Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Pages for Deletion: +Inland Northwest)
({{VFDn|Laptop}}: did what I could, hoping someone can tell me if it's good enough)
 
(6,221 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|Lake Zurich, Illinois}} ==
{{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=14:13, October 10, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=~~~~~
+
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Imagine, a small Midwestern town that has two kinds of assholes, megalomaniacs, and Mexicans! Anon was just in to correct the list of elementary schools. Either that, or cyber-bully. Who knows? Who cares? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:13 10-Oct-14</small>
  +
#What do Lake Zurich and this article have in common? They're both boring. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141010162239}}
  +
#Lake what? Where?? --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 12:55, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 08:45, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*{{Abstain}} Nobody's ever going to look this up but maybe for the one or two people from Lake Zurich that do, they'll find it funny. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 17:12, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
 
}}
 
}}
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|The Last World War}} ==
   
New nominations at the top of the page below this line; --></div>
+
{{VFDt|time=09:49, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=3
== [[Inland Northwest]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=12:03, February 27, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|delnumber=1
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
{{Delete}} Written, and revised overnight with 2010 census numbers, overtly to boost the city of Boise, just irreverently enough to fit on a humor wiki. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:03 27-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{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}}
 
}}
 
}}
   
==[[101 Things You Should Not Do]]==
+
== {{VFDn|Devon}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:57, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=02:09, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{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)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=
 
# {{Delete}} List {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|05:57 25 Feb 2013}}
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*{{Comment|Abstain.}} A playground for I.P. Anon and other drive-by writers of one-liners isn't optimal, but it's self-contained. The template, though, is awful: "This page is under perpetual construction... It is an ever changing work...." That is in fact a better description of [[Uncyclopedia:Sandbox]]. Better to get them to finish it, to flesh out each of the 100 themes into funny paragraphs, as I now try to do on its talk page. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:11 25-Feb-13</small>
+
*[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:Arthur C. Clarke]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Good Electricity and Bad Electricity}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:30, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=1
+
{{VFDt|time=14:04, October 12, 2014 (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
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
#{{Keep}} Good enough now. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:21 24-Feb-13</small>
+
|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)
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=#{{delete}} This article is based on the assertion that Arthur C. Clarke claimed to invent everything, insults directed to other dead sci-fi authors, and poorly implemented jabs at his allegations pedophilia. There is a bit of concept here, but very little execution, and not much more potential. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 12:30, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
*I see Aleister at work here and am holding off. The original article hit the same buttons ''ad nauseam'' but did start with a perfectly fine concept. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:38 24-Feb-13</small>
 
*:Never saw this page before, checked the history (remember the rule about looking for a better version in the history????) and found out it's a Mhaille page, and reverted to his last edit. So by being a Mhaille page I surmise it contains very good material, but don't have time to read it now. Am going other places now, and one of them has food. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 12:46 24-2-'13
 
*::Point to Aleister; nominator has the duty to make a token effort to find some quality somewhere, even during a purge of a namespace. I brought categories up to date after Aleister's mega-revert. Only the section on "tingle" seems to have no basis in reality, but maybe some of you recall something about Clarke that I don't. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:56 24-Feb-13</small>
 
*:::The content is basically the same. Although it was created by an established user, it was also created in 2006. There is ''some'' content, but it could be collapsed to half a dozen quotes without losing any information. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:12, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
 
*::To answer my own question, [[WP:Arthur C. Clarke]] does not contain the word "tingle" so I'll kill three of the quotes for you. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:16 24-Feb-13</small>
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Anonymous]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Uterus or GTFO!}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:12, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=1
+
{{VFDt|time=00:38, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
 
#{{Keep}}. This is a very specific vote for a very specific article. Wooga for life! -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delnumber=3
|delete=#{{delete}} This page is, by its title, the epitome of scatter-shot. I would quote trim it, but this page has no theme. Is it trying to quote the internet cyber-terrorist group, or what? If so, the subject is too obscure. It is trying to compile every anonymous quote in the history of humanity? If so, the subject is too broad. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 12:12, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Starting with a nonsense year number in a preachy Intro before devolving into themelessness, this is another tribute to the namespace instead of a service to the reader. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:16 24-Feb-13</small>
+
#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}} This page fails on various levels, but mostly on a poor (or non-existent) concept. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|09:33 25 Feb 2013}}
+
#{{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>
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:17, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
*[[Wikiquote:Anonymous]] is a real page, as is [[Wikiquote:Anonymous (group)]]. Theoretically there could be a valid page that is a parody of this, and this Unquotable page would be the ideal location. Sadly, the page at this location fails. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|09:33 25 Feb 2013}}
+
|keepnumber=0
  +
|keep=
  +
|comments=If anything brings back {{u|mnbvcxz|Preggo man}}, it will be deleting this article. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 12:05, October 16, 2014 (UTC)
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:About]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Threesome}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:55, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=12:11, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{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>
  +
#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|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)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
#{{Keep}} If we are going to have an Unquotable namespace--and, for the moment, we are--then why not have a page setting out a coherent plan for it? UnNews has several such, and they used to be helpful. Indeed policy should not be "spread across 5 or 6 pages" and if you can find a better spot at which to unify it, tell me where it went and I'll flip my vote. You might find this page a useful place to set down guidelines so that the cruft you have spent so much time editing doesn't creep back. Or we might flesh this out into deadpan praise of people's use of dead men's quotations to fluff up their unremarkable present-day rhetoric. We have found gassy text elsewhere and not deleted an entire page that otherwise has a purpose. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:43 23-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{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)
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=#{{delete}} unhelpful "about" page. The policy pages for unquotable are spread across 5 or 6 pages for no apparent reason, besides making the project look bigger than it actually is. What is said here could be said in one sentence. This has been unedited since 2006. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:55, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Obfuscata]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Miranda Cosgrove's Uterus}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:05, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=3
+
{{VFDt|time=13:15, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{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)
  +
#: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>
  +
#::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)
  +
#: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=
#{{Keep}} It's a good example of Obfuscata, and probably should remain purely as that. Given it is Obfuscata, I don't see a huge argument for a rewrite of this to match a rewrite of the page it's a translation of. If the main page is rewritten to an extent that this is no longer relevant, then we can look at a rewrite of this at that stage. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|02:19 24 Feb 2013}}
+
#{{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}} Per above. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 02:35, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Keep}} I wanted to vote delete, but laughed several times while reading the page. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:37, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
#{{Keep}}. Because, because, because, because, because. I'm serious about that last one. The first four are me being silly. -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
|comments=
|delnumber=2
+
*{{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)
|delete=#{{delete}} Reskin of the unquotable mainpage. And by "reskin" I mean text change. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:05, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete|Delete, again.}} This is seriously bad use of the English language. Yes, it is meant to make fun of same, but simply taking another Uncyclopedia page and making the English turgid is not heavy lifting nor as laughter-causing as focused, planned, engaging use of (perhaps with wry commentary on) bad English. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:52 23-Feb-13</small>
 
|comments=*{{comment}} I plan on a doing a reworking on the quotable mainpage. However, the main link template is intertwined with the various reskin pages. Before I work on the quote mainpage, I need to see what the community wants to keep, so I am not wasting time reworking articles that are going to be deleted anyway. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 08:05, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:You have noted that the same text is transliterated multiple times into different "languages," but you could improve the Unquotable main page without the risk that we might compel you to apply your changes to Obfuscata in bad English, pirate-speak, etc. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>10:52 23-Feb-13</small>
 
*::The coding of [[Unquotable:MainArticleList]] (which is used as template) is horrible, generating different content on different pages because there is a different section of code for each page the template appears on. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 20:17, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:Horrible indeed! The template ("tricked out" in the ever-self-congratulatory words of {{U|Some user}}) special-cases itself based on who its caller is, to give each caller the "elegance" of calling the same, single template to achieve radically different effects! This is not so much a key part of our site heritage as a bomb planted especially deep! {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>21:42 23-Feb-13</small>
 
*{{comment|@ puppy}} if we need an article on Obfuscata, which would be a valid subject, it should be at [[Obfuscata]], not as a clone of a random navigation page. This article makes about as much sense as running [[Newtis Newtfield]] through a [[Swedish Chef]] translator and calling it the [[this page does not exist|Svedeesh Noot]]. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 17:16, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
 
::I agree that we should have an article at [[Obfuscata]] but the closest we have is at [[Obfuscation]]. I think this quotable page is a good example of Obfuscata, and we don't have an article at Obfuscata about the style of writing, so this should stay, at least until someone writes the Obfuscata page. You may consider this a challenge to write said page, if you like. Also, if someone ran Newtis Newtfield through a Swedish chef translator and called it the Sveedeesh Noot that would be funny. Redundant, but funny, particularly if it were linked as a see also from the main Newtis Newtfield article.{{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 02:40, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
==[[Unquotable:History of Unquotable]]==
+
== {{VFDn|Arsene Wenger}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=22:20, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=3
+
{{VFDt|time=13:17, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=2
#{{Keep}} I fight for {{U|Some user}}. -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 01:40, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
#:That is the corniest Tron reference I have seen in a long time. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|02:23 23 Feb 2013}}
 
#{{Keep}} Imrealized knows his history. This page, which I've never seen before, give the background of the Oscar quotes, something which uncyclopedia is infamous for. It outlines the start of the meme, and how it evolved. I don't understand why people want to delete the main pages of the Oscar Wilde quotes. The quotes themselves, when they are bad and are on good to stupid articles, sure, but not the historical pages themselves. What's the problem with leaving those few pages alone, especially one like this which educates about the beginning of a tradition. I stand with Imrealized in standing with Some user, who is sitting down and won't stand for himself. [[user:Aleister|'''Aleister''']] 8:03 23-2-'13
 
#{{Keep}} I didn't want to be the only holdout, so I proposed originally to userspace this piece of Uncyc history so that it wouldn't get deleted outright. But I think that since it does mention former Uncyc admins in the story, it does deserve a place in Unquotable as Uncyc history. The UN:CM test also takes into account whether any of the admins might have heard of it, and I do remember one or two of the admins mentioned here, though they are no longer active on this site. Admittedly this story all happened before I chanced upon Uncyclopedia, but that is history for you. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 02:58, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
#:How would you feel about it being moved to Uncyclopedia namespace? {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:46 25 Feb 2013}}
 
|delnumber=3
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Poorly written navelism. And as someone who actually digs into the history of this site and it's various facets, even I found this a most uninteresting chapter, as it's almost pure [[UN:CM]] stuff. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|10:20 21 Feb 2013}}
+
#{{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>
#{{Delete}} Namespace creator {{U|Some user}} sets down in print his personal story as persecuted artist. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:27 21-Feb-13</small>
+
#Can't we just delete this? I don't see anyone stepping forward to help. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018213221}}
#{{delete}} nobody cares. This is somewhere between vanity and cracking wise with the navigation tools, with a dose of advocacy. This uses a whole article of ranting to explain history that could be said in a paragraph. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:42, February 22, 2013 (UTC)
+
#:We can and will, if we prevail in the vote. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:27 19-Oct-14</small>
#:History explained in one paragraph - today's educational system described. The best history is an eyewitness account of what occurred told by someone who was there, plus the thought process which went into the situations described. It would be nice to have as detailed an account of the creation of uncy and other aspects of the wiki as we have here about the step-by-step creation and thought processes concerning the start of the Oscar Wilde quotes. [[user:Aleister|''a random historian'']] 8:25 23-2-'13
+
|keepnumber=0
  +
|keep=
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*This did not seem to me to focus quite exclusively on one user, but since that user is the main focus of the article, I propose we userspace this article to Some User's userspace. {{Unsigned|Simsilikesims}}
+
*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}}
*:Concur {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:12 22-Feb-13</small>
+
*: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>
*::Deleted or in name space - either means it's not in general distribution. I'm happy with that. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|07:09 22 Feb 2013}}
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Jesus Christ]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Laptop}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:12, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=2.5
+
{{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
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
#{{Keep|Selfish half-keep}}. I've hacked, trimmed, added, hacked and polished again. Without completely changing the concept, this is significantly improved. It could be more designed as twisting scripture, but that doesn't fit with the “illiterate/didn't write it” concept, which I feel has merit, and could possibly become it's own article. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|04:34 23 Feb 2013}}
 
#:"Twisting scripture" would imply that the invented quotations were actually based on something. This is the prerequisite for decent humor rather than rant--attributed to Jesus, as I say below at Hitler, not based on anything but desire for artificial melodrama. If the concept of the lists is inattention to the basis of humor, then it is not a "concept" you need to preserve. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:12 23-Feb-13</small>
 
#::There are two ways to do a page like this that make sense. One is to try and make the quotes as near to that original as possible. The second is to take the character of the subject and create quotes that fit with a parody of the character. This is a parody of the person, rather than a parody of sayings attributed to him. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|11:47 23 Feb 2013}}
 
#Puppy barks. And will probably keep on barking. Nice page. [[user:Aleister|'''Aleister''']] 8:08 23-2-'13
 
#{{Keep}}. This vote is also specific, but in an entirely different way than the other vote. -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=#{{delete|Jesi-cruft}} 60% advocacy and 40% randumbo. 100% in the wrong tone. Only a couple quotes come close to being clever, and those are in the wrong tone. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 17:12, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*The Intro is downright good. On the rest of the article, my comments are the same as on the Hitler one. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:16 21-Feb-13</small>
+
*Detailed editing comments moved to replacement article's talk page. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:04 19-Oct-14</small>
  +
*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}}
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Swedish_Chef]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Igpay Atinlay}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:17, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=2
+
{{VFDt|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>
  +
#::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=
#{{keep}}- the Unquotable section of articles work together collectively allowing for running gags, viewing each as a stand alone article is, in my view, the wrong approach to dealing with this section of articles. -- {{User:Mhaille/sig}}
+
#{{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)
#{{Keep}}. Bork, bork, bork! -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
|comments=
|delnumber=5
+
*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}}
|delete=#{{delete}} Another article that is the same concept as the mainspace article, only done worse. Granted, the mainspace article execution could use work, but quotification is hardly an improvement. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 17:17, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Unquotable fails utterly, and especially at imitating Wikiquotes, when the person being quoted is not a celebrity but a stock stereotype. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:30 19-Feb-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} Muppet cruft. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:33 20 Feb 2013}}
 
#{{Delete}} The quotes here just aren't funny anymore (especially the dated stuff about G.W. Bush), and translating them into Sveedish Chef speek does not zee make zem foooney Bork Bork Bork! Besides, the Muppet Show in which the Swedish Chef muppet starred in was in its prime when I was in about 6th or 7th grade. The celebrity claim to fame of this muppet is so old that it has been forgotten and is no longer widely remembered. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 03:09, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 17:50, February 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
|comments=*{{comment}} we have a near identically themed page at for the [[Swedish Chef]] in mainspace. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:33, February 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Yoda]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|That Guy You Hate}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:13, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=3
+
{{VFDt|time=16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
 
#{{keep}}- the Unquotable section of articles work together collectively allowing for running gags, viewing each as a stand alone article is, in my view, the wrong approach to dealing with this section of articles. -- {{User:Mhaille/sig}}
 
#{{Keep}} you must. -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
#Just read this, and some of it is pretty good. You can't have enough good Yodaisms. I'll do some work on the page later. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 22:25 26-2-'13
 
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delnumber=3
|delete=#{{delete}} 90% of the quotes are about sex, and 9% are Russian Reversals. There might be a couple quotes here that are funny, but I can't see justifying a page on the subject. The whole joke is the Yoda voice, which is done better than the quote format could ever be at [[Yoda]]. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 17:13, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delete=
#{{Delete|"Stroke my green penis, you will."}} Not just the Russian Reversals but everything on this page is imitative. The only authentic comedy was done by the creators of Yoda. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:28 19-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} Gay ''humour''. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
#{{Delete}} Muppet cruft. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:34 20 Feb 2013}}
+
#{{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}} 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)
  +
#: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}}
  +
#::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=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== {{VFDc|Unquotable:Satan}} ==
+
== {{VFDn|Short Circuit}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=15:59, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=4
+
{{VFDt|time=00:21, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
 
#{{keep}} Not a Muppet. Beyond that this is an example of what the namespace is good for. There's half a dozen decent one liners, but not enough content to call it an article of prose. Adding much more to this would potentially be overkill. Deleting this would be removing a page that has merit. Saying “It wouldn't survive in mainspace” is correct - and that's why we have other name spaces. This is better than 99% of [[:Category:My sojourn|My sojourn]] articles. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:43 20 Feb 2013}}
 
#{{keep}} Per above. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 06:50, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{keep}}- the Unquotable section of articles work together collectively allowing for running gags, viewing each as a stand alone article is, in my view, the wrong approach to dealing with this section of articles. -- {{User:Mhaille/sig}}
 
#{{Keep}}. TYUN! -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delnumber=2
|delete=#{{delete}} this feels like the retarded step-brother of the [http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/good-guy-lucifer/ Good Guy Lucifer meme]. This is a mixture of scattershot, advocacy, and general quotecruft. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 15:59, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delete=
#{{Delete}} If anyone wants to write an article in the voice of Satan, I consider that a legitimate comedy strategy. This article is that strategy reduced to exactly listcruft. If any newbie wrote this in mainspace, any experienced editor would tell him that we are looking for funny paragraphs and not quips, slaps, and one-liners. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:25 19-Feb-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} No redeeming qualities. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:21 20-Oct-14</small>
|comments=*{{comment|At pup}} the problem with this is that there may be 6 good one-liners, but there are 20 quotes on the page. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 14:16, February 20, 2013 (UTC)
+
#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}}
----
+
|keepnumber=1
*'''Vote closed.''' No consensus to delete. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:03 26-Feb-13</small>
+
|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=
  +
*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)
 
}}
 
}}
   
== {{VFDc|Making up Oscar Wilde quotes}} ==
+
== {{VFDn|Owl}} ==
*Voters, see also [[Forum:Trimming back the Wilde Quotes‎‎]]. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:22 19-Feb-13</small>
+
{{Votervfd|time=15:47, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
{{VFDt|time=23:30, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
|keepnumber=3.5
+
|delnumber=2
  +
|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>
  +
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
# '''Half keep per Kip'''. It has significance. The issue is that this page, much like [[Vandalism/example on wheels!]], has a place on this site. But I'd replace most of the content with [[Unquotable:Oscar Wilde]] and make '''that''' the redirect. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|10:56 20 Feb 2013}}
+
|comments=
#Entire vote per Kip. This is a historic page in uncy's history. As the source of the Oscar Wilde quotes, and the start of the in-joke, essential page. I like the plaque idea, to mark it as historic. [[user:Aleister|''Aleister'']] 12:51 21-2-'13
+
}}
#{{Keep}} As the origin of the in-joke, this page should be kept. I too like the idea of a plaque. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 00:26, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Keep}}. I also like the idea of plaque build-up. I'd work on said plaque, but would probably have my work replaced four hours later. -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
== {{VFDn|Indiana Jones}} ==
  +
  +
{{VFDt|time=17:03, October 21, 2014 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=1
 
|delnumber=1
|delete=#{{delete}} redundant with [[Unquotable:Oscar Wilde]]. I finally got around to reading through this article and moving the good quotes (all 3 of them) to the other Wilde quote page, and I recently purged it too. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 15:47, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|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}} 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)
  +
#{{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>
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*I feel the need to point out that this page has historical significance as the very origin of the Oscar Wilde in-joke. If anything, it deserves a clean-up and a plaque. {{User:Kip the Dip/sig}} <small>09:56, Feb. 20, 2013</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)
*{{comment|@ pup & kip}} there is alot of overlap between this page and [[Unquotable:Oscar Wilde]]. Besides bad quotes, there is nothing of importance here that isn't at the unquotable page. I would actually prefer to move the unquotable to this name, per my crusade to delete the unquotable namespace. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 14:20, February 20, 2013 (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. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:38 22-Oct-14</small>
:* I would be {{for| }} merging Unquotable:Oscar Wilde with this namespace, but {{against| }} deleting Unquotable entirely. It's a valid parody of Wikiquotes and amusing when properly managed. Then again, what you do with your own Uncyclopedia is your business. {{User:Kip the Dip/sig}} <small>02:52, Feb. 21, 2013</small>
 
----
 
*'''Vote closed.''' Broad support to keep. Ideas on restructuring our Wildeisms are still welcome in the [[Forum:Trimming back the Wilde Quotes|Forum]]. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:58 26-Feb-13</small>
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Avogadro]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Nude figure-skating}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:49, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=11:41, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=1
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} A dumb ramble. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:41 22-Oct-14</small>
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=3
 
|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>
 
#{{Delete}} --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 17:49, February 26, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
=Archived VFD Discussions=
+
== {{VFDn|Turkish-Greek conflict}} ==
{{VFDarchive}}
 
   
[[Category:Articles deleted by Lyrithya at some point]]
+
{{VFDt|time=11:52, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
[[Category:Uncyclopedia deletion]]
+
|delnumber=2
[[Category:Pages repeatedly nominated on VFD]]
+
|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>
[[es:Inciclopedia:VPB]]
+
#{{Delete}} {{Unsigned|ScottPat|10:12, 2014 October 22}}
[[id:Tolololpedia:PUP]]
+
|keepnumber=0
[[ko:포럼:세탁소]]
+
|keep=
[[pt:Desciclopédia:Eliminação de páginas]]
+
|comments=
  +
}}

Latest revision as of 20:08, October 23, 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 Lake Zurich, Illinois H T D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 318 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Imagine, a small Midwestern town that has two kinds of assholes, megalomaniacs, and Mexicans! Anon was just in to correct the list of elementary schools. Either that, or cyber-bully. Who knows? Who cares? Spıke ¬ 14:13 10-Oct-14
  2. What do Lake Zurich and this article have in common? They're both boring. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 16:22 10 Oct 2014
  3. Lake what? Where?? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 12:55, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 08:45, October 22, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • Symbol neutral vote Abstain. Nobody's ever going to look this up but maybe for the one or two people from Lake Zurich that do, they'll find it funny. --Pwn head Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 17:12, October 11, 2014 (UTC)

edit The Last World War H T D Survivor

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 298 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 T D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 282 hours
Delete (4)
  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)
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: 270 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: 259 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: 3
Elapsed Time: 248 hours
Delete (4)
  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)
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: 247 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: 223 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: 109 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
Elapsed Time: 105 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
    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 That Guy You Hate H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 99 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: 1
Elapsed Time: 92 hours
Delete (2)
  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
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: 2
Elapsed Time: 68 hours
Delete (2)
  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
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Indiana Jones H T D

Score: -1
Elapsed Time: 51 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

edit Nude figure-skating H D

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 32 hours
Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. A dumb ramble. Spıke ¬ 11:41 22-Oct-14
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Turkish-Greek conflict H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 32 hours
Delete (2)
  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) 10:12, 2014 October 22
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
Personal tools
projects