Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Lost (TV series)/Previous recaps)
({{VFDn|Sudden Instant Death Syndrome}}: Deleted)
 
(9,522 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]]
  +
<!-- Do not edit above this line -->
   
=Pages for Deletion=
+
== {{VFDn|Vietnamese}} ==
{{VFDRules2}}
 
<div style="display: none;">
 
<!-- COPY, do not CUT, the below template, and place it at the TOP of the page, replace ARTICLENAME as appropriate and please remove the arrows and stuff. It's unnecessary to keep that stuff.
 
   
==[[ARTICLENAMEHERE]]==
+
{{VFDg|time=17:42, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=~~~~~
+
|delnumber=5
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} A bunch of pornographic content and a few sentences about how the Chinese are better than the Vietnamese. --[[User:Precious Star|Precious Star]] ([[User talk:Precious Star|talk]]) 17:44, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Not an "encyclopedia article" but a pictorial essay, to make the unfunny assertion that the Vietnamese are whores. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:05 20-Nov-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Words cannot describe just how terrible this article is. So, it's pretty bad. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 19:39, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Just when you think all the ancient junk has gone...this one pops up! --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:43, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#An attempt to look nice at the expense of anything remotely intelligent. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141122000235}}
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
Don't mingle 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|Chav/Translations}} ==
   
New nominations at the top of the page below this line; --></div>
+
{{VFDg|time=17:28, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=5
==[[Republic of Lee Kingdom]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=00:57, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|delnumber=1
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} I believe this is about Singapore, which already has an article to itself. Also, so many redlinks and it just looks very unfunny. {{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}}
+
#{{Delete}} I don't think this is particularly funny or worth keeping. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 17:28, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} Various editors (overwhelmingly Anons) have used this overlong list to catalog the "funny" things that chavs say rather than write original humor. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:52 21-Nov-14</small>
}}
+
#{{Delete}} The same joke repeated hundreds of times --[[User:Precious Star|Precious Star]] ([[User talk:Precious Star|talk]]) 19:26, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Flypaper. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:46, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
==[[Talk Talk]]==
+
#Can't tell if all this stuff is even about chavs at all. In any case, it's not of much use. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141122000658}}
{{Votervfd|time=23:40, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} Talking shit about a band does not make an article funny. In fact, it makes you look stupid. {{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}}
 
#{{Delete}} Am always happy to vote against an article whose brand of humor is, "Look at me! I don't know what I'm talking about!" Band members include "The Other Guy" and "Another Guy" and not until Sec. 2 does anything relate to the actual band, and even then a quote is attributed to "some snobby assed music journalist." Lame. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:47 29-May-12</small>
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
==[[NASDAQ]]==
+
== {{VFDn|SEHS}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=22:15, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=2
 
|keep=
 
# {{keep}} I fixed this up a bit, but I don't see anything wrong with it. Could be funny with a coordinated attack. --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 22:36, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Keep|Rewritten.}} I fixed it up a bit more. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:12 29-May-12</small>
 
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} I don't like this. {{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}}
 
|comments=
 
* Having seen stock traders before, I would have to say that the tuxedo stereotype really adds flavor to this article! Speaking of which, have we an article about [[necktie]]s? --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 23:22, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
*:There's [[Clip-on tie]]. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:31 29-May-12</small>
 
*::Kay. There's also [[Bow tie]]. I'll make a disambiguation page. --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 23:33, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
}}
 
   
==[[Malcolm Glazer]]==
+
{{VFDt|time=21:15, November 22, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=19:11, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=3
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
#{{Keep}} It is about someone real and notable (the owner of the Manchester United football club). It has a theme (map him onto the ''Lord of the Rings''). It has a fun shoop. What it lacks is explanation about '''why''' he relates to ''Lord of the Rings''--it is random allegory but humor is not far away. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>19:55 29-May-12</small>
 
|delnumber=2
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete|I piss on this article}} And on the person responsible for it's cration. {{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}}
+
#{{Delete}} SEHS being "Sudden Head Exploding Syndrome," a Wacky Ailment with which to piggyback off [[A splode]] in this article from 2005, which has little to say about the ailment no one will look up except that it runs in things — and American politicians — the authors don't happen to like. Before deleting the external links, I didn't follow them, so I can't say whether this entire Syndrome was invented at an external website, as our recent "Dihydrogen monoxide" was. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>21:15 22-Nov-14</small>
#No funny. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 21:22, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
+
#Unlike [[Dihydrogen monoxide]], this doesn't deserve an article. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123001312}}
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} It's not terrible, but it's not good either. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 02:22, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
}}
 
 
==[[Mesherschmit Vs. Spitfire]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=04:02, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=
 
[[File:ATT00071.jpg|thumb|right|100px]]
 
#This is pure nonesense. {{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}}
 
#{{Delete}} The initial shoop is entertaining but will live on elsewhere. Misspelling in page name; Brits with bad teeth and small penises. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:54 29-May-12</small>
 
#Yeah, I really did like the picture. Everything else is trash.{{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120529123127}}
 
#Meshershit Vs. Shitfire. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 21:17, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#:Ok, now why the ''Hell'' didn't ''I'' think of that? You bastard.{{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120529213710}}
 
#::Lol--{{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}} 22:05, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
==[[Diet Cola]]==
+
== {{VFDn|Sudden Instant Death Syndrome}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=03:59, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=0
+
{{VFDg|time=00:25, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=5
|delnumber=6
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#Da fuq? {{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}}
+
#From the redundant and made-up title to the random lists of nonsensical items such as masturbating kittens, this article is about essentially nothing. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123002536}}
#It is garbage with no concept and a single image with a ''non sequitur'' caption. And it was written by two ten-year-olds who just ate a bunch of taffy. That's ''what the fuq''.{{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120529071441}}
+
#{{Delete}} Dead Baby Humor has to be especially good to be funny. This article, by comparison, uses most of the trite themes in the book: Author discussing himself, author apparently with A.D.D., "nobody knows anything," listcruft, memecruft, history-of-the-future, and another list of Notable Sufferers, inviting cyberbullying and not being disappointed in the response. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:16 23-Nov-14</small>
# I hate those articles saying "That food/drink is evil!"--{{User:Mr-ex777/sig}} 09:09, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Stupid. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 02:14, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
#{{Delete}} Yes, Mr-ex777, that is about all this article says. A health scare needs to be done cleverly. I have grabbed the Hebrew Coke can for [[Diet Coke]], which itself is in sad shape. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:50 29-May-12</small>
+
#{{Delete}} HowTo:Not write an article {{User:Frosty/sig3}} 06:04, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
#Reads like vandalism. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 21:16, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Not funny at all. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 23:54, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
#{{burninate}} Too much crass, sex, and randomness. --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 22:38, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
 
==[[Lost (TV series)/Previous recaps]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=21:16, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=5
 
|delete=
 
# {{delete|Huff, then turn into a content fork.}} This is currently the top article on [[Special:LongPages]], at 394,674 bytes. I suggest splitting it into separate articles by season, namely "Lost (TV series)/Season #". --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 21:16, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
#:Is the material worth preserving, or not? If so, you hardly need our vote to organize it better. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:27 29-May-12</small>
 
#::{{Delete|Another reason to huff:}} It's illogical to have a subpage of [[Lost (TV series)|a redirect]]. --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 22:11, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#:::That's not a reason at all. It's very easy to change the title of the subpage so it's no longer a subpage of a redirect but of the page being redirected to. {{User:Sockpuppet of an unregistered user/sig4}}<small>''00:31, 30 May 2012''</small>
 
#::::Have we created a guide for choosing the best title for your work? If not, I can start one. --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 01:55, May 30, 2012 (UTC)
 
#[[Supernatural (TV series)|Huff outright]]. Just like <<< that page, this one is bloated, tedious splooge.{{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120529071010}}
 
#Since Qzekrom brought this nom here more or less pointlessly, I am going to one-up him and vote to actually kill it a la Bizzee. --{{User:Thekillerfroggy/sig}} 19:28, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#Pointless rambling. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 21:16, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Convinced by BB, below. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:09 29-May-12</small>
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*{{Comment|Abstain.}} Am not sure that this or any article with satirical renditions of hour-long TV shows from 2004 is not funny to some niche audience, no matter how tedious they are (the parodies, not the audience), and this is why I also abstain from bandcruft, gamecruft, and fightcruft. Surely Star Trek, from about 1970, is doted on comparably and everyone approves. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>21:52 29-May-12</small>
+
*It hardly discusses babies anyway. Only two paragraphs at the end. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123013038}}
*:I watched every last episode of Lost, and I can tell you that I personally do not find anything the least bit funny about this concentrated pile of Fail. As for Star Trek, I feel rather lukewarm towards it and its spin-offs. However, if there were a Star Trek article that was 400 kB long, and was as comparatively unfunny, I'd vote to kill that thing with nukes.{{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120529215646}}
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
==[[Horizon]]==
+
== {{VFDc|Samuel L. Vacuum}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=13:58, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=2
 
|keep=#Most of this seems more than acceptable content. Why are you nomming this? {{User:Sockpuppet of an unregistered user/sig4}}<small>''14:03, 28 May 2012''</small>
 
#This isn't bad. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 14:11, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{Delete}} You have got to be joking.--{{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}} 13:58, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
#I've seen so many shit pages today, I'm kinda on He.Will.Kill's side on this one.{{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120529070529}}
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
   
==[[Niggas in Paris]]==
+
{{VFDg|time=00:32, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=13:24, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=5
 
|keep=#Hey bro, don't be hatin' on my homie's sweet page, yo. {{User:Sockpuppet of an unregistered user/sig4}}<small>''13:56, 28 May 2012''</small>
 
#'''Keep'''. I chuckled. Good enough. Spike can't tell me what's funny. -{{User:Optimuschris/sig}}<small><small>16:12, 28 May</small></small>
 
#Prolly as an appropriate article for the song as you can ever get. And it repeats itself because that's the joke. --{{User:Thekillerfroggy/sig}} 00:25, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Keep}} That shit cray. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 00:55, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#Feature!--{{User:Mr-ex777/sig}} 12:57, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delnumber=3
|delete=#{{Delete}} It repeats itself. How is that funny?--{{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}} 13:24, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} I have the answer. It's not. {{User:Cat the Colourful/sig sig 2|13:28|28|May|2012}}
 
#{{Delete|Let's hear it again!}} No, let's not. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:38 28-May-12</small>
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
 
==[[Constitution (Games)]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=17:15, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=3
 
|keep=
 
#{{Keep}} "Constitution" is the stamina-like attribute of characters in role-playing games. Word play, such as "constitution" as the opposite of "prostitution," is a fine humor form we rarely see. This article unfortunately spreads a small amount of material very thin, but it's about something real, is intelligent, and it has an idea what it wants to achieve. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:24 27-May-12</small>
 
#'''Keep.''' It needs some work, like maybe an image or two, but it's promising. {{User:GEORGIEGIBBONS/sig}} 19:20, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Keep|Not bad enough.}} {{User:Sockpuppet of an unregistered user/sig4}}<small>''12:27, 28 May 2012''</small>
 
|delnumber=2
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} The article was just.... I don't really know how to put it in words. It's bad, but as I read one, it got worst. It had a way of explaining itself, and it gets worse because it just puts some random stuff that's no sense and just very random and immature. If goes off topic more than once, and I honesty believe thaey were just putting stuff there just for the hell of it. It was so random and illogical, my brain actually felt really bad after trying to comprehend what the article is trying to say. I also highly doubt the subject that its talking about even exist (and if it does then it was not made by a intelligent person, and I'm not just saying that.--{{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}} 17:15, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
+
#Article begins with an unimpressive sentence, explains in tedious detail why said unimpressive sentence is a comedic masterpiece, and ends with a gratuitous instance of {{tl|USERNAME}}. Was voted onto the front page by a group of editors who are mostly no longer here. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123003229}}
#This is pretty bad. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 13:44, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete|Navelism.}} Yes, it was a feature, a VFD moved to VFH by fallen-away editors who reveled in their freedom to feature a thoroughly bad article. That was not amusing the reader but self-amusement, a prank not a joke, and that goes for the article as well. No one will look for this transformation of Samuel L. Jackson's name, no one will laugh at the emphasis on Jackson's blackness, and after that sentence, no one will enjoy author's essay about trying to write an article. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:21 23-Nov-14</small>
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} Considering that there are already two save votes, this article probably won't go. But I reckon that this article would be much funnier if it were actually ''about'' Samuel L Vacuum as opposed to plain navelism along the lines of "here's why it's funny". [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 11:26, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
*@SPIKE- That could work if it wasn't written so randomly.--{{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}} 17:26, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
+
#:It was about Samuel L. Vacuum before it was rewritten to be about how terrible that concept was; see Comments. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123170359}}
*:Now we're down to quibbles. (Get started! I already saved one today.) I suggest a section listing famous personalities with high (or low) Constitution ratings (who bare all on the cinema: constitution/prostitution) with the implications for the D&D cards of each. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:31 27-May-12</small>
 
*:I dumped some new ideas into it and scrubbed the old D&D-cruft. But the result just doesn't hang together. Someone else should take a turn. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:01 28-May-12</small>
 
----
 
*Previously [[Uncyclopedia:Votes_for_deletion/Archive260#Constitution_.28Games.29|VFD'd]], Jan'12; 0-3 Delete; kept by Lyrithya citing "apathy." {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:35 27-May-12</small>
 
*Better title would be [[Constitution (gaming)]] but is protected to Admins due to past vandalism. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:38 27-May-12</small>
 
}}
 
 
==[[Tank Abbot]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=09:52, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=2
 
|keepnumber=2
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
#'''Keep'''. Weaker stuff - amusing for those who know who he is.--{{user:sycamore/sig}} 12:17, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
+
#{{Keep|A Classic.}} Hilarious and clever. This is not about writing an Uncyclopedia article. It's a parody of comedy writing in general and critique of the overuse of memes in place of actual jokes. This was one of the first articles I read on Uncyclopedia and one of the first to get me interested in this site, so I would think that there are others who find it amusing as well. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 02:21, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
#'''Keep'''. It's not that bad actually. It just needs to be reworked and those awful red links removed.--{{User:Iwillkillyou333/sig}} 16:45, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
+
#:Mocking bad writing by imitating it simply produces a bad page. Your apparent knowledge of the point of this pointless article is not evident by reading the article. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:36 23-Nov-14</small>
|delnumber=1
+
#{{Keep|New low.}} Deleting featured articles? Petty petty. I don't particularly like it but enough people voted for it to highlight the site that you can't outright delete it. --[[User:Nikau|Nikau]] ([[User talk:Nikau|talk]]) 06:28, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
|delete=
+
#:Some featured articles can be utter shite. This one isn't terrible, but if it was exactly as it is now and didn't have the "featured" at the top, it would be VFD material. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 11:26, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
#This is-a bad. {{User:Bizzeebeever/signature|20120526095235}}
+
#::This vote ought to be disregarded because it is based not on the quality of the article, but on an objection to the policy. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123170235}}
  +
#:::More problematic is disparaging fellow voters ("Petty petty"), a trend I thought had stopped when Shabidoo threw his Wikia pass-key down the gutter. However, you started it with the comment below, which suggests that a goal was to purge the site of a specific author. I famously enforce civility not with creative vote counting but with the ban-stick. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:25 23-Nov-14</small>
  +
#::::I find it ironic that you would call Nikau's comment one that disparages other users and at the same time call my opinion of the article "apparent knowledge" that "is not evident by reading the article." That's a tad belittling, wouldn't you say? --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 21:17, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#:::No I wouldn't, not ironic, not disparaging, and not belittling. I asserted that your statement about the point of the article is not evident from reading the article, that's all. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:18 23-Nov-14</small>
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*While it was created by {{u|Evilcorporatemetaljesus}}, it was [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Samuel_L._Vacuum?diff=3315753&oldid=3294717 rewritten] by {{u|Mrmonkey72}}. Adding this because its original creator was mentioned in another discussion as having written this and other poor-quality articles. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123004021}}
  +
*The current policy at Uncyclopedia is to protect featured articles. If anyone feels strongly about this then a forum can be created to discuss it there. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 21:36, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*24 hours hasn't yet elapsed. Other articles are allowed more time; shouldn't this stay open a tad longer? {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141123231105}}
  +
:FA's don't go to VFD; that is a long standing policy. This matter can be discussed in a forum if required. I would vote to keep this one regardless as evidently lots of people found it funny at one point. --{{User:ChiefjusticeDS/sig}} 11:39, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
 
}}
 
}}
 
==[[Apocalypse]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=15:57, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=5
 
|keep=
 
#'''Keep'''. Made this a little more encyclopedic, this is a major topic and has it's moments.--{{user:sycamore/sig}} 10:23, May 25, 2012 (UTC)
 
#Vital, maybe rewrite.--{{User:Mr-ex777/sig}} 06:43, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
 
#If the lists and redlinks were removed this would be a nice little article. {{User:Frosty/sig3}} 06:45, May 26, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Keep}} For no reason lol. --[[User:SecondChanceForMe|2<small><sup>nd</sup></small> Chance for me]] ''(because I was'' '''banned'''.'')'' [[User talk:SecondChanceForMe|<small>(Say)</small>]] 09:35, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Keep}} (Formerly '''Delete'''.) <s>Dumb disclaimer put me in a bad mood to encounter the long lists that followed. Instead, redirect it to [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]] (though it is being worsened by a newbie today).</s> No longer a gaping sore thanks to Mr-ex777. Could still use an owner and an actual theme. Don't call the reader a wanker in the intro. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:01 24-May-12</small>
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delete=#{{Delete}}And redirect to [[End of Time]]. --{{User:Scofield/sig}} 15:57, May 24, 2012 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} This is, once again, one of those articles that starts promisingly with a nice photo, nice thumbnail-text, nice first five/six sentences, then comes an ultimately random piece which, somehow, features a celebraty on some part (George Bush is a celebrity right?) and then turns into an endless like list which starts annoying the reader who turns his/hers back to the article and votes for deletion. This is sad. : ( {{User:Cat the Colourful/sig sig 2|16:55|28|May|2012}}
 
#* In that case, it should only be that long. --{{User:Qzekrom/sig6}} 22:41, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
*Lists and chuck norris removed.--{{User:Mr-ex777/sig}} 09:33, May 29, 2012 (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 00:16, November 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 • Poopsmithed by Llwy-ar-lawr • Engineered by Pup (report bugs here)

edit Vietnamese H Archive

Score: 5 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 199 hours
Delete (5)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. A bunch of pornographic content and a few sentences about how the Chinese are better than the Vietnamese. --Precious Star (talk) 17:44, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Not an "encyclopedia article" but a pictorial essay, to make the unfunny assertion that the Vietnamese are whores. Spıke ¬ 18:05 20-Nov-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Words cannot describe just how terrible this article is. So, it's pretty bad. ConCass2 (talk) 19:39, November 20, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Just when you think all the ancient junk has gone...this one pops up! --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:43, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
  5. An attempt to look nice at the expense of anything remotely intelligent. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:02 22 Nov 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Chav/Translations H Archive

Score: 5 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 176 hours
Delete (5)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. I don't think this is particularly funny or worth keeping. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 17:28, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Various editors (overwhelmingly Anons) have used this overlong list to catalog the "funny" things that chavs say rather than write original humor. Spıke ¬ 17:52 21-Nov-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. The same joke repeated hundreds of times --Precious Star (talk) 19:26, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Flypaper. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:46, November 21, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Can't tell if all this stuff is even about chavs at all. In any case, it's not of much use. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:06 22 Nov 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit SEHS H T D Survivor

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 148 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. SEHS being "Sudden Head Exploding Syndrome," a Wacky Ailment with which to piggyback off A splode in this article from 2005, which has little to say about the ailment no one will look up except that it runs in things — and American politicians — the authors don't happen to like. Before deleting the external links, I didn't follow them, so I can't say whether this entire Syndrome was invented at an external website, as our recent "Dihydrogen monoxide" was. Spıke ¬ 21:15 22-Nov-14
  2. Unlike Dihydrogen monoxide, this doesn't deserve an article. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:13 23 Nov 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. It's not terrible, but it's not good either. --Pwn head Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 02:22, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Sudden Instant Death Syndrome H Archive

Score: 5 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 145 hours
Delete (5)
  1. From the redundant and made-up title to the random lists of nonsensical items such as masturbating kittens, this article is about essentially nothing. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:25 23 Nov 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Dead Baby Humor has to be especially good to be funny. This article, by comparison, uses most of the trite themes in the book: Author discussing himself, author apparently with A.D.D., "nobody knows anything," listcruft, memecruft, history-of-the-future, and another list of Notable Sufferers, inviting cyberbullying and not being disappointed in the response. Spıke ¬ 01:16 23-Nov-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Stupid. --Pwn head Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 02:14, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. HowTo:Not write an article ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) Icons-flag-au 06:04, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
  5. Symbol delete vote Delete. Not funny at all. Newman66 Visit my table here! Contributions My works 23:54, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • It hardly discusses babies anyway. Only two paragraphs at the end. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 01:30 23 Nov 2014

edit 🔒 Samuel L. Vacuum H T D Survivor Oldvfd Archive

Score: 1 • voting closed
Elapsed Time: 145 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Article begins with an unimpressive sentence, explains in tedious detail why said unimpressive sentence is a comedic masterpiece, and ends with a gratuitous instance of {{USERNAME}}. Was voted onto the front page by a group of editors who are mostly no longer here. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:32 23 Nov 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote Navelism. Yes, it was a feature, a VFD moved to VFH by fallen-away editors who reveled in their freedom to feature a thoroughly bad article. That was not amusing the reader but self-amusement, a prank not a joke, and that goes for the article as well. No one will look for this transformation of Samuel L. Jackson's name, no one will laugh at the emphasis on Jackson's blackness, and after that sentence, no one will enjoy author's essay about trying to write an article. Spıke ¬ 01:21 23-Nov-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Considering that there are already two save votes, this article probably won't go. But I reckon that this article would be much funnier if it were actually about Samuel L Vacuum as opposed to plain navelism along the lines of "here's why it's funny". ConCass2 (talk) 11:26, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
    It was about Samuel L. Vacuum before it was rewritten to be about how terrible that concept was; see Comments. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 17:03 23 Nov 2014
Keep (2)
  1. Symbol keep vote A Classic. Hilarious and clever. This is not about writing an Uncyclopedia article. It's a parody of comedy writing in general and critique of the overuse of memes in place of actual jokes. This was one of the first articles I read on Uncyclopedia and one of the first to get me interested in this site, so I would think that there are others who find it amusing as well. --Pwn head Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 02:21, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
    Mocking bad writing by imitating it simply produces a bad page. Your apparent knowledge of the point of this pointless article is not evident by reading the article. Spıke ¬ 14:36 23-Nov-14
  2. Symbol keep vote New low. Deleting featured articles? Petty petty. I don't particularly like it but enough people voted for it to highlight the site that you can't outright delete it. --Nikau (talk) 06:28, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
    Some featured articles can be utter shite. This one isn't terrible, but if it was exactly as it is now and didn't have the "featured" at the top, it would be VFD material. ConCass2 (talk) 11:26, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
    This vote ought to be disregarded because it is based not on the quality of the article, but on an objection to the policy. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 17:02 23 Nov 2014
    More problematic is disparaging fellow voters ("Petty petty"), a trend I thought had stopped when Shabidoo threw his Wikia pass-key down the gutter. However, you started it with the comment below, which suggests that a goal was to purge the site of a specific author. I famously enforce civility not with creative vote counting but with the ban-stick. Spıke ¬ 17:25 23-Nov-14
    I find it ironic that you would call Nikau's comment one that disparages other users and at the same time call my opinion of the article "apparent knowledge" that "is not evident by reading the article." That's a tad belittling, wouldn't you say? --Pwn head Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 21:17, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
    No I wouldn't, not ironic, not disparaging, and not belittling. I asserted that your statement about the point of the article is not evident from reading the article, that's all. Spıke ¬ 22:18 23-Nov-14
Comments
  • While it was created by Evilcorporatemetaljesus, it was rewritten by Mrmonkey72. Adding this because its original creator was mentioned in another discussion as having written this and other poor-quality articles. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 00:40 23 Nov 2014
  • The current policy at Uncyclopedia is to protect featured articles. If anyone feels strongly about this then a forum can be created to discuss it there. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 21:36, November 23, 2014 (UTC)
  • 24 hours hasn't yet elapsed. Other articles are allowed more time; shouldn't this stay open a tad longer? -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 23:11 23 Nov 2014
FA's don't go to VFD; that is a long standing policy. This matter can be discussed in a forum if required. I would vote to keep this one regardless as evidently lots of people found it funny at one point. --ChiefjusticeGameCube 11:39, November 24, 2014 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects