Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Unquotable:Quotes_in_Dumbass)
({{VFDn|Short Circuit}})
 
(6,439 intermediate revisions by 93 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]]
  +
<!-- Do not edit above this line -->
   
=Pages for Deletion=
+
== {{VFDn|The Last World War}} ==
{{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]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=09:49, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=~~~~~
+
|delnumber=3
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|delnumber=1
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} In depth analysis, stage-by-stage using maps, of a made-up conflict that only the author cares about. Complete with made-up statistics like "123,456" as well. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 09:49, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{delete|It is occasionally criticized for being slightly destructive.}} The intro--from which that sentence is taken--looked promising, but the descriptions of the conflict didn't do anything for me. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141011162737}}
  +
#{{Delete}} This article about nothing keeps begging for editors' time to fix it up, while never inducing anyone to take control and make it funny. See also '''Comments'''. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:05 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
|keepnumber=1
  +
|keep=
  +
#{{Keep}} Sorry, but I found it funny, especially the maps. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 12:27, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*I voted {{Keep|Keep}} [[Uncyclopedia:Votes_for_deletion/Archive235#The_Last_World_War|last time]] based on Aleister doing work, a commitment that he says in the ballot he never made. I had been moved at the concept of the unknowability of a Last War; now I find the concept undeveloped and I think the bit about humanity going extinct and the author being a panda is dumb. Llwy is working on it, but the maps Anton199 likes suggest to me comic book, not encyclopedia; and the problem is the text, which needs a better comedy theme than "War so nutty!" {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:48 11-Oct-14</small>
  +
*:All I did was fix some spelling and formatting, and I don't see myself doing any more; I wouldn't overestimate me. It's more readable now, but no funnier. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141011165618}}
 
}}
 
}}
Don't finagle with with the above template. Seriously. You may succumb to peer pressure.
 
   
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.
+
== {{VFDn|Devon}} ==
   
New nominations at the top of the page below this line; --></div>
+
{{VFDg|time=02:09, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=5
== [[Unquotable:Litterbox]] ==
+
|delete=
{{Votervfd|time=19:58, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Yet another article about some small area in England which is said to be inhabited by some sort of subhuman creatures that don't really speak English. [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 02:09, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#:Small area of England! It's one of the most famous counties. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 09:14, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#::To some of us, England itself is a "small area." {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:29 22-Oct-14</small>
  +
#:::Aye, to those of you with a small history, yes. ;) {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 13:59, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{delete|the disease known as ‘chav’.}} Long string of attacks on Devon, with no humour and less concept. I believe there was a campaign to clear out such towncruft earlier in the century, but I wasn't there at the time; I was busy huffing imaginary rainbows. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012021357}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Whatever ScottPat devises as a replacement will be better. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:29 22-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Don't know how soon I'll finish the re-write so might as well delete this now. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 08:57, October 23, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} and {{Replace}} with Scott's article, when it's ready. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 10:34, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|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)
 
#Delete like it's 1999. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 00:52 19-2-'13
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*[http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Devon?oldid=153094 Here] is the last version by the first author; it's nothing spectacular and it's very short, but it's better than what's there now. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012022051}}
  +
*:Not much in the original version worth keeping, nor even worth the time to give it mark-up. I've deleted a lot of cruft from the current version; there is material inside that one could make an article out of. The content-free Intro prepares the reviewer for the worst. Unfortunately, the new author of [[Dudley]], {{U|Mjr74}} lives far away from Devon, if I read my maps aright, so we can't saddle him with this. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:25 12-Oct-14</small>
  +
*:I notified Mjr74 anyway; he says he has visited Devon and has stuff he could add. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:56 14-Oct-14</small>
  +
*I've gone for a [[User:ScottPat/Devon|re-write]]. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 09:14, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*:Hooray! {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:29 22-Oct-14</small>
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes in Piratespeak]], [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Obfuscata]], [[Unquotable:Quotes in Gangsta]],[[Unquotable:Quotes in Français]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Good Electricity and Bad Electricity}} ==
{{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=3
 
|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>
 
#Delete like it's 1999. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 00:52 19-2-'13
 
|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=14:04, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=19:28, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=2
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} A tiny bit of pseudo-intellectualism. Might fit on Illogicopedia. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:04 12-Oct-14</small>
  +
#Agreed. I'll stick it there right now. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012183634}}
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
+
|comments=*It's well written. I'm inclined to leave it, so that it may pleasantly surprise those who stumble across it. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 09:19, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
|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)
 
#Delete like it's 1999. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 00:52 19-2-'13
 
|comments=
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Dumbass]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Uterus or GTFO!}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=13:48, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=00:38, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=3
  +
|delete=
  +
#Per Spike on my talk page, this article documents a meme without making it funny. It seems to exist mainly to advertise pictures of pregnant women. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141013003852}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Per me on her talk page: "A flagrant example of (1) basing an Uncyclopedia article on a meme (viz, "Tits or GTFO," that is: post pornography or I will assume it never happened) from another website and (2) extrapolating so far that the reader has to "guess the punch line to read the joke." I stated no opinion on his goals, as I would grant {{U|Mnbvcxz}} his little affectation if he would just quit changing diapers and return. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:49 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:17, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
+
|comments=If anything brings back {{u|mnbvcxz|Preggo man}}, it will be deleting this article. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 12:05, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
|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)
 
#Delete like it's 1999. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 00:52 19-2-'13
 
|comments=
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[:Category:Things Retards Believe]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Threesome}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:16, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=12:11, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=5
|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}} Article, ostensibly about group sex, makes the point that Catholics whip sinners, and keeps making it and making it until it becomes totally non-encyclopedic and the goal is to see how far into the reader's head it can be driven, not to be funny. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:11 13-Oct-14</small>
#'''Yep''' per below {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:23 18 Feb 2013}}
+
#It's like the article is whipping the reader's brain for committing the sin of trying to read it. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141013160517}}
#{{delete}} Insult category. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete|Ho hum}} Whatever it is it doesn't seem to be funny. [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 03:45, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Agreed. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 01:12, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} It has a joke: the narrator whips himself after each erotic moment, in order not to succumb to the sin, and his interlocutor finds it arousing, but it's the only one and I don't think it's worth it. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 10:31, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=1
  +
|keep=
  +
#{{Keep}} It's a bit silly but I don't see why it should head for the shredder. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:01, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
|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]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Miranda Cosgrove's Uterus}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=13:46, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=13:15, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
 
 
|delnumber=4
 
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{delete|Delete and redirect}} to [[UnDebate:Main Page]]. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:46 17 Feb}}
+
#{{Yuk|Delete}} I confess I only read the first paragraph. (If anyone wants to tell me I'm an irresponsible jerk for nomming it without first reading the whole thing, go right ahead ... but please read the whole thing yourself before you do that.) [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 13:15, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
#{{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>
+
#:Yeah, I'll step up to that task; the reason VFD is here is to ensure authors that their stuff won't be deleted without discussion, vote, and 24-hour notice; and authors should get the additional safeguard of knowing that any nominator will evaluate the whole thing. (Even the history, as the rules require, and perhaps the talk page.) If all you know is that it has a crappy Intro, repair might not require deleting the entire page. If you had gotten to the end, you would have seen a hint that this is one of the articles fleshing out {{U|Mnbvcxz}}'s pregnancy infatuation. Some voters may view this as an inherent part of the history of Uncyclopedia. On the nomination itself, I'm abstaining. Cosgrove is a celebrity but there is no real comedy point to us speculating about her innards. We have deleted knock-offs of this meme. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:23 13-Oct-14</small>
#{{delete}} per above. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
+
#::Wait ... did you say this is a ''meme?'' Like, claiming weird stuff about Miranda Cosgrove's organs is a standing joke on the Internet? I don't understand the world. That is clear. [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 14:55, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
#{{Delete}} per above. I lost interest in this article about halfway through the sample debate, and couldn't be bothered to read all of it, it's that bad. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:51, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
#:I meant only an Uncyclopedia meme or [[Uncyclopedia:In-jokes|in-joke]], though this is not in any official list; not that it goes wider than Uncyclopedia. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>15:03 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
#I, on the other hand, ''did'' read the whole thing, and I came to the same conclusion. Indeed, uterine newts (and sometimes eels) and Miranda Cosgrove (who played Carly Shay in [[iCarly]], which may have originated the newt-pregnancy meme) are injokes here, perpetuated by Mnbvcxz--and I don't find the newt pregnancy stuff to be funny, which is to be expected from something that is merely an expression of someone's fetish. On this tine of the fork, arousal does not equal amusement. I will also echo the importance of reading the whole article, as [[Chess]], which has a sucky intro but a perfectly good middle, was deleted on the fork in Forest Fire Week, IIRC after being tagged by someone who often does not read past the intro and has thus destroyed several perfectly good articles. This anecdote is here not to shoehorn in goings-on at another random website for no reason, but to provide an example of what we shouldn't do here. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141013154855}}
  +
#:This is still a ballot, not a diary. Citing other websites and specific personalities at other websites is not a valid argument, in my opinion — either as examples or counterexamples. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:09 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
#::Well, you see, I think of it as citing Uncyclopedia to prove a point about Uncyclopedia. Clearly you don't see it that way, and your opinion is no less valid than mine so I suppose I'll just keep my mouth shut. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141013162602}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Straight to userspace. Unless I get to write an article about my disgusting fetishes. [[19 year old Colombian boys and girls covered in honey and tied up lightly]] coming to the main page soon. --[[User:Nikau|Nikau]] ([[User talk:Nikau|talk]]) 17:50, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Pointless article, most likely something not many people will look for. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:35, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#:No--but they may well look for [[Miranda Cosgrove]] and instead find themselves directed to the article on her uterus. Is this a good or bad thing? What was I trying to say? {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020234246}}
  +
|keepnumber=2
  +
|keep=
  +
#{{Keep|"Her doctor...pronounced her Fallopian tubes "Thin as Paper" at a Veterinarian's office in L.A. called Healthy Hounds."}} I too have now given it a complete read — for the first time, in fact — and I enjoyed the ride. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:24 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Keep}} I wanted to vote delete, but laughed several times while reading the page. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:37, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*{{Yuk}} So after being double-barked at over wimping out after the first paragraph, I went back and read the whole thing. It is a fantasy piece of the sort dreamed up by 12 year old boys, which gave the author the chance to write "uterus" many times and even use such exciting terms as "cervix" and "reproductive system" in a few places. Unfortunately most of it is too far away from reality to be taken as anything except nonsense, and ''none of it is funny''. Furthermore, down at the end, it mutates briefly into a Wacky War article, which doesn't really improve things.<br>On the plus side, the grammar and spelling are both very clean. And that'll get you a free ride on the MBTA (at least, it will if you've also got two dollars along, to put in the little 'contributions' box at the front of the bus). [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 16:12, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Mexican Canadian War of 1984]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Arsene Wenger}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=13:42, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=13:17, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=2
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} I am nominating this to try to achieve improvements to, not deletion of, this article on the football manager by some editor Over There. I am not even sure whether getting thrown out of a cinema relates to anything. As it stands, the initial and recurring theme is Pedo/Anal/Rape/SexWithBlackMen Humor. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:17 14-Oct-14</small>
  +
#Can't we just delete this? I don't see anyone stepping forward to help. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018213221}}
  +
#:We can and will, if we prevail in the vote. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:27 19-Oct-14</small>
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|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}}
 
#{{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}} per above. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:38, February 18, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} yet another Wacky War with an old meme thrown in. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:57, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*I'm not sure what's supposed to happen here, but you might be interested in [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Arsene_Wenger?oldid=1635086 this] slightly more sanitary version. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141014173645}}
  +
*:It is much cleaner, but it is also from 2007, and presumably omits comedy based on news in the last seven years — I assume there is some. Is there a Brit in the house who would like to do a merge? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:11 14-Oct-14</small>
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Charles Darwin]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Laptop}} ==
*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)
+
{{VFDt|time=06:34, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=2
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{delete|Obnoxious teenagers who talk to their parents like shit were caused by laptops.}} This article begins with the premises that laptops are useful for viewing porn and are 'three dimensional magic box[es]', then goes on to discuss... essentially nothing. It has been almost the same since it was rewritten in 2007; [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Laptop?oldid=972881 prior to that], it wasn't much better (''It is project with much effort, but it not marketable and usable. Then he exploded.''). I have a replacement at [[User:Llwy-ar-lawr/Laptop]]. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141019063455}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Intro also has a list of memes and a junk acronym; pointless Section 2 is overwhelmed by illustrations; then nothing but listcruft until the trite finale: Laptops are actually alien lifeforms. Proposed replacement is not ready.... {{User:SPIKE/signature}} 10:47, 19 October 2014
 
|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}}
+
*Detailed editing comments moved to replacement article's talk page. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:04 19-Oct-14</small>
*: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)
+
*Not sure if this is the right place to say this, but I've tried to follow your suggestions, Spike, and would appreciate it if you could have another look. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141023200806}}
*::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|Igpay Atinlay}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:49, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDg|time=10:38, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete|Replace.}} 1 gimmick, 0 jokes (may be more than 0 but it's too tedious to scan the article to see if there are jokes). Page title with gimmick applied to it ensures no one will search for it, or they will get exactly what they expected and will not laugh. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:38 19-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} How the Hell did it not cross the author's mind that nobody can read this page? (Unless this is a prime example of the author trying to amuse himself out of confusing the readers) [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:32, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#'''Replace''' with [[User:Llwy-ar-lawr/Pig Latin|non-Pig Latin version]], and probably '''move''' to [[Pig Latin]] (unless there's something there, in which case I'm not sure what we do). I am no scholar of Pig Latin and I find it about as bothersome to read as do Spike and ConCass, but I found the actual content somewhat amusing. I strongly encourage anyone whose main or sole criterion for voting '''delete''' was its unreadability to read the English version and reconsider. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020225334}}
  +
#:'''Changing above vote to Replace'''. That was a fun read. How can anyone on '''a humor wiki''' prefer a page that is merely a perfect encoding? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:55 20-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Replace}} or something. The actual content is pretty good and the main problem seems that the article is hard to read. It would be good if it was replaced by Llwy's "translated" version, but the original should probably be kept as a subpage and linked to in the See also section, because there are people who will actually find reading the page in Pig Latin more amusing than reading it in English. Also, the page doesn't have to be deleted at all: the original one could be kept where it is now, and Llwy's version can be pasted at [[Pig Latin]]... {{User:Anton199/sig}} 16:19, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#:And you don't need a vote of VFD to replace a redirect that doesn't delete an Uncyclopedian's substantive work. But I won't flip my vote anyway; I don't want the gimmicky version to exist, because editors spend time polishing the codification that they could spend writing funny stuff. I recently tweaked [[HTBFANJS#Pages that look like the things they're about]] to be a little more disapproving; for instance, to cite only articles that have more than a gimmick, versus articles that pursue a gimmick unusually well. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:31 21-Oct-14</small>
  +
#:Have moved the plaintext article to [[Pig Latin]], replacing the redirect. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:49 23-Oct-14</small>
  +
#::We could also have the Pig Latin and English versions side by side in the same article, with a table or something. That seems like enough of a compromise to satisfy everyone to some extent. In any case, I hope we preserve the history instead of just deleting the thing and moving 'mine' on top, because the real authors should be given credit. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141021224702}}
  +
#:No, please! We ought not put fairness to previous authors on a par with having an article hang together and look good. A link is OK, for readers who really want Pig Latin in Pig Latin; but presenting him with multiple versions at once distracts him for the sake of someone's vanity. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:55 23-Oct-14</small>
  +
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=2
+
#{{Keep}} I think it's kind of cute. I got a laugh out of it. Granted, it's a little hard to read, but I think it should stay in Pig Latin -- it just seems totally appropriate. [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 22:43, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
|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=
 
|comments=
  +
*In fact, [[Pig Latin]] redirects to [[Igpay Atinlay]], so it is entirely probable that someone would get here by searching for Pig Latin. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020225536}}
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Word Salad]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Igpay Atinlay}} bis ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:43, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=23:49, October 23, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
 
 
|delnumber=2
 
|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=
#{{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>
+
#{{Delete}} Having moved the plaintext version to [[Pig Latin]], replacing the redirect to [[Igpay Atinlay]], do voters still want the article about Pig Latin in Pig Latin to go away? I do. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:49 23-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} If we have the article in English, having a duplicate in unreadable Pig Latin is stupid and unnecessary. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 12:58, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#:As I said above, I think we should have one. I found reading the page on Pig Latin in Pig Latin quite amusing and very Uncyclopedia-like past-time. I know many people who will actually laugh when they see it. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 13:09, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#::Does it imply that no future Uncyclopedian should edit [[Pig Latin]] without (groan!) keeping [[Igpay Atinlay]] in synch? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:15 25-Oct-14</small>
  +
#:::I think that's going to be up to the editor who will want to make any changes to [[Pig Latin]]. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 13:30, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=1
  +
|keep=
  +
#OK, {{Keep}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 12:14, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*Could it be a subpage maybe? (I have no opinion.) {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141024021325}}
  +
*:In fact, it could stay right where it is, though I'd rather it not. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:18 25-Oct-14</small>
  +
*As per what I said in the first nomination, I think we should keep it somewhere. If it stays right where it is, it should have a link to the plain English version right at the beginning, however. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 10:25, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*:That would be a {{Keep}} {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:40 25-Oct-14</small>
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Longinus]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|That Guy You Hate}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:38, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=3
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Gay ''humour''. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} A non-encyclopedic chat about no one. The title plus the template ("This page...is completely worthless") plus the Intro ("let's do some quality bitching about that little fucker") should keep the reader from reading further. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:07 19-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{delete|I'm gonna tear off his Penis and use it as a toilet plunger.}} Yet more disgusting gay-bashing. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020184757}}
  +
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=2
+
#{{Keep}} Strangely, the profanity knocks back the humour and makes the article less funny. But the subject has potential for a good page and doesn't look like something thrown together by an anon in 5 minutes. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:36, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
|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)
+
#:You mean it has potential for a good page, but it isn't one right now? If it's not good now, it shouldn't remain in its current state. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020184757}}
#{{Delete}} Pick a topic. Pick a meme. Shuffle. The result is filler. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:49 17-Feb-13</small>
+
#::I mean it can be redeemed with editing, without having to rewrite the whole page. I just couldn't word it right. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:29, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[World War III-XX]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Short Circuit}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:30, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDt|time=00:21, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=3
|delnumber=2
+
|delete=
|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}} No redeeming qualities. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:21 20-Oct-14</small>
#{{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>
+
#With an article like this, I can't imagine that seeing the movies would make me think any better of it. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020185527}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Nothing but sex. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:12, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=1
  +
|keep=#{{Keep}} I'm not a fan of humour about sex but the immature part of my brain did make me laugh while reading this and I can't vote to delete something that made me laugh so I'll vote to keep. We ought to cater for all humour types as long as it is a parody. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 14:06, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*Just wondering of you've even seen the movies, Spike? --{{User:Maniac1075/sig}} 03:45, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*:I have not. I was not evaluating the movies. The Uncyclopedia page is a start-to-finish Anal Sex Joke. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:12 20-Oct-14</small>
  +
*Yeah, try watching them!--{{User:Maniac1075/sig}} 23:45, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*:No offence but... you are saying that the content of the movies somehow justifies the article's consisting entirely of sex jokes (and no, Spike, it's not just anal sex)? I can't really see that. Perhaps you could summarise the plot points you were parodying, for the benefit of us lazy bums who can't be bothered to watch the movies? {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020235324}}
  +
*::Actually nevermind--I read {{w|Short Circuit|Wikipedia's article}}, and I really can't see either the value of turning it into one long sex joke or the attributes of the movie that inspired you to do so. Sorry. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020235837}}
  +
*I still recommend watching the movie so you know what you're reading about. I can't see any reason someone who doesn't know what an article is about would find anything funny about it if they don't get it. If that's the case, I could spend the next week adding VFD to so many articles on this site.--{{User:Maniac1075/sig}} 09:41, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*:I know perfectly well what I'm reading about, as I said above. I could guess what the movie was about from your article, actually. There is ''nothing'' that can justify turning it into what you turned it into. Nothing. Besides, the article shouldn't require intimate knowledge of the subject matter to be comprehensible; if it does, and if many readers haven't got that knowledge, it probably shouldn't exist. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141021133854}}
  +
*::Yeah cause alot of people just read random articles they know nothing about. My point is, it's not funny to you few people, yet the ones I showed it to found it pretty funny indeed. I just don't agree that the small majority of voters against something is able to rule out an article as being unfunny, just because it's not the type of humor they enjoy. So what it comes down to, is if it doesn't please you couple of people who have time to vote for peoples work to be deleted because you don't personally like it, that means it should not exist for those who do. right? I dunno, maybe it's non Australians not getting Australian humor? Too bad there is no Uncylcopedia.com.au I guess.--{{User:Maniac1075/sig}} 15:33, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[JC-bashers]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Owl}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=11:59, February 16, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=23:30, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=3
  +
|delete=
  +
#Wow, I just... don't even know where to begin. This article is almost entirely random nonsense; it barely has a concept--that of documenting and/or parodying the O RLY meme, which probably won't go over too well with some people here, and I'm not fond of it either--and that's only after I cut out a lot of it. [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Owl?oldid=5831831 Prior to my edits], it really was about nothing. A much more cut-down version may be found at [[User:Llwy-ar-lawr/scratchpad]], which I'm still not too happy with (though you are welcome to say you want that as the replacement). I feel like we should have an article on owls, but I have no clue what it should consist of, and it's certainly not what we have now. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141020233058}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Nominator cleaned it up a lot, but it's still a ramble. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:27 21-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 10:27, October 25, 2014 (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}}
 
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Glenn_Beck_(Asshat)]] ==
+
== {{VFDc|Indiana Jones}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=14:19, February 15, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=1
+
{{VFDg|time=17:03, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=1
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} The introduction is the most random one I've ever read. After that, the article doesn't improve. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 17:03, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=2
 
|keep=
 
|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
+
#{{Keep}} I spruced the intro up a bit to cut out some of the randomness and cut out a chunk of the article and replaced it with something new, entitled "Indiana Jones and the Adventure that May be at Variance to this Article." I think it just needs to be edited/ spruced up, that's all. [[User:IndianaJones104|IndianaJones104]] ([[User talk:IndianaJones104|talk]]) 22:31, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
|delnumber=2
+
#{{Keep}} The article has a theme: the <s>absurd lengths of</s> movie titles of the form, "Indiana Jones and the...."; also pearls of good [[CoW|Choice of Words]]. The final three sections (ineptly typed following the {{Tl|Reflist}}, which had nothing in it anyway), were short sections that did nothing but tell the same joke again; and IndianaJones104's edits of today merely added red-links, memes, and a Section 2 at odds with the rest of the article. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:44 21-Oct-14</small>
|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=
 
|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>
+
#I don't get it. I made the first sentence less random, but I still don't see any good humour. "His brother, Han Solo", "a sickly young man, who contracted the terminal disease, bad-ass", "closet-gay extraordinare Benjamin Franklin"... I can explain several jokes but they still aren't funny. And about the absurdly long movie titles: I don't find "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" or "...the Raiders of the Lost Ark" very long, so there seems to be no basis for that comedy theme in this article. It might not have to be deleted, but most of its parts should be rewritten. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:30, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
*: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 stand corrected: The titles of the actual movies aren't absurdly long. But they are long, and inventing some that are absurdly long is humor by exaggeration. The article can absolutely benefit from further editing. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:38 22-Oct-14</small>
*::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>
+
*Should IndianaJones105's section be reverted? I'm not sure I care for either version of the section, but just putting it out there. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141024021509}}
*::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=
+
== {{VFDn|Nude figure-skating}} ==
{{VFDarchive}}
 
   
[[Category:Articles deleted by Lyrithya at some point]]
+
{{VFDt|time=11:41, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
[[Category:Uncyclopedia deletion]]
+
|delnumber=2
[[Category:Pages repeatedly nominated on VFD]]
+
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} A dumb ramble. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:41 22-Oct-14</small>
  +
#Fails to live up to the wonderfully silly premise of being naked in a situation that so clearly calls for warm clothing. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141024022416}}
  +
|keepnumber=0
  +
|keep=
  +
|comments=
  +
}}
   
[[es:Inciclopedia:VPB]]
+
== {{VFDn|Turkish-Greek conflict}} ==
[[id:Tolololpedia:PUP]]
+
[[ko:포럼:세탁소]]
+
{{VFDt|time=11:52, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
[[pt:Desciclopédia:Eliminação de páginas]]
+
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Citizens of "two idiot countries" battle in our encyclopedia with all available weapons except good English. Fire all nonsense numbers! {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:52 22-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} {{Unsigned|ScottPat|14:12, 2014 October 22 (UTC)}}
  +
#A bunch of shavings from the logs of randomness trees, glued together with English that was after its running through a food processor. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141024023708}}
  +
#{{Delete}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 16:59, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=0
  +
|keep=
  +
|comments=
  +
}}

Latest revision as of 20:12, October 25, 2014

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 The Last World War H T D Survivor

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 346 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. In depth analysis, stage-by-stage using maps, of a made-up conflict that only the author cares about. Complete with made-up statistics like "123,456" as well. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:49, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote It is occasionally criticized for being slightly destructive. The intro--from which that sentence is taken--looked promising, but the descriptions of the conflict didn't do anything for me. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 16:27 11 Oct 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. This article about nothing keeps begging for editors' time to fix it up, while never inducing anyone to take control and make it funny. See also Comments. Spıke ¬ 12:05 13-Oct-14
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. Sorry, but I found it funny, especially the maps. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:27, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
Comments
  • I voted Symbol keep vote Keep last time based on Aleister doing work, a commitment that he says in the ballot he never made. I had been moved at the concept of the unknowability of a Last War; now I find the concept undeveloped and I think the bit about humanity going extinct and the author being a panda is dumb. Llwy is working on it, but the maps Anton199 likes suggest to me comic book, not encyclopedia; and the problem is the text, which needs a better comedy theme than "War so nutty!" Spıke ¬ 16:48 11-Oct-14
    All I did was fix some spelling and formatting, and I don't see myself doing any more; I wouldn't overestimate me. It's more readable now, but no funnier. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 16:56 11 Oct 2014

edit Devon H Archive

Score: 5 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 330 hours
Delete (5)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Yet another article about some small area in England which is said to be inhabited by some sort of subhuman creatures that don't really speak English. Snarglefoop (talk) 02:09, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
    Small area of England! It's one of the most famous counties. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:14, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
    To some of us, England itself is a "small area." Spıke ¬ 11:29 22-Oct-14
    Aye, to those of you with a small history, yes. ;) Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 13:59, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote the disease known as ‘chav’. Long string of attacks on Devon, with no humour and less concept. I believe there was a campaign to clear out such towncruft earlier in the century, but I wasn't there at the time; I was busy huffing imaginary rainbows. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 02:13 12 Oct 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Whatever ScottPat devises as a replacement will be better. Spıke ¬ 11:29 22-Oct-14
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Don't know how soon I'll finish the re-write so might as well delete this now. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 08:57, October 23, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Symbol delete vote Delete. and Replace b Replace. with Scott's article, when it's ready. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:34, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • Here is the last version by the first author; it's nothing spectacular and it's very short, but it's better than what's there now. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 02:20 12 Oct 2014
    Not much in the original version worth keeping, nor even worth the time to give it mark-up. I've deleted a lot of cruft from the current version; there is material inside that one could make an article out of. The content-free Intro prepares the reviewer for the worst. Unfortunately, the new author of Dudley, Mjr74 lives far away from Devon, if I read my maps aright, so we can't saddle him with this. Spıke ¬ 11:25 12-Oct-14
    I notified Mjr74 anyway; he says he has visited Devon and has stuff he could add. Spıke ¬ 01:56 14-Oct-14
  • I've gone for a re-write. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:14, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
    Hooray! Spıke ¬ 11:29 22-Oct-14

edit Good Electricity and Bad Electricity H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 318 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. A tiny bit of pseudo-intellectualism. Might fit on Illogicopedia. Spıke ¬ 14:04 12-Oct-14
  2. Agreed. I'll stick it there right now. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 18:36 12 Oct 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • It's well written. I'm inclined to leave it, so that it may pleasantly surprise those who stumble across it. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:19, October 22, 2014 (UTC)

edit Uterus or GTFO! H T D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 307 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Per Spike on my talk page, this article documents a meme without making it funny. It seems to exist mainly to advertise pictures of pregnant women. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:38 13 Oct 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Per me on her talk page: "A flagrant example of (1) basing an Uncyclopedia article on a meme (viz, "Tits or GTFO," that is: post pornography or I will assume it never happened) from another website and (2) extrapolating so far that the reader has to "guess the punch line to read the joke." I stated no opinion on his goals, as I would grant Mnbvcxz his little affectation if he would just quit changing diapers and return. Spıke ¬ 00:49 13-Oct-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:17, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

If anything brings back Preggo man, it will be deleting this article. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:05, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

edit Threesome H T D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 296 hours
Delete (5)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Article, ostensibly about group sex, makes the point that Catholics whip sinners, and keeps making it and making it until it becomes totally non-encyclopedic and the goal is to see how far into the reader's head it can be driven, not to be funny. Spıke ¬ 12:11 13-Oct-14
  2. It's like the article is whipping the reader's brain for committing the sin of trying to read it. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 16:05 13 Oct 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Ho hum Whatever it is it doesn't seem to be funny. Snarglefoop (talk) 03:45, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Agreed. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 01:12, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Symbol delete vote Delete. It has a joke: the narrator whips himself after each erotic moment, in order not to succumb to the sin, and his interlocutor finds it arousing, but it's the only one and I don't think it's worth it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:31, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. It's a bit silly but I don't see why it should head for the shredder. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:01, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
Comments

edit Miranda Cosgrove's Uterus H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 294 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Yuk Delete I confess I only read the first paragraph. (If anyone wants to tell me I'm an irresponsible jerk for nomming it without first reading the whole thing, go right ahead ... but please read the whole thing yourself before you do that.) Snarglefoop (talk) 13:15, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
    Yeah, I'll step up to that task; the reason VFD is here is to ensure authors that their stuff won't be deleted without discussion, vote, and 24-hour notice; and authors should get the additional safeguard of knowing that any nominator will evaluate the whole thing. (Even the history, as the rules require, and perhaps the talk page.) If all you know is that it has a crappy Intro, repair might not require deleting the entire page. If you had gotten to the end, you would have seen a hint that this is one of the articles fleshing out Mnbvcxz's pregnancy infatuation. Some voters may view this as an inherent part of the history of Uncyclopedia. On the nomination itself, I'm abstaining. Cosgrove is a celebrity but there is no real comedy point to us speculating about her innards. We have deleted knock-offs of this meme. Spıke ¬ 14:23 13-Oct-14
    Wait ... did you say this is a meme? Like, claiming weird stuff about Miranda Cosgrove's organs is a standing joke on the Internet? I don't understand the world. That is clear. Snarglefoop (talk) 14:55, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
    I meant only an Uncyclopedia meme or in-joke, though this is not in any official list; not that it goes wider than Uncyclopedia. Spıke ¬ 15:03 13-Oct-14
  2. I, on the other hand, did read the whole thing, and I came to the same conclusion. Indeed, uterine newts (and sometimes eels) and Miranda Cosgrove (who played Carly Shay in iCarly, which may have originated the newt-pregnancy meme) are injokes here, perpetuated by Mnbvcxz--and I don't find the newt pregnancy stuff to be funny, which is to be expected from something that is merely an expression of someone's fetish. On this tine of the fork, arousal does not equal amusement. I will also echo the importance of reading the whole article, as Chess, which has a sucky intro but a perfectly good middle, was deleted on the fork in Forest Fire Week, IIRC after being tagged by someone who often does not read past the intro and has thus destroyed several perfectly good articles. This anecdote is here not to shoehorn in goings-on at another random website for no reason, but to provide an example of what we shouldn't do here. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 15:48 13 Oct 2014
    This is still a ballot, not a diary. Citing other websites and specific personalities at other websites is not a valid argument, in my opinion — either as examples or counterexamples. Spıke ¬ 16:09 13-Oct-14
    Well, you see, I think of it as citing Uncyclopedia to prove a point about Uncyclopedia. Clearly you don't see it that way, and your opinion is no less valid than mine so I suppose I'll just keep my mouth shut. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 16:26 13 Oct 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Straight to userspace. Unless I get to write an article about my disgusting fetishes. 19 year old Colombian boys and girls covered in honey and tied up lightly coming to the main page soon. --Nikau (talk) 17:50, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Pointless article, most likely something not many people will look for. ConCass2 (talk) 20:35, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
    No--but they may well look for Miranda Cosgrove and instead find themselves directed to the article on her uterus. Is this a good or bad thing? What was I trying to say? -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 23:42 20 Oct 2014
Keep (2)
  1. Symbol keep vote "Her doctor...pronounced her Fallopian tubes "Thin as Paper" at a Veterinarian's office in L.A. called Healthy Hounds." I too have now given it a complete read — for the first time, in fact — and I enjoyed the ride. Spıke ¬ 16:24 13-Oct-14
  2. Symbol keep vote Keep. I wanted to vote delete, but laughed several times while reading the page. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:37, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
Comments
  • Yuk Yuk. So after being double-barked at over wimping out after the first paragraph, I went back and read the whole thing. It is a fantasy piece of the sort dreamed up by 12 year old boys, which gave the author the chance to write "uterus" many times and even use such exciting terms as "cervix" and "reproductive system" in a few places. Unfortunately most of it is too far away from reality to be taken as anything except nonsense, and none of it is funny. Furthermore, down at the end, it mutates briefly into a Wacky War article, which doesn't really improve things.
    On the plus side, the grammar and spelling are both very clean. And that'll get you a free ride on the MBTA (at least, it will if you've also got two dollars along, to put in the little 'contributions' box at the front of the bus). Snarglefoop (talk) 16:12, October 13, 2014 (UTC)

edit Arsene Wenger H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 270 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. I am nominating this to try to achieve improvements to, not deletion of, this article on the football manager by some editor Over There. I am not even sure whether getting thrown out of a cinema relates to anything. As it stands, the initial and recurring theme is Pedo/Anal/Rape/SexWithBlackMen Humor. Spıke ¬ 13:17 14-Oct-14
  2. Can't we just delete this? I don't see anyone stepping forward to help. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 21:32 18 Oct 2014
    We can and will, if we prevail in the vote. Spıke ¬ 01:27 19-Oct-14
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • I'm not sure what's supposed to happen here, but you might be interested in this slightly more sanitary version. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 17:36 14 Oct 2014
    It is much cleaner, but it is also from 2007, and presumably omits comedy based on news in the last seven years — I assume there is some. Is there a Brit in the house who would like to do a merge? Spıke ¬ 18:11 14-Oct-14

edit Laptop H T D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 157 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Obnoxious teenagers who talk to their parents like shit were caused by laptops. This article begins with the premises that laptops are useful for viewing porn and are 'three dimensional magic box[es]', then goes on to discuss... essentially nothing. It has been almost the same since it was rewritten in 2007; prior to that, it wasn't much better (It is project with much effort, but it not marketable and usable. Then he exploded.). I have a replacement at User:Llwy-ar-lawr/Laptop. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 06:34 19 Oct 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Intro also has a list of memes and a junk acronym; pointless Section 2 is overwhelmed by illustrations; then nothing but listcruft until the trite finale: Laptops are actually alien lifeforms. Proposed replacement is not ready.... Spıke ¬  10:47, 19 October 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • Detailed editing comments moved to replacement article's talk page. Spıke ¬ 17:04 19-Oct-14
  • Not sure if this is the right place to say this, but I've tried to follow your suggestions, Spike, and would appreciate it if you could have another look. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 20:08 23 Oct 2014

edit Igpay Atinlay H T D

Score: 3 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 153 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Replace. 1 gimmick, 0 jokes (may be more than 0 but it's too tedious to scan the article to see if there are jokes). Page title with gimmick applied to it ensures no one will search for it, or they will get exactly what they expected and will not laugh. Spıke ¬ 10:38 19-Oct-14
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. How the Hell did it not cross the author's mind that nobody can read this page? (Unless this is a prime example of the author trying to amuse himself out of confusing the readers) ConCass2 (talk) 20:32, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  3. Replace with non-Pig Latin version, and probably move to Pig Latin (unless there's something there, in which case I'm not sure what we do). I am no scholar of Pig Latin and I find it about as bothersome to read as do Spike and ConCass, but I found the actual content somewhat amusing. I strongly encourage anyone whose main or sole criterion for voting delete was its unreadability to read the English version and reconsider. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 22:53 20 Oct 2014
    Changing above vote to Replace. That was a fun read. How can anyone on a humor wiki prefer a page that is merely a perfect encoding? Spıke ¬ 22:55 20-Oct-14
  4. Replace b Replace. or something. The actual content is pretty good and the main problem seems that the article is hard to read. It would be good if it was replaced by Llwy's "translated" version, but the original should probably be kept as a subpage and linked to in the See also section, because there are people who will actually find reading the page in Pig Latin more amusing than reading it in English. Also, the page doesn't have to be deleted at all: the original one could be kept where it is now, and Llwy's version can be pasted at Pig Latin... Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:19, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
    And you don't need a vote of VFD to replace a redirect that doesn't delete an Uncyclopedian's substantive work. But I won't flip my vote anyway; I don't want the gimmicky version to exist, because editors spend time polishing the codification that they could spend writing funny stuff. I recently tweaked HTBFANJS#Pages that look like the things they're about to be a little more disapproving; for instance, to cite only articles that have more than a gimmick, versus articles that pursue a gimmick unusually well. Spıke ¬ 16:31 21-Oct-14
    Have moved the plaintext article to Pig Latin, replacing the redirect. Spıke ¬ 23:49 23-Oct-14
    We could also have the Pig Latin and English versions side by side in the same article, with a table or something. That seems like enough of a compromise to satisfy everyone to some extent. In any case, I hope we preserve the history instead of just deleting the thing and moving 'mine' on top, because the real authors should be given credit. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 22:47 21 Oct 2014
    No, please! We ought not put fairness to previous authors on a par with having an article hang together and look good. A link is OK, for readers who really want Pig Latin in Pig Latin; but presenting him with multiple versions at once distracts him for the sake of someone's vanity. Spıke ¬ 13:55 23-Oct-14
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. I think it's kind of cute. I got a laugh out of it. Granted, it's a little hard to read, but I think it should stay in Pig Latin -- it just seems totally appropriate. Snarglefoop (talk) 22:43, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
Comments

edit Igpay Atinlay H T D bis

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 44 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Having moved the plaintext version to Pig Latin, replacing the redirect to Igpay Atinlay, do voters still want the article about Pig Latin in Pig Latin to go away? I do. Spıke ¬ 23:49 23-Oct-14
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. If we have the article in English, having a duplicate in unreadable Pig Latin is stupid and unnecessary. ConCass2 (talk) 12:58, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
    As I said above, I think we should have one. I found reading the page on Pig Latin in Pig Latin quite amusing and very Uncyclopedia-like past-time. I know many people who will actually laugh when they see it. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:09, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
    Does it imply that no future Uncyclopedian should edit Pig Latin without (groan!) keeping Igpay Atinlay in synch? Spıke ¬ 13:15 25-Oct-14
    I think that's going to be up to the editor who will want to make any changes to Pig Latin. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 13:30, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (1)
  1. OK, Symbol keep vote Keep. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 12:14, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Comments
  • Could it be a subpage maybe? (I have no opinion.) -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 02:13 24 Oct 2014
    In fact, it could stay right where it is, though I'd rather it not. Spıke ¬ 10:18 25-Oct-14
  • As per what I said in the first nomination, I think we should keep it somewhere. If it stays right where it is, it should have a link to the plain English version right at the beginning, however. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:25, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
    That would be a Symbol keep vote Keep. Spıke ¬ 10:40 25-Oct-14

edit That Guy You Hate H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 147 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Gay humour. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. A non-encyclopedic chat about no one. The title plus the template ("This page...is completely worthless") plus the Intro ("let's do some quality bitching about that little fucker") should keep the reader from reading further. Spıke ¬ 17:07 19-Oct-14
  3. Symbol delete vote I'm gonna tear off his Penis and use it as a toilet plunger. Yet more disgusting gay-bashing. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 18:47 20 Oct 2014
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. Strangely, the profanity knocks back the humour and makes the article less funny. But the subject has potential for a good page and doesn't look like something thrown together by an anon in 5 minutes. ConCass2 (talk) 20:36, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
    You mean it has potential for a good page, but it isn't one right now? If it's not good now, it shouldn't remain in its current state. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 18:47 20 Oct 2014
    I mean it can be redeemed with editing, without having to rewrite the whole page. I just couldn't word it right. ConCass2 (talk) 20:29, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
Comments

edit Short Circuit H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 139 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. No redeeming qualities. Spıke ¬ 00:21 20-Oct-14
  2. With an article like this, I can't imagine that seeing the movies would make me think any better of it. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 18:55 20 Oct 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Nothing but sex. ConCass2 (talk) 20:12, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. I'm not a fan of humour about sex but the immature part of my brain did make me laugh while reading this and I can't vote to delete something that made me laugh so I'll vote to keep. We ought to cater for all humour types as long as it is a parody. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 14:06, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
Comments
  • Just wondering of you've even seen the movies, Spike? --ManiacJaSg-Maniac1075Complain Here 03:45, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
    I have not. I was not evaluating the movies. The Uncyclopedia page is a start-to-finish Anal Sex Joke. Spıke ¬ 12:12 20-Oct-14
  • Yeah, try watching them!--ManiacJaSg-Maniac1075Complain Here 23:45, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
    No offence but... you are saying that the content of the movies somehow justifies the article's consisting entirely of sex jokes (and no, Spike, it's not just anal sex)? I can't really see that. Perhaps you could summarise the plot points you were parodying, for the benefit of us lazy bums who can't be bothered to watch the movies? -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 23:53 20 Oct 2014
    Actually nevermind--I read Wikipedia's article, and I really can't see either the value of turning it into one long sex joke or the attributes of the movie that inspired you to do so. Sorry. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 23:58 20 Oct 2014
  • I still recommend watching the movie so you know what you're reading about. I can't see any reason someone who doesn't know what an article is about would find anything funny about it if they don't get it. If that's the case, I could spend the next week adding VFD to so many articles on this site.--ManiacJaSg-Maniac1075Complain Here 09:41, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
    I know perfectly well what I'm reading about, as I said above. I could guess what the movie was about from your article, actually. There is nothing that can justify turning it into what you turned it into. Nothing. Besides, the article shouldn't require intimate knowledge of the subject matter to be comprehensible; if it does, and if many readers haven't got that knowledge, it probably shouldn't exist. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 13:38 21 Oct 2014
    Yeah cause alot of people just read random articles they know nothing about. My point is, it's not funny to you few people, yet the ones I showed it to found it pretty funny indeed. I just don't agree that the small majority of voters against something is able to rule out an article as being unfunny, just because it's not the type of humor they enjoy. So what it comes down to, is if it doesn't please you couple of people who have time to vote for peoples work to be deleted because you don't personally like it, that means it should not exist for those who do. right? I dunno, maybe it's non Australians not getting Australian humor? Too bad there is no Uncylcopedia.com.au I guess.--ManiacJaSg-Maniac1075Complain Here 15:33, October 21, 2014 (UTC)

edit Owl H T D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 116 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Wow, I just... don't even know where to begin. This article is almost entirely random nonsense; it barely has a concept--that of documenting and/or parodying the O RLY meme, which probably won't go over too well with some people here, and I'm not fond of it either--and that's only after I cut out a lot of it. Prior to my edits, it really was about nothing. A much more cut-down version may be found at User:Llwy-ar-lawr/scratchpad, which I'm still not too happy with (though you are welcome to say you want that as the replacement). I feel like we should have an article on owls, but I have no clue what it should consist of, and it's certainly not what we have now. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 23:30 20 Oct 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Nominator cleaned it up a lot, but it's still a ramble. Spıke ¬ 13:27 21-Oct-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 10:27, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit 🔒 Indiana Jones H T D Oldvfd Archive

Score: -1 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 99 hours
Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. The introduction is the most random one I've ever read. After that, the article doesn't improve. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:03, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (2)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. I spruced the intro up a bit to cut out some of the randomness and cut out a chunk of the article and replaced it with something new, entitled "Indiana Jones and the Adventure that May be at Variance to this Article." I think it just needs to be edited/ spruced up, that's all. IndianaJones104 (talk) 22:31, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol keep vote Keep. The article has a theme: the absurd lengths of movie titles of the form, "Indiana Jones and the...."; also pearls of good Choice of Words. The final three sections (ineptly typed following the {{Reflist}}, which had nothing in it anyway), were short sections that did nothing but tell the same joke again; and IndianaJones104's edits of today merely added red-links, memes, and a Section 2 at odds with the rest of the article. Spıke ¬ 22:44 21-Oct-14
Comments
  1. I don't get it. I made the first sentence less random, but I still don't see any good humour. "His brother, Han Solo", "a sickly young man, who contracted the terminal disease, bad-ass", "closet-gay extraordinare Benjamin Franklin"... I can explain several jokes but they still aren't funny. And about the absurdly long movie titles: I don't find "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" or "...the Raiders of the Lost Ark" very long, so there seems to be no basis for that comedy theme in this article. It might not have to be deleted, but most of its parts should be rewritten. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 18:30, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
    I stand corrected: The titles of the actual movies aren't absurdly long. But they are long, and inventing some that are absurdly long is humor by exaggeration. The article can absolutely benefit from further editing. Spıke ¬ 18:38 22-Oct-14
  • Should IndianaJones105's section be reverted? I'm not sure I care for either version of the section, but just putting it out there. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 02:15 24 Oct 2014

edit Nude figure-skating H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 80 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. A dumb ramble. Spıke ¬ 11:41 22-Oct-14
  2. Fails to live up to the wonderfully silly premise of being naked in a situation that so clearly calls for warm clothing. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 02:24 24 Oct 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Turkish-Greek conflict H D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 80 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Citizens of "two idiot countries" battle in our encyclopedia with all available weapons except good English. Fire all nonsense numbers! Spıke ¬ 11:52 22-Oct-14
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. The preceding unsigned comment was added by ScottPat (talk • contribs) 14:12, 2014 October 22 (UTC)
  3. A bunch of shavings from the logs of randomness trees, glued together with English that was after its running through a food processor. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 02:37 24 Oct 2014
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:59, October 25, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
Personal tools
projects