Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Revert ScottPat--Will explain on your talk page)
({{VFDn|Worst 100 Songs Referencing Paedophilia}})
 
(4,197 intermediate revisions by 67 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|Rasta Jesus}} ==
{{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=00:37, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=~~~~~
+
|delnumber=3
  +
|delete=
  +
#Do we really need an article on this? There seems to be nothing useful here, no concept or anything. We have plenty of Jesii already. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140929003735}}
  +
#{{Delete|"Shit (literal shit)."}} I have no problem with the existence of the article, as it can be found with the Jesii nav-template. But this article starts with a fanboy tone, stops for a moment at the assertion that non-separatism is racist (which now in the US, I find serious and unfunny), and ends in history-of-the-future and lists. Bottom line, after the useful concept of a Rastafarian Christ, authors have nothing they actually want to say about him. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:43 29-Sep-14</small>
  +
#{{Delete}} Precious little to do with anything. Like the pic though. I guess that came from elsewhere? --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:28, September 29, 2014 (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|Mark Rutte}} ==
   
<!--PUT NEW NOMINATIONS RIGHT BELOW THIS LINE, AND DON'T BE TRIPLE-SPACING BETWEEN NOMINATIONS --></div>
+
{{VFDt|time=00:38, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
== [[Hampster]] ==
+
|delnumber=2
{{Votervfd|time=13:05, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delete=
  +
#{{Delete}} Spotted by {{U|Llwy-ar-lawr}}. Imported from the Dutch Uncyclopedia last year as the only contribution of {{U|Burgerhallojan}}, seemingly translated by machine, poorly; minimal attempt to clean up and tons of red-links. Notable enough to have a Wikipedia entry, but the reader will be straining too hard to read the "English" to laugh. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>00:38 29-Sep-14</small>
  +
#Yeah. That. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140929004446}}
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
  +
|comments=*Actually, Spike did see it, and [[User talk:Burgerhallojan|commented to its author]] about it, but, er... this sentence ought to have a sensible ending and I just can't think of one. Maybe this is a pointless comment and I should go back to sleep. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140929004446}}
  +
}}
  +
  +
== {{VFDn|Trailer Park Boys}} ==
  +
  +
{{VFDt|time=20:47, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delnumber=3
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Not funny and very un-encyclopedic. No images just random rant. {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 13:05, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} No redeeming qualities; the subject must have been funnier than this listcrufty report on it. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>20:47 29-Sep-14</small>
#{{Delete}} Created in 2005. In 2009, editor {{U|TPCBD}} arrived, so if you are wondering about the acronym in the second paragraph and at the start of '''Military Ranking''', it is a specific Uncyclopedian quoting himself. This fanboy cheerleading has no purpose except to guide readers to the external website given at the end. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:10,13:12 22-Sep-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} Listing badly but take that away, there would be very little left. --{{User:Romartus/sig2}} 22:24, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
#{{Delete}} No redeeming features and an annoying p in the title. --[[User:Sog1970|Sog1970]] ([[User talk:Sog1970|talk]]) 13:11, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{delete|Being really fucking awesome. Its a serious crime. Dont fuck with them.}} {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140929223441}}
|comments=
 
}}
 
 
== [[Heinrich himmler is GAY]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=12:34, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} Another in-joke that ought be in someone's userspace. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 12:34, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} A stub with a surprisingly long history. Melds the Nazi meme with the GAY meme. Worthless. No comedy payback for the choice to write in the first person. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:37 22-Sep-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} Atrocious. {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 12:41, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Although the picture is quite fetching. --[[User:Sog1970|Sog1970]] ([[User talk:Sog1970|talk]]) 12:52, September 22, 2013 (UTC)
 
#:It is widely used and will not be a casualty if you vote to delete the article. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:07 22-Sep-13</small>
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[19 Kids and Counting]] (redirect at [[The Duggar Family]]) ==
+
== {{VFDn|MediaWiki:Admin names in bold.css‎‎}} ==
{{Votervfd|time22:36, September 16, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=1
+
{{VFDt|time=15:51, September 30, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=3
#{{Keep}} Keepable now. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:58 21-Sep-13</small>
 
|delnumber=1
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Poor article from 2008 that has been bad and offending since then. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 22:36, September 16, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} User-optional code to render the names of Admins in bold in reports and diff pages is tedious to keep current, and there is no evidence that anyone uses it. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>15:51 30-Sep-14</small>
|comments=
+
#Looks like we don't need this. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140930161406}}
*I've renamed this article to align with the actual name of the TV show and its Wikipedia article, and will edit it to make clear that the Duggars are not specific, non-celebrity individuals being cyberbullied (for which I briefly banned Anon). It is a cruft magnet, as the TV show is about a Christian family with a disdain for birth control. Anyone with a beef about breeders, Christians, and toothless hillbillies, will pile on. At the moment, the article has no comedy strategy except ridiculing the Duggar Family, and by extension any family that shares their values, and calling them sluts. This could be remedied. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:58 16-Sep-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} Don't know what this is, but I don't like it. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 19:21, September 30, 2014 (UTC)
*I rewrote the "Before kids" section so that it aligns more closely with the Wikipedia article, and I think it works better. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 01:37, September 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:Yikes! hope that isn't autobiographical! Also, the table of the 19 kids is serving the exact function that listcruft usually does: As an Anon magnet to tell the same joke again. Is there a better approach here? {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:58 21-Sep-13</small>
 
*::No, I never married or had kids, and my conversion experience was much earlier in life (and not at a service), so it's not autobiographical. As to the table, a better approach would be to have a section about each one of the kids, with a corresponding paragraph (similar to the one I deleted about the oldest because it failed hard), but I am not familiar enough with the show or the kids to do so myself. {{User:Simsilikesims/sig}} 15:56, September 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:Me neither, having temporarily concluded (see above) that this was Anon thinking his neighbors the Duggars needed ridiculing on Uncyclopedia. Your suggestion would solve the table's problem, if anyone out there can undertake it. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>17:14 21-Sep-13</small>
 
}}
 
 
== [[ChavScum]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=13:49, September 16, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} This page has been on the site since 2006. It is the essence of chav-cruft and used to contain a section inviting future editors to document individual chavs. Editorializing in the page title and the title's unusual spelling (which no random reader is ever going to type) is because its sole purpose has always been to document, and to guide Uncyclopedia readers to, a specific blog in the <code>.uk</code> domain (references now removed). It is not original comedy writing. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:49 16-Sep-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} Bang and the article is gone! {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 18:31, September 16, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Absolute wank. {{User:Reverend P. Pennyfeather/sig}} 10:00, September 20, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} I don't think this article is funny. Voted. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 02:13, September 21, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
  +
*The main reason for highlighting admins that I know of is to make it easier to flag down active ones--hence the original code that highlighted them only in recent changes, which both sites have now done away with. Highlighting them anywhere else is excessive and obnoxious, IMHO. Since we've taken the approach of making bold admins an optional CSS thing, it seems likely to me that anyone who is experienced enough to know how to use it is also experienced enough to know the active admins' names by heart, or at least where to go to get their attention. That certainly applies to me; I know who has what rights here and I've never had any use for calling them out beyond a desire to make things flashier. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140930161406}}<br>And besides, we already have a link to [[Uncyclopedia:Active Admins]] at the top of recent changes, in that grey box thingy, so even the original purpose of the bold names doesn't hold any water. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20140930163337}}
  +
*:One use for our code is that it highlights edits by Admins in a diff report or a page history, for the benefit of users who are hesitant to override Admins. Separately and again, what any other website does is not a factor here. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>16:43 30-Sep-14</small>
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Fuck Me]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Empire: Total War}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=12:35, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
|keepnumber=1
 
|keep=
 
#Keep. I just voted to save this good article deja vu style. Will take out the one quote too many. [[user:Aleister|ALeIsTeR]] 15-9-'13
 
#:You didn't. I just have (removed Wilde #2 and "Some redneck guy"). It doesn't change a thing. Deleting Section 4 (the listcruft) wouldn't help either. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>23:59 15-Sep-13</small>
 
|delnumber=5
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} Awful. Not funny. {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 12:35, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} The point of this page is the glee of swearing to strangers. When it documents the many uses of the word "fuck," it's informative and not funny. When it dabbles in history, it's babbling and not funny. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>12:48 15-Sep-13</small>
 
#{{Exterminate}} Awful. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 23:54, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} Insert gratuitous link to Tvtropes article on Screw Yourself. --{{user:DungeonSiegeAddict510/sig3}} 17:04, September 16, 2013 (UTC)(Curse you abusefilter17 D:)
 
#{{Delete}} The article is funny from time to time. But you can see how the author struggles with himself in order to write comedy and not a pornographic novel. At some moments, you can actually see a border between the two. P.S. I did not understand why the "the whore I am" picture violated Wikia terms of use. But, anyway, we won't need this image anymore, of the article gets deleted. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 07:38, September 17, 2013 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
   
== [[Rucka Rucka Ali]] ==
+
{{VFDt|time=22:48, September 30, 2014 (UTC)
{{Votervfd|time=19:45, September 14, 2013 (UTC)
+
|delnumber=3
|keepnumber=2
 
|keep=
 
#{{Keep}} A real article, about [[WP:Rucka Rucka Ali|a real "comedian"]], with a real comedy strategy: Misstate the source material. Ali does not seem like a good comedian, mostly specializing in racial stereotypes; and this article isn't the best ever, mostly replacing the truth about Ali with the exact opposite without using the change to make a clever point, but it is trying to do what we try to do. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>11:18 15-Sep-13</small>
 
#Per Spike. [[user:Aleister|Aleister]] 15-9
 
|delnumber=1
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} Bad article, and I don't see any thing that funny in this article. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 19:45, September 14, 2013 (UTC)
+
#{{Delete}} Aside from the overuse of strikethrough and {{C|Censored}}, this article is full of exact dates and links to data on external websites. It was surely written not to amuse but to record the history of this game and certain gamers' gripes against the manufacturers and their difficult implementations. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>22:48 30-Sep-14</small>
|comments=
+
#{{Delete|Yawn!}} Simply a huge collection of fact, rather than humour and, as Spike says, is just a massive rant. [[User:ConCass2|ConCass2]] ([[User talk:ConCass2|talk]]) 06:37, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
}}
+
#So boring I barely read past the intro. I'm just going to assume the whole thing is like that. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141001221249}}
 
== [[Pantera]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=02:48, September 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=4
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} A gamer provides his view of the band. To-wit: "a merry group of fags, who one day decided to record the sound of there own love making." If you jump in despite that Intro, the first section tells a joke with excessive recursion. It is nothing but toilet humor thereafter, and that's after I deleted a listing of band members and the usual Discography. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>02:48 14-Sep-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} Awful. {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 06:25, September 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Easy Button}} Terrible article first made in 2005, during the very early days of Uncyclopedia. It had improved some more, then someone added pictures and more other stuff. Then, someone decided to blank part of it, and it still remained a very poor and unfunny article for years. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 13:13, September 14, 2013 (UTC)
 
#:If you have found a version in the page history that you think is better, you are welcome to substitute it (and reattach {{Tl|VFD}}) and we'll vote on that. In fact, the nominator is supposed to do that. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>13:18 14-Sep-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 09:16, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
}}
   
== [[Perrin Aybara]] ==
+
== {{VFDn|Worst 100 Songs Referencing Paedophilia}} ==
{{Votervfd|time=21:23, September 5, 2013 (UTC)
+
|keepnumber=1
+
{{VFDt|time=18:07, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
|keep=
+
|delnumber=2
#Someone put in a large amount of time over several days, and then came back to edit it quite awhile later, and likely learned a lot here during this process. But I'm voting to keep the page since I don't think it's enough to huff. Maybe the author just needs a note on his talk page to go back and polish it and/or ask for assistance. [[user:Aleister|Aleister]] 19:00 in these parts
 
|delnumber=5
 
 
|delete=
 
|delete=
#{{Delete}} I am not convinced that Anon today at [[Talk:Perrin Aybara]] ("This is the best thing to ever hit internet!") is not just a random spambot, but he has found a cache of babble, Randumbo, and listcruft. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>21:23 5-Sep-13</small>
+
#{{Delete}} A catalog rather than humor. Includes songs obviously about pedophilia, songs that are not but could be construed so, songs about sex under the age of majority but above the age of consent, songs about puppy-love, and songs with none of the above. Some items are accompanied by a quip or wisecrack, some are not, none have well-developed original humor. The page is about the joy of lechery (and "paedophilia" as meme) rather than the joy of writing comedy. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>18:07 1-Oct-14</small>
#{{Delete}} God, this is awful. {{User:Reverend P. Pennyfeather/sig}} 18:55, September 9, 2013 (UTC)
+
#Seems to mainly be written in order to make a point. The point falls flat anyhow. {{User:Llwy-ar-lawr/sig|20141001221346}}
#{{Delete}} The quotes are bad and once they are removed it leaves nothing. {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 16:46, September 12, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} It is very old and I don't think the author will ever want to come back. But we can still notify him. {{User:Anton199/sig}} 09:18, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Easy Button}} Not funny. It is somewhat possible that someone can salvage this. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 20:30, September 15, 2013 (UTC)
 
|comments=
 
}}
 
 
== [[Hot dog]] ==
 
{{Votervfd|time=14:56, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keepnumber=0
 
|keep=
 
|keep=
|delnumber=3
 
|delete=
 
#{{Delete}} This listy little article has only one joke: that a frankfurter is essentially a [[penis]], something it was delightful for the young author to type but won't take the reader anywhere he has not already gone in his mind. Redirecting this to [[Dogshit sandwich]] would kill two birds with one stone. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:56 2-Sep-13</small>
 
#{{Delete}} Agreed. {{User:ScottPat/sig2}} 16:38, September 2, 2013 (UTC)
 
#{{Delete}} {{User:Anton199/sig}} 08:32, September 3, 2013 (UTC)
 
 
|comments=
 
|comments=
*{{Comment}} I am planning to make an improvement to this article in my userspace and removing the lower organ jokes and other stupid stuff. And this would probably be the case. {{User:Newman66/sig}} 20:55, September 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
*:Your "plan" seems to have halted voting on this page. Please take a copy of it now (or ask me for a copy after it gets deleted). Deletion will not bar you or anyone from writing a replacement page. {{User:SPIKE/signature}}<small>14:15 14-Sep-13</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 22:13, October 1, 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 Rasta Jesus H D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 70 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Do we really need an article on this? There seems to be nothing useful here, no concept or anything. We have plenty of Jesii already. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 00:37 29 Sep 2014
  2. Symbol delete vote "Shit (literal shit)." I have no problem with the existence of the article, as it can be found with the Jesii nav-template. But this article starts with a fanboy tone, stops for a moment at the assertion that non-separatism is racist (which now in the US, I find serious and unfunny), and ends in history-of-the-future and lists. Bottom line, after the useful concept of a Rastafarian Christ, authors have nothing they actually want to say about him. Spıke ¬ 00:43 29-Sep-14
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Precious little to do with anything. Like the pic though. I guess that came from elsewhere? --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:28, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Mark Rutte H T D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 70 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Spotted by Llwy-ar-lawr. Imported from the Dutch Uncyclopedia last year as the only contribution of Burgerhallojan, seemingly translated by machine, poorly; minimal attempt to clean up and tons of red-links. Notable enough to have a Wikipedia entry, but the reader will be straining too hard to read the "English" to laugh. Spıke ¬ 00:38 29-Sep-14
  2. Yeah. That. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 00:44 29 Sep 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • Actually, Spike did see it, and commented to its author about it, but, er... this sentence ought to have a sensible ending and I just can't think of one. Maybe this is a pointless comment and I should go back to sleep. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 00:44 29 Sep 2014

edit Trailer Park Boys H T D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 50 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. No redeeming qualities; the subject must have been funnier than this listcrufty report on it. Spıke ¬ 20:47 29-Sep-14
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Listing badly but take that away, there would be very little left. --LaurelsRomArtus*Imperator ITRA (Orate) ® 22:24, September 29, 2014 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Being really fucking awesome. Its a serious crime. Dont fuck with them. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 22:34 29 Sep 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit MediaWiki:Admin names in bold.css‎‎ H T D Tag article

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 31 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. User-optional code to render the names of Admins in bold in reports and diff pages is tedious to keep current, and there is no evidence that anyone uses it. Spıke ¬ 15:51 30-Sep-14
  2. Looks like we don't need this. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 16:14 30 Sep 2014
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Don't know what this is, but I don't like it. ConCass2 (talk) 19:21, September 30, 2014 (UTC)
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
  • The main reason for highlighting admins that I know of is to make it easier to flag down active ones--hence the original code that highlighted them only in recent changes, which both sites have now done away with. Highlighting them anywhere else is excessive and obnoxious, IMHO. Since we've taken the approach of making bold admins an optional CSS thing, it seems likely to me that anyone who is experienced enough to know how to use it is also experienced enough to know the active admins' names by heart, or at least where to go to get their attention. That certainly applies to me; I know who has what rights here and I've never had any use for calling them out beyond a desire to make things flashier. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 16:14 30 Sep 2014
    And besides, we already have a link to Uncyclopedia:Active Admins at the top of recent changes, in that grey box thingy, so even the original purpose of the bold names doesn't hold any water. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 16:33 30 Sep 2014
    One use for our code is that it highlights edits by Admins in a diff report or a page history, for the benefit of users who are hesitant to override Admins. Separately and again, what any other website does is not a factor here. Spıke ¬ 16:43 30-Sep-14

edit Empire: Total War H T D

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 24 hours
Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Aside from the overuse of strikethrough and Censored, this article is full of exact dates and links to data on external websites. It was surely written not to amuse but to record the history of this game and certain gamers' gripes against the manufacturers and their difficult implementations. Spıke ¬ 22:48 30-Sep-14
  2. Symbol delete vote Yawn! Simply a huge collection of fact, rather than humour and, as Spike says, is just a massive rant. ConCass2 (talk) 06:37, October 1, 2014 (UTC)
  3. So boring I barely read past the intro. I'm just going to assume the whole thing is like that. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 22:12 1 Oct 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments

edit Worst 100 Songs Referencing Paedophilia H T D

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 5 hours
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. A catalog rather than humor. Includes songs obviously about pedophilia, songs that are not but could be construed so, songs about sex under the age of majority but above the age of consent, songs about puppy-love, and songs with none of the above. Some items are accompanied by a quip or wisecrack, some are not, none have well-developed original humor. The page is about the joy of lechery (and "paedophilia" as meme) rather than the joy of writing comedy. Spıke ¬ 18:07 1-Oct-14
  2. Seems to mainly be written in order to make a point. The point falls flat anyhow. -– Llwy-ar-lawr (talkcontribs) 22:13 1 Oct 2014
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Comments
Personal tools
projects