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|Dissociative Identity Disorder}}: VFD)
 
(7,269 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{deletiondebates|[[UN:VFD]]}}{{VFDRules}}
+
{{VFDr}}
  +
[[Category:Uncyclopedia deletion]]
  +
[[Category:Pages repeatedly nominated on VFD]]
  +
[[es:Inciclopedia:VPB]]
  +
[[id:Tolololpedia:PUP]]
  +
[[ko:포럼:세탁소]]
  +
[[pt:Desciclopédia:Eliminação de páginas]]
  +
[[de:Uncyclopedia:Löschen]]
  +
<!-- Do not edit above this line -->
   
=Pages for Deletion=
+
== {{VFDn|Never-Ending Story}} ==
{{VFDRules2}}
 
<div style="display: none;">
 
<!-- COPY, do not CUT, the below template, and place it at the TOP of the page, replace "ARTICLE NAME HERE" as appropriate and please remove the arrows and stuff. It's unnecessary to keep that stuff.
 
   
== [[ARTICLE NAME HERE]] ==
+
{{VFDg|time=08:19, June 10, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=~~~~~
+
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Image-free randumbo. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 08:20, June 10, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Never compose while on drugs. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:42 10-Jun-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Maybe it's only because I've actually never read the book or seen the movie, but I just don't get any of it. Except maybe the "Excerpt" section, but even that's not very funny, and certainly won't make any sense to anyone without exposure to programming. {{User:Chunkles/sig}} 19:25, June 11, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Felt like it would never end. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 08:22, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=1
 
|delete=
 
 
|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|Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch}} ==
   
New nominations at the top of the page below this line; --></div>
+
{{VFDt|time=20:55, June 21, 2015 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=4
== [[Inland Northwest]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=12:03, February 27, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|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}} Anon asserts on the talk page that the material is largely plagiarized from Monty Python. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>20:55 21-Jun-15</small>
#{{delete}} 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)
+
#{{Delete}} A somewhat pointless re-telling of someone else's joke without making it interesting enough to save. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 13:12, June 22, 2015 (UTC)
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 08:24, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
* 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}}
+
#{{Delete}} The only salvageable parts were the intro and what it is made of, but that's not enough to justify keeping the whole thing. {{User:Chunkles/sig}} 22:20, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
*: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]]==
 
{{Votervfd|time=17:57, February 25, 2013 (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>
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Arthur C. Clarke]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Marx Shrugged}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:30, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
#{{Keep}} Good enough now. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:21 24-Feb-13</small>
 
|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]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=22:08, June 21, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=12:12, February 24, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|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>
+
#{{Delete}} 2010 author {{U|Weri long wang}} writes the opposite of the plot of ''Atlas Shrugged,'' then reverses the title too, just to make sure no one can find it. There is no other humor than to invent an acronym of C.U.N.T. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>22:08 21-Jun-15</small>
#{{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}} Not funny. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 08:27, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
|comments=
+
#{{Delete}} Title good but following article crap. I will take a bold punt and suggest the writer has never read any Marx. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:38, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
*[[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
}}
 
 
== [[Unquotable:About]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=08:55, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
|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>
 
|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|Who Do You Think}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:05, February 23, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=3
 
|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}} 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]]==
+
{{VFDt|time=14:08, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=22:20, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=4
|keepnumber=3
 
|keep=
 
#{{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}}
+
#No redeeming value as far as I can tell {{User:Reverend P. Pennyfeather/sig}} 14:08, June 28, 2015 (UTC)
#{{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}} Not even ramble, but babble, and about a nonexistent character. No comedy strategy other than rant-at-the-reader. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>14:20 28-Jun-15</small>
#{{delete}} 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}} Baffling gibberish. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 14:39, June 28, 2015 (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
+
#{{Delete}} Only after reading the talk page, did I kind of get the author's concept. The reader should not have to do that, especially if the piece is still no more amusing or comprehensible. Obscure nonsense. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:19, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
|comments=
+
|keepnumber=0
*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}}
 
*: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]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=17:12, February 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=2.5
 
 
|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>
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Unquotable:Swedish_Chef]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|HowTo:Trick Women in 3 Easy Steps}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=17:17, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=2
 
|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}}. Bork, bork, bork! -- {{User:Imrealized/sig}} 20:05, February 25, 2013 (UTC)
 
|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]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=03:35, June 30, 2015 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=17:13, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=4
|keepnumber=3
+
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Smug article from someone who has tricked a woman. A waste of the reader's time. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>03:35 30-Jun-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Sexist and unfunny. Finishes off with a crappy list. No redeeming qualities. {{User:Chunkles/sig}} 22:24, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Never funny in a million years. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:31, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} Awful. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:23, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
  +
|keepnumber=0
 
|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|HowTo:Get a boner}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=15:59, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=4
 
|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
 
|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}} 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>
 
|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)
 
----
 
*'''Vote closed.''' No consensus to delete. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:03 26-Feb-13</small>
 
}}
 
   
== {{VFDc|Making up Oscar Wilde quotes}} ==
+
{{VFDt|time=02:56, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
*Voters, see also [[Forum:Trimming back the Wilde Quotes‎‎]]. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:22 19-Feb-13</small>
+
|delnumber=2
{{Votervfd|time=15:47, February 19, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delete=
|keepnumber=3.5
+
#{{Delete}} No humor except the glee of writing to strangers about sex. It is a chore maintaining the 2012 page of {{U|SecondChanceForMe}} against continual vandalism. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>02:56 5-Jul-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} I'm sure there is a funny and clever article that could written with this subject header, but this isn't it.--[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:31, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
  +
|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}}
 
#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
 
|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)
 
 
|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|Dissociative Identity Disorder}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=08:49, February 17, 2013 (UTC)
+
  +
{{VFDt|time=18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
|delnumber=4
  +
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} (Dissociative Identity Disorder was previously known as Multiple Personality Disorder, just so you all know.) To get the joke you have to visit the revision history, to see that the article was written largely by a single user who with every revision wrote about a different thing with a different style, sometimes reverting himself (and calling his own contributions vandalism). The idea wouldn't be bad, except for the fact that the reader has no clue what this is about, unless he randomly checks the page's history or talkpage. Also, none of the revisions are very well written, I find. Finally, (albeit it's of a minor concern compared to the rest), the disorder isn't portrayed particularly well. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} WTF? --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:33, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
  +
#{{Delete}} I don't even see the invisible hand that Nominator does, but that author {{U|So So}} used this as a sandbox. His various projects and a few of Anon's could be thought of as a collective Dissociative Identity, but I agree that this isn't obvious to most readers. {{User:Spike/signature}}<small>02:45 6-Jul-15</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Another nonsense article (that is not even an article), that nobody will bother trying to figure out. It would have at least made more sense if each personality change was on one page, so the reader can see the dysfunction. The various personalities are barely described either, just cheesy lines left for the reader to try to figure out. --[[User:EStop|EStop]] ([[User talk:EStop|talk]]) 09:46, July 6, 2015 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=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=
  +
*The page is protected, so I couldn't add {VFD}. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 18:40, July 5, 2015 (UTC)
 
}}
 
}}
 
=Archived VFD Discussions=
 
{{VFDarchive}}
 
 
[[Category:Articles deleted by Lyrithya at some point]]
 
[[Category:Uncyclopedia deletion]]
 
[[Category:Pages repeatedly nominated on VFD]]
 
 
[[es:Inciclopedia:VPB]]
 
[[id:Tolololpedia:PUP]]
 
[[ko:포럼:세탁소]]
 
[[pt:Desciclopédia:Eliminação de páginas]]
 

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

Shortcut:
UN:VFD
Deletion Policy
QuickVFD
Votes for deletion

Intensive Care Unit

del log

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

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

Add a new article here


How to quickly find VFDable articles (using special pages)

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

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

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

edit Never-Ending Story H Archive

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

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch H T D

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

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Marx Shrugged H D

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

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Who Do You Think H T D

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

No keep votes.

Comments

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

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

No keep votes.

Comments

edit HowTo:Get a boner H D

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

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Dissociative Identity Disorder H T D Survivor

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

No keep votes.

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