnLegacyRandumbo:Robotic ghost pirates''' instead of taking it to VFD. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:13, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
*::::Except that I didn't think it was VFD worthy. I felt it had merit, but not in the “frame” of mainspace. Otherwise we should delete UnDictionary because all the articles are stubs. Under that “frame”, this article works. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:42 17 Feb}}
 
----
 
<references />
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Avogadro]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|HowTo:Trick Women in 3 Easy Steps}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:49, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{delete}} Article consists of immaturely insulting the subject and grues. It is also unlinked from mainspace, besides a couple redirects. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:49, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete|Part-time penis.}} And I do hate it when grues are insulted. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:21 17-Feb-13</small>
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
   
== [[Word Salad]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=03:35, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=08:43, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Smug article from someone who has tricked a woman. A waste of the reader's time. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>03:35 30-Jun-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Sexist and unfunny. Finishes off with a crappy list. No redeeming qualities. {{User:Chunkles/sig}} 22:24, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Never funny in a million years. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:31, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Awful. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:23, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{delete}} random for the sake of random. This has been kept twice, but it has been 3 years since it has been taken to VFD. It has only 1 mainspace link, so I am guessing no-one really cares about it. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:43, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} I can't add to my argument in its last VFD; but in the one before that, before I arrived, it had overwhelming support: Don't delete until Romartus has had a say. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:45 17-Feb-13</small>
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Longinus]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|HowTo:Get a boner}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:38, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=02:56, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
|keep=
 
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delnumber=2
|delete=#{{delete}} red-link laden randumbo from 2006 that survived this long mainly due to mentioning kitten huffing. Although it has been edited a few times since 2006, it is still the same article. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:38, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Pick a topic. Pick a meme. Shuffle. The result is filler. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:49 17-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} No humor except the glee of writing to strangers about sex. It is a chore maintaining the 2012 page of {{U|SecondChanceForMe}} against continual vandalism. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>02:56 5-Jul-15</small>
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} I'm sure there is a funny and clever article that could written with this subject header, but this isn't it.--[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:31, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
}}
 
 
== [[World War III-XX]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=08:30, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{delete}} a wacky war from the 31st century between Coke and Pepsi involving Harrison Ford, Tome Cruise, and Chuck Norris. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:30, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Per above. There used to be World War articles on every number between III and about XV, and we got rid of all; did this one survive merely from our fatigue? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:47 17-Feb-13</small>
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[JC-bashers]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Dissociative Identity Disorder}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=11:59, February 16, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} (Dissociative Identity Disorder was previously known as Multiple Personality Disorder, just so you all know.) To get the joke you have to visit the revision history, to see that the article was written largely by a single user who with every revision wrote about a different thing with a different style, sometimes reverting himself (and calling his own contributions vandalism). The idea wouldn't be bad, except for the fact that the reader has no clue what this is about, unless he randomly checks the page's history or talkpage. Also, none of the revisions are very well written, I find. Finally, (albeit it's of a minor concern compared to the rest), the disorder isn't portrayed particularly well. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} WTF? --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:33, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} I don't even see the invisible hand that Nominator does, but that author {{U|So So}} used this as a sandbox. His various projects and a few of Anon's could be thought of as a collective Dissociative Identity, but I agree that this isn't obvious to most readers. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>02:45 6-Jul-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Another nonsense article (that is not even an article), that nobody will bother trying to figure out. It would have at least made more sense if each personality change was on one page, so the reader can see the dysfunction. The various personalities are barely described either, just cheesy lines left for the reader to try to figure out. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:46, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=#{{delete}} Randumbo with a hint of advocacy. It has largely been untouched since 2006, except for a wannabe-maintenance template. I think it might be a parody of Jehovah's Witnesses, since it seems that JC-bashers are Christians. (JC = Jesus Christ, I assume). Or maybe JC-bashers are bible thumpers. Whatever this article is supposed to be about, I assume we probably have (or should have) a better version somewhere. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 11:59, February 16, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Yes, exactly "randumbo with a hint of advocacy." If you are going to take on strident advocates/opponents of a sect (includes Glenn Beck), be playful and not extreme-sounding yourself--and above all, don't write crap. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:12 16-Feb-13</small>
 
#I like [[Uncyclopedia:Legal_Department/JCbashers]], but I also like [[An Article Written by Somebody that Didn't Read How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid: A Retrospective]]. I wouldn't want to reinstate the original article in that case either. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:28 16 Feb}}
 
#{{Delete}} Just not funny enough, looks like it was written by an 11 year old, except for the legal department link. That part was funny. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 23:51, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*I've heard “JC bashers” used as a term for any grass roots Christian evangelist movement. It's not a common phrase here either though. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:28 16 Feb}}
+
*The page is protected, so I couldn't add {VFD}. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
 
 
}}
 
}}
 
== [[Glenn_Beck_(Asshat)]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=14:19, February 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
#A vital page to keep Glenn Beck's honored name among the people who care most. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 14:20 15-2-'13
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{delete}} and redirect to [[Glenn Beck]]. This is a combination of "I don't like this guy's politics" and a database of Youtube videos. We already have a much better article on the subject. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 14:19, February 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
#'''Delete'''. It's a redundancy, and not a good one. SPIKE has improved it, but I don't see a point on having a "passable" article on a topic where we have a "featured" article. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|11:43 16 Feb}}
 
|comments=
 
*As "Uncyclopedia is not a catalog to things found elsewhere on the Net," I've deleted three sections that had no function but to send readers to YouTube. '''Pieces of this article intended to serve up true utterances of Beck by which to discredit him are advocacy, not humor, even if you think he is ridiculously funny.''' Some funny stuff remains <s>and I would like to see it merged into [[Glenn Beck]], as</s> "Asshat" in the title is likewise too busy being advocacy to help the reader reach the article. I assume Aleister's vote is more advocacy rather than a vote. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:31 15-Feb-13</small>
 
*:Advocacy? Are we wikipedia now? All the Fred Phelps pages are advocacy, the Hitler pages are too, I guess, and anti-Hitler pages are too, and on and on...[[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] minutes later. I remember when we moved this page to here when Glenn Beck was replaced with the other page, and there was discussion about what to call it, and Asshat won.
 
*::I reply by boldfacing a sentence of my earlier reply. Multiple wrongs don't make a right. The Hitler pages have value added by Uncyclopedians. If you intend to reassemble the YouTube collection that I deleted, please take it to a more suitable website. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:41 15-Feb-13</small>
 
*::I strike part of my earlier reply. [[Glenn Beck]] was a FA and should not receive any orphaned pieces of this article, especially if that is not an improvement. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:06 15-Feb-13</small>
 
*:::I recall when Glenn Beck was written there was some discussion about if it should replace this article, which was an established page by that time. We decided sure, as long as this page was kept around, and the discussion of what to name it was heated and laster for about a year (no it didn't, but it was discussed). I don't like the Glenn Beck page itself, it's more of an UnBooks because it's a transcript of Beck's show. This page is more encyclopedic, and I think should have remained the Beck article. And why can't we put the videos back on the talk page????? This seems a suitable place to put them, and to enjoy them at our leisure. Videos work, and many pages use them. Do we have a limit on vids (three sounds reasonable if presented well, with captions and they are appropriate to the page. The vid at UnPoetia:Well-oil birds worked so perfectly you'd think it was designed for the page) and if so, let's put a couple of them back at least. Glenn, we hardly knew ye! [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 12:45 16-2-'13
 
*::::Do we have a limit? My personal limit is 1; as when yesterday I cut out a section of [[Bear wrestler]] with no original comedy, designed only to share a TV show with other Uncyclopedians. Which is as close as you come to comedy in the deleted sections. We appreciate the work of cops but not enough to allow roughing up detainees; and we benefit from your skill but not when you use the website to catalog the rants of a commentator you disagree with. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:27 17-Feb-13</small>
 
*:::::I just visited [[Bear wrestler]]. Imagine my disappointment when I discovered it wasn't about hairy homosexual gladiators. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|02:34 17 Feb}}
 
*On a related note, I found [[Unquotable:Glenn Beck]] which is similarly themed, although it is written like a bad uncyclopedia rather than a bad liberaladvocacypedia article. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 10:50, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
}}
 
 
=Archived VFD Discussions=
 
{{VFDarchive}}
 
 
[[Category:Articles deleted by Lyrithya at some point]]
 
[[Category:Uncyclopedia deletion]]
 
[[Category:Pages repeatedly nominated on VFD]]
 
 
[[es:Inciclopedia:VPB]]
 
[[id:Tolololpedia:PUP]]
 
[[ko:포럼:세탁소]]
 
[[pt:Desciclopédia:Eliminação de páginas]]
 

Latest revision as of 09:46, July 6, 2015

Shortcut:
UN:VFD
Deletion Policy
QuickVFD
Votes for deletion

Intensive Care Unit

del log

The goal here is to improve the quality of Uncyclopedia, not to win a vote. You can edit a page during a vote. You can flip your vote if the page improves or if other voters convince you.

To nominate a page for deletion
  • Read these rules and the deletion policy.
  • Do not increase the number of active nominations on VFD to over 20, as a 1 day ban often offends. (Inactive votes, which are grayed out, don't count in the limit of 20.)
  • Please check an article's history before nominating it. If there has been vandalism, revert it to the best past version. Also, check the article's talk page to see if it is in Category:Deletion Survivor. If so, Special:WhatLinksHere will find the relevant VFD archive(s); read about how the previous vote(s) went.
  • Add {{VFD}} to the article in question. Failure to do so will invalidate the vote.
  • If an article survives VFD, do not resubmit it for at least 1 month.

Add a new article here


How to quickly find VFDable articles (using special pages)

To vote to delete or keep an article
  • Edit the section for the article in question.
  • To vote, start a new line at the end of the delete= or keep= section, beginning with #. This creates a numbered entry. Do not put a space before #. Increment the delnumber or keepnumber, whichever applies.
    • To post brief indented replies to a vote, start lines with #: with one or more colons; anything else breaks the numbered list.
  • To type a comment, start a new line at the end of the comments= section, beginning with * (as comments need not be numbered).
  • Votes with an explanation, and comments, are more helpful in analyzing the quality of an article.
  • ~~~~ - Sign and timestamp your vote. Unsigned votes will be removed without prejudice.

Do not delete any content without authorization. To change a vote, strike your old one and add a new one. Do not change other users' posts. At least 24 hours must pass before a nomination is closed or an article is deleted.

Moderated by Spike or any Admin • Now hiring for Poopsmith • Engineered by Pup (report bugs here)

edit Never-Ending Story H Archive

Score: 4 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 625 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Image-free randumbo. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 08:20, June 10, 2015 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Never compose while on drugs. Spıke Ѧ 11:42 10-Jun-15
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Maybe it's only because I've actually never read the book or seen the movie, but I just don't get any of it. Except maybe the "Excerpt" section, but even that's not very funny, and certainly won't make any sense to anyone without exposure to programming. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 19:25, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Felt like it would never end. --EStop (talk) 08:22, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch H T D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 348 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Anon asserts on the talk page that the material is largely plagiarized from Monty Python. Spıke Radiomicrophone20:55 21-Jun-15
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. A somewhat pointless re-telling of someone else's joke without making it interesting enough to save. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 13:12, June 22, 2015 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. --EStop (talk) 08:24, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. The only salvageable parts were the intro and what it is made of, but that's not enough to justify keeping the whole thing. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 22:20, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Marx Shrugged H D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 347 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. 2010 author Weri long wang writes the opposite of the plot of Atlas Shrugged, then reverses the title too, just to make sure no one can find it. There is no other humor than to invent an acronym of C.U.N.T. Spıke Radiomicrophone22:08 21-Jun-15
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Not funny. --EStop (talk) 08:27, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Title good but following article crap. I will take a bold punt and suggest the writer has never read any Marx. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:38, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Who Do You Think H T D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 187 hours
Delete (4)
  1. No redeeming value as far as I can tell Sir Reverend P. Pennyfeather (fancy a chat?) CUN VFH PLS 14:08, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Not even ramble, but babble, and about a nonexistent character. No comedy strategy other than rant-at-the-reader. Spıke Radiomicrophone14:20 28-Jun-15
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Baffling gibberish. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 14:39, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Only after reading the talk page, did I kind of get the author's concept. The reader should not have to do that, especially if the piece is still no more amusing or comprehensible. Obscure nonsense. --EStop (talk) 09:19, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit HowTo:Trick Women in 3 Easy Steps H T D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 150 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Smug article from someone who has tricked a woman. A waste of the reader's time. Spıke Radiomicrophone03:35 30-Jun-15
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Sexist and unfunny. Finishes off with a crappy list. No redeeming qualities. Chunkles talk ✏️ contribs 22:24, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Never funny in a million years. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:31, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Awful. --EStop (talk) 09:23, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit HowTo:Get a boner H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 30 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. No humor except the glee of writing to strangers about sex. It is a chore maintaining the 2012 page of SecondChanceForMe against continual vandalism. Spıke Radiomicrophone02:56 5-Jul-15
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. I'm sure there is a funny and clever article that could written with this subject header, but this isn't it.--EStop (talk) 09:31, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Dissociative Identity Disorder H T D Survivor

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 15 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. (Dissociative Identity Disorder was previously known as Multiple Personality Disorder, just so you all know.) To get the joke you have to visit the revision history, to see that the article was written largely by a single user who with every revision wrote about a different thing with a different style, sometimes reverting himself (and calling his own contributions vandalism). The idea wouldn't be bad, except for the fact that the reader has no clue what this is about, unless he randomly checks the page's history or talkpage. Also, none of the revisions are very well written, I find. Finally, (albeit it's of a minor concern compared to the rest), the disorder isn't portrayed particularly well. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. WTF? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:33, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. I don't even see the invisible hand that Nominator does, but that author So So used this as a sandbox. His various projects and a few of Anon's could be thought of as a collective Dissociative Identity, but I agree that this isn't obvious to most readers. Spıke Radiomicrophone02:45 6-Jul-15
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Another nonsense article (that is not even an article), that nobody will bother trying to figure out. It would have at least made more sense if each personality change was on one page, so the reader can see the dysfunction. The various personalities are barely described either, just cheesy lines left for the reader to try to figure out. --EStop (talk) 09:46, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • The page is protected, so I couldn't add {VFD}. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects