Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Inland Northwest: Reverted to best version in history)
({{VFDn|Short Circuit}}: Reply)
 
(6,153 intermediate revisions by 92 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=3
  +
|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)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=1
+
|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)
  +
}}
  +
  +
== {{VFDn|Third World War}} ==
  +
  +
{{VFDt|time=09:47, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Nothing much in the article. No humour, no encyclopedic parody. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 09:47, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Concept is Wacky War plus history-of-the-future. Execution is stuck in lists, including the unfunny list of names of countries. Writing style is gibberish, starting with the first sentence — "...an armed conflict in The Third World, that took place during The Third World..." — not even a conundrum; ending with, "The outcome...is unclear." {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>15:01 11-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{delete|123,456,789 (which is roughly over 9000).}} Little more than a few bad puns glued together with randomness and nonsense numbers. Includes a poke at Jews for good measure--of stupidity. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141011161411}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Boring. --{{User:Xamralco/sig}} 17:16, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=0
  +
|keep=
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
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
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} In depth analysis, stage-by-stage using maps, of a made-up conflict that only the author cares about. Complete with made-up statistics like "123,456" as well. {{User:ScottPat/sig3}} 09:49, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{delete|It is occasionally criticized for being slightly destructive.}} The intro--from which that sentence is taken--looked promising, but the descriptions of the conflict didn't do anything for me. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141011162737}}
  +
#{{Delete}} This article about nothing keeps begging for editors' time to fix it up, while never inducing anyone to take control and make it funny. See also '''Comments'''. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:05 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
|keepnumber=1
  +
|keep=
  +
#{{Keep}} Sorry, but I found it funny, especially the maps. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 12:27, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|comments=
  +
*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}}
  +
}}
   
== [[Inland Northwest]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Devon}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:03, February 27, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=02:09, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=2
  +
|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)
  +
#{{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}}
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
  +
|comments=
  +
*[http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Devon?oldid=153094 Here] is the last version by the first author; it's nothing spectacular and it's very short, but it's better than what's there now. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012022051}}
  +
*:Not much in the original version worth keeping, nor even worth the time to give it mark-up. I've deleted a lot of cruft from the current version; there is material inside that one could make an article out of. The content-free Intro prepares the reviewer for the worst. Unfortunately, the new author of [[Dudley]], {{U|Mjr74}} lives far away from Devon, if I read my maps aright, so we can't saddle him with this. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:25 12-Oct-14</small>
  +
*:I notified Mjr74 anyway; he says he has visited Devon and has stuff he could add. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:56 14-Oct-14</small>
  +
}}
  +
  +
== {{VFDn|Good Electricity and Bad Electricity}} ==
  +
  +
{{VFDt|time=14:04, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=2
 
|delnumber=2
 
|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}} A tiny bit of pseudo-intellectualism. Might fit on Illogicopedia. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:04 12-Oct-14</small>
#{{delete}} largely imaginary region (per wikipedia, the actual inland northwest refers to eastern Washington and northern Idaho). The author is overly excited about the fact that Boise is the 101st largest city in the United States. --{{User:Mnbvcxz/sig5}} 13:41, February 28, 2013 (UTC)
+
#Agreed. I'll stick it there right now. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012183634}}
  +
|keepnumber=0
  +
|keep=
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
* I was considering a revert of the last editor, but the previous revision was no better. I don't know the area at all though, so have no idea what is relevant and what is just garbage. Is there any earlier revision which is better than the current? Is there a way to salvage anything worthwhile from it? {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|01:58 28 Feb 2013}}
 
*:I did exactly that yesterday, and concluded exactly that. Saw in the history that {{U|JesusLandMan}} in 2007 set out to "make it at least a little funny"; rev of 26-Aug-07, minus "Why Boise Sucks" is short but has a concept. <small>14:14</small> PS--I have indeed assembled a version based on that one; sorry I did not do this before nominating. I'll let my nomination stand; what do you think now, Mnbvcxz? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>15:45 28-Feb-13</small>
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
==[[101 Things You Should Not Do]]==
+
== {{VFDn|UnNews:NRA celebrates Colorado theatre shootings}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:57, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=20:14, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=2
  +
|delete=
  +
#<s>First paragraph discloses to us that we are about to be treated to a more or less serious portrayal of the incident. The rest of the article tries and fails to remedy this shortcoming. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012201424}}</s> It seems more like criticism than satire, even though it is over-the-top. I'm waffling though. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012214318}}
  +
#:Errrmmmm ... Did you per chance read the linked article on Yahoo about the actual incident? More or ''less'' serious indeed.... [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 20:56, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#::Original rationale rescinded because it was stupid. Separately, the fact that it was written by Aimsplode is certainly not a factor (though having little souvenirs of him around is not particularly pleasant). {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141012214318}}
  +
#:::Indeed. (I moved part of Llwy's post, above, to avoid an empty nomination.) In my opinion, you could vote {{Delete|Delete}} from sheer advocacy or from unfunniness but Snarglefoop should resist the temptation to vote according to whether he agrees with its apparent thesis. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:52 12-Oct-14</small>
  +
#::::Heaven forbid! ''Humor sit omne hominis!'' [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 23:26, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} The author is trying to write a satire, but has very little to satirise, and fails miserably. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:57, October 18, 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>
+
*Nomination suggested that the UnNews was a "serious portrayal" of a massacre; it is not. I don't agree with, nor like, its thesis, that gun crimes are evidence that the NRA (also, incidentally, Christians) are laughably wrong. The '''Source''', a ''Yahoo'' blog about a gloating tweet "associated" with the NRA, is misleading, as the NRA never endorses crimes using guns; I think the tweet was more likely planted. But I'm not sure that any of this, or the fact that it was written by a permabanned user, justify deleting it. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>21:28 12-Oct-14</small>
  +
* Dunno. You have to hate the NRA pretty severely to find this funny, I think, 'cuz it's so totally contrary to reality. To be funny, I think stuff generally has to fall into the "uncanny valley" where it's ''almost'' believable, but not quite, and this is totally off the mark. To find it "almost believable" to you'd need to seriously believe the NRA was a bunch of raving lunatics.<br>And as to the post reported by Yahoo -- even if it was really from the NRA it was just a case of bad timing (and it was probably either auto-generated after being scheduled days before, or it was sent by someone who hadn't heard the news); it appeared to me to be entirely unrelated to the shooting incident. [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 03:22, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
*:Again, less likely to be the NRA celebrating the massacre than anti-NRA forces (I include Yahoo) trying to make hay over it. In any case, though, if the author is not already anti-NRA, he will not be laughing but will be trying to gauge what this article is advocating. Goes against [[CoW#Extremists|my advice to authors on writing about extremists]] (not that that means automatic deletion). {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:32 13-Oct-14</small>
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Arthur C. Clarke]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Uterus or GTFO!}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:30, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=00:38, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=2
  +
|delete=
  +
#Per Spike on my talk page, this article documents a meme without making it funny. It seems to exist mainly to advertise pictures of pregnant women. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141013003852}}
  +
#{{Delete}} Per me on her talk page: "A flagrant example of (1) basing an Uncyclopedia article on a meme (viz, "Tits or GTFO," that is: post pornography or I will assume it never happened) from another website and (2) extrapolating so far that the reader has to "guess the punch line to read the joke." I stated no opinion on his goals, as I would grant {{U|Mnbvcxz}} his little affectation if he would just quit changing diapers and return. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:49 13-Oct-14</small>
  +
|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)
  +
}}
  +
  +
== {{VFDn|Threesome}} ==
  +
  +
{{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}} Good enough now. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:21 24-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}} 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=
 
|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|Miranda Cosgrove's Uterus}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:12, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=13:15, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=3
  +
|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)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
|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)
+
#{{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>
|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}} 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>
 
#{{Delete}} This page fails on various levels, but mostly on a poor (or non-existent) concept. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|09:33 25 Feb 2013}}
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*[[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}}
+
*{{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)
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:About]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Arsene Wenger}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:55, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=1
+
{{VFDt|time=13:17, October 14, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=2
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} I am nominating this to try to achieve improvements to, not deletion of, this article on the football manager by some editor Over There. I am not even sure whether getting thrown out of a cinema relates to anything. As it stands, the initial and recurring theme is Pedo/Anal/Rape/SexWithBlackMen Humor. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:17 14-Oct-14</small>
  +
#Can't we just delete this? I don't see anyone stepping forward to help. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018213221}}
  +
#:We can and will, if we prevail in the vote. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:27 19-Oct-14</small>
  +
|keepnumber=0
 
|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>
 
|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=
  +
*I'm not sure what's supposed to happen here, but you might be interested in [http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Arsene_Wenger?oldid=1635086 this] slightly more sanitary version. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141014173645}}
  +
*:It is much cleaner, but it is also from 2007, and presumably omits comedy based on news in the last seven years — I assume there is some. Is there a Brit in the house who would like to do a merge? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:11 14-Oct-14</small>
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Quotes_in_Obfuscata]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|HP Costa Rica Today}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:05, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=3
+
{{VFDt|time=20:17, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=3
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} 2007 Uncyclopedian {{U|Hpsucks}} believes this offshore affiliate of Hewlett-Packard is gay. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:17 15-Oct-14</small>
  +
#Boring. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141015204131}}
  +
#{{Delete}}Even the article's title is a turn off. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:02, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=0
 
|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}}
+
|comments=
#{{Keep}} Per above. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 02:35, February 25, 2013 (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)
 
|delnumber=2
 
|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|Tails the Straight}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=22:20, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=3
+
{{VFDt|time=20:23, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=1
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} This isn't horrible, but it's also not funny, IMHO. The humor is too strained. It's a sort of parody of a parody of a minor character in the Sonic the Hedgehog cartoons, and from me, at least, it gets a great big "Eh what??", and the question, "Why does the world need this article?" leaps unbidden to one's mind. [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 20:23, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
#{{Keep}} I fight for {{U|Some user}}. -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 01:40, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Keep}} Like [[Uncyclopedia:Votes_for_deletion/archive207#Tails_the_Straight|last time]]. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:29 15-Oct-14</small>
#:That is the corniest Tron reference I have seen in a long time. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|02:23 23 Feb 2013}}
+
|comments=
#{{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
+
*''/me shrugs.'' {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141015203118}}
#{{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}}
+
  +
== {{VFDn|The Good, the Bad and the Ugly}} ==
  +
  +
{{VFDt|time=20:28, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=3
 
|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}}
+
#Spotted by an IP who pointed it out on the talk page, and unfortunately now has the idea that it reflects the quality of the entire website. In fact, it does not: it is a long string of explicit gay sex 'jokes', ending in a pointless list full of nonsense numbers. There are no better versions in the history. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141015202852}}
#{{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>
+
#{{Delete}} Indeed there are not; the nonsense list, the dodgy humor, and even the dangling final sentence in the Intro about the theater waist-deep in cum, are from original author {{U|Strook}} in 2009. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:32 15-Oct-14</small>
#{{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)
+
#{{Delete}}. Checked the article's history. The author put this up for Pee Review! What was said there still stands. What a pile of puke!--{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:05, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
#: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}}
+
*IP sez, "Now I hate this website and it's your fault"? Not a consideration. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:34 15-Oct-14</small>
*:Concur {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:12 22-Feb-13</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|UnBooks:So Your Parents Hate You: A Guide}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:12, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=2.5
+
{{VFDt|time=21:16, October 18, 2014 (UTC)
|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
 
|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)
+
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete|Pedo Humor.}} UnBook written in the voice of Michael Jackson invites prospects to come to Neverland. Written to be creepy, not funny. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>21:16 18-Oct-14</small>
  +
|keepnumber=2
  +
|keep=#{{keep|Set up alarms in the middle of the night to keep throwing your tantrum.}} I got a few laughs out of it--the concept is that reasonable things parents do are the ultimate signs of evil, and that's funny. <s>I see nothing about paedophilia or Michael Jackson; if they're there anywhere, it's too subtle for me to pick up.</s> {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018212820}}
  +
#:Correction: I see that 'I' links to [[Michael Jackson]] in one or two places. Even so, however, I don't see the pedo stuff. Michael Jackson could easily be removed, leaving what appears to be an innocent article. I'll fix the grammar and punctuation. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018213602}}
  +
#::I've cleaned it up and given it a different ending. I encourage Spike to reconsider. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018220603}}
  +
#:::Further correction: After doing some research, it turns out that Michael Jackson did apparently molest children, so you're not entirely off-base. In any case, that stuff is gone, so yeah. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141018235545}}
  +
#::::Impressive copy-editing, but then you tipped the Tipp-Ex onto the page, replacing the ending where creepy author exposes (!) himself as Jackson with an ending where author mumbles and wanders off. I won't reconsider (yet) but will lose the vote fair and square. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>01:27 19-Oct-14</small>
  +
#{{Keep}} The reworked version seems funny enough to me. (But perhaps my brain has melted from reading too many VFD'd articles...) [[User:Snarglefoop|Snarglefoop]] ([[User talk:Snarglefoop|talk]]) 00:28, October 19, 2014 (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>
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Swedish_Chef]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Laptop}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:17, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=2
+
{{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}}- 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}}
+
|comments=
#{{Keep}}. Bork, bork, bork! -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
+
*Detailed editing comments moved to replacement article's talk page. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:04 19-Oct-14</small>
|delnumber=5
 
|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|Igpay Atinlay}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:13, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=3
+
{{VFDt|time=10:38, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=1
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} 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>
  +
|keepnumber=0
 
|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}} 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
 
|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|"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}} Muppet cruft. {{User:PuppyOnTheRadio/sig3|12:34 20 Feb 2013}}
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== {{VFDc|Unquotable:Satan}} ==
+
== {{VFDn|That Guy You Hate}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=15:59, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=4
+
{{VFDt|time=16:51, October 19, 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}} Gay ''humour''. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 16:51, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
|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)
+
#{{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>
----
+
|keepnumber=1
*'''Vote closed.''' No consensus to delete. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:03 26-Feb-13</small>
+
|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)
  +
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== {{VFDc|Making up Oscar Wilde quotes}} ==
+
== {{VFDn|Movie Of Lady Whose Ankle Is Showing}} ==
*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=16:59, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
|keepnumber=3.5
 
|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}}
 
#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)
 
 
|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}} Not that bad, but not good either. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 16:59, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=2
  +
|keep=
  +
#{{Keep}} Not that good, but not bad either. No, seriously, it has a good comedy theme — the very low threshold, a century ago, for the prudish to express horror; and develops it with refinement. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:11 19-Oct-14</small>
  +
#Wait, you mean over in America it is normal for women to show their ankles, and that this is just a pisstake? How modern. Before I go off-subject, {{Keep|keep}} is my vote since this page made me chuckle. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 20:31, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
 
|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>
 
*{{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 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|Short Circuit}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:49, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=00:21, October 20, 2014 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=1
  +
|delete=
  +
{{Delete}} No redeeming qualities. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:21 20-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=
  +
*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>
 
}}
 
}}
 
=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 12:12, October 20, 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: 3
Elapsed Time: 237 hours
Delete (3)
  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)
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 Third World War H D

Score: 4
Elapsed Time: 218 hours
Delete (4)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Nothing much in the article. No humour, no encyclopedic parody. Sir ScottPat (converse) White Ensign Scotland Flag 1 Compassrose VFH UnS NotM WotM WotY 09:47, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Concept is Wacky War plus history-of-the-future. Execution is stuck in lists, including the unfunny list of names of countries. Writing style is gibberish, starting with the first sentence — "...an armed conflict in The Third World, that took place during The Third World..." — not even a conundrum; ending with, "The outcome...is unclear." Spıke ¬ 15:01 11-Oct-14
  3. Symbol delete vote 123,456,789 (which is roughly over 9000). Little more than a few bad puns glued together with randomness and nonsense numbers. Includes a poke at Jews for good measure--of stupidity. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 16:14 11 Oct 2014
  4. Symbol delete vote Delete. Boring. --Pwn head Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 17:16, October 11, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit The Last World War H T D Survivor

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 218 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: 2
Elapsed Time: 202 hours
Delete (2)
  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)
  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
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

edit Good Electricity and Bad Electricity H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 190 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

edit UnNews:NRA celebrates Colorado theatre shootings H D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 183 hours
Delete (2)
  1. First paragraph discloses to us that we are about to be treated to a more or less serious portrayal of the incident. The rest of the article tries and fails to remedy this shortcoming. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 20:14 12 Oct 2014 It seems more like criticism than satire, even though it is over-the-top. I'm waffling though. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 21:43 12 Oct 2014
    Errrmmmm ... Did you per chance read the linked article on Yahoo about the actual incident? More or less serious indeed.... Snarglefoop (talk) 20:56, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
    Original rationale rescinded because it was stupid. Separately, the fact that it was written by Aimsplode is certainly not a factor (though having little souvenirs of him around is not particularly pleasant). -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 21:43 12 Oct 2014
    Indeed. (I moved part of Llwy's post, above, to avoid an empty nomination.) In my opinion, you could vote Symbol delete vote Delete from sheer advocacy or from unfunniness but Snarglefoop should resist the temptation to vote according to whether he agrees with its apparent thesis. Spıke ¬ 22:52 12-Oct-14
    Heaven forbid! Humor sit omne hominis! Snarglefoop (talk) 23:26, October 12, 2014 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. The author is trying to write a satire, but has very little to satirise, and fails miserably. ConCass2 (talk) 20:57, October 18, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • Nomination suggested that the UnNews was a "serious portrayal" of a massacre; it is not. I don't agree with, nor like, its thesis, that gun crimes are evidence that the NRA (also, incidentally, Christians) are laughably wrong. The Source, a Yahoo blog about a gloating tweet "associated" with the NRA, is misleading, as the NRA never endorses crimes using guns; I think the tweet was more likely planted. But I'm not sure that any of this, or the fact that it was written by a permabanned user, justify deleting it. Spıke ¬ 21:28 12-Oct-14
  • Dunno. You have to hate the NRA pretty severely to find this funny, I think, 'cuz it's so totally contrary to reality. To be funny, I think stuff generally has to fall into the "uncanny valley" where it's almost believable, but not quite, and this is totally off the mark. To find it "almost believable" to you'd need to seriously believe the NRA was a bunch of raving lunatics.
    And as to the post reported by Yahoo -- even if it was really from the NRA it was just a case of bad timing (and it was probably either auto-generated after being scheduled days before, or it was sent by someone who hadn't heard the news); it appeared to me to be entirely unrelated to the shooting incident. Snarglefoop (talk) 03:22, October 13, 2014 (UTC)
    Again, less likely to be the NRA celebrating the massacre than anti-NRA forces (I include Yahoo) trying to make hay over it. In any case, though, if the author is not already anti-NRA, he will not be laughing but will be trying to gauge what this article is advocating. Goes against my advice to authors on writing about extremists (not that that means automatic deletion). Spıke ¬ 14:32 13-Oct-14

edit Uterus or GTFO! H T D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 179 hours
Delete (2)
  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
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: 168 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: 166 hours
Delete (3)
  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)
Keep (1)
  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
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: 142 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 HP Costa Rica Today H D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 111 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. 2007 Uncyclopedian Hpsucks believes this offshore affiliate of Hewlett-Packard is gay. Spıke ¬ 20:17 15-Oct-14
  2. Boring. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 20:41 15 Oct 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete.Even the article's title is a turn off. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:02, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Tails the Straight H T D Survivor

Score: 0
Elapsed Time: 111 hours
Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. This isn't horrible, but it's also not funny, IMHO. The humor is too strained. It's a sort of parody of a parody of a minor character in the Sonic the Hedgehog cartoons, and from me, at least, it gets a great big "Eh what??", and the question, "Why does the world need this article?" leaps unbidden to one's mind. Snarglefoop (talk) 20:23, October 15, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. Like last time. Spıke ¬ 20:29 15-Oct-14
Comments

edit The Good, the Bad and the Ugly H T D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 111 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Spotted by an IP who pointed it out on the talk page, and unfortunately now has the idea that it reflects the quality of the entire website. In fact, it does not: it is a long string of explicit gay sex 'jokes', ending in a pointless list full of nonsense numbers. There are no better versions in the history. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 20:28 15 Oct 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Indeed there are not; the nonsense list, the dodgy humor, and even the dangling final sentence in the Intro about the theater waist-deep in cum, are from original author Strook in 2009. Spıke ¬ 20:32 15-Oct-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete.. Checked the article's history. The author put this up for Pee Review! What was said there still stands. What a pile of puke!--LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:05, October 17, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • IP sez, "Now I hate this website and it's your fault"? Not a consideration. Spıke ¬ 20:34 15-Oct-14

edit UnBooks:So Your Parents Hate You: A Guide H T D

Score: -1
Elapsed Time: 38 hours
Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Pedo Humor. UnBook written in the voice of Michael Jackson invites prospects to come to Neverland. Written to be creepy, not funny. Spıke ¬ 21:16 18-Oct-14
Keep (2)
  1. Symbol keep vote Set up alarms in the middle of the night to keep throwing your tantrum. I got a few laughs out of it--the concept is that reasonable things parents do are the ultimate signs of evil, and that's funny. I see nothing about paedophilia or Michael Jackson; if they're there anywhere, it's too subtle for me to pick up. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 21:28 18 Oct 2014
    Correction: I see that 'I' links to Michael Jackson in one or two places. Even so, however, I don't see the pedo stuff. Michael Jackson could easily be removed, leaving what appears to be an innocent article. I'll fix the grammar and punctuation. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 21:36 18 Oct 2014
    I've cleaned it up and given it a different ending. I encourage Spike to reconsider. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 22:06 18 Oct 2014
    Further correction: After doing some research, it turns out that Michael Jackson did apparently molest children, so you're not entirely off-base. In any case, that stuff is gone, so yeah. -– Llwy-ar-lawr talk contribs 23:55 18 Oct 2014
    Impressive copy-editing, but then you tipped the Tipp-Ex onto the page, replacing the ending where creepy author exposes (!) himself as Jackson with an ending where author mumbles and wanders off. I won't reconsider (yet) but will lose the vote fair and square. Spıke ¬ 01:27 19-Oct-14
  2. Symbol keep vote Keep. The reworked version seems funny enough to me. (But perhaps my brain has melted from reading too many VFD'd articles...) Snarglefoop (talk) 00:28, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
Comments

edit Laptop H T D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 29 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

edit Igpay Atinlay H T D

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 25 hours
Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. 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
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit That Guy You Hate H D

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 19 hours
Delete (2)
  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
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)
Comments

edit Movie Of Lady Whose Ankle Is Showing H T D Survivor

Score: -1
Elapsed Time: 19 hours
Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Not that bad, but not good either. Anton (talk) Uncyclopedia United 16:59, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (2)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. Not that good, but not bad either. No, seriously, it has a good comedy theme — the very low threshold, a century ago, for the prudish to express horror; and develops it with refinement. Spıke ¬ 17:11 19-Oct-14
  2. Wait, you mean over in America it is normal for women to show their ankles, and that this is just a pisstake? How modern. Before I go off-subject, Symbol keep vote keep is my vote since this page made me chuckle. ConCass2 (talk) 20:31, October 19, 2014 (UTC)
Comments

edit Short Circuit H D

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 11 hours
Delete (1)

Symbol delete vote Delete. No redeeming qualities. Spıke ¬ 00:21 20-Oct-14

Keep (0)

No keep votes.

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
Personal tools
projects