Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 17:05, March 4, 2013 by Spike (talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Deletion Policy
Votes for deletion

Intensive Care Unit

del log

Rules and procedures:

  1. If you're too lazy to read the deletion policy, please, at least, carefully read this list of rules.
    1. But seriously, read the deletion policy.
    2. Do not put anything up for VFD that is not appropriate for VFD.
    3. Abusers of the policy will be abused by the claw end of a hammer. You have been warned.
  2. If you have an article that meets the criteria for VFD:
    1. Check the revision history of the page. It may have been vandalised, or just badly edited over a long period of time. If so, find a better version and revert the article. It may not be suitable for deletion.
    2. Add {{vfd}} to the article in question. Failure to do so will invalidate the vote.
    3. Provide an initial vote (see below) and include a comment as to why you have placed the article on VFD.
  3. If you are here to vote on the deletion/salvation of articles:
    1. Thank you.
    2. No really, thank you.
    3. Edit the section for the article you are addressing.
    4. Pick a space under the appropriate heading (Keep, Delete, Comment), add your sig/comment preceded with a #
      1. # - Creates a numbered bullet for your entry and makes sure that things are formatted correctly (do not put a space before the #).
      2. Comment - If you care to, leave a comment, even if it is as short as "The article is not at all funny". Votes without comments are less useful in analyzing the quality of an article.
      3. --~~~~ - Sign and timestamp your vote. Unsigned votes will be removed without prejudice.
  4. Do not revert edits of the administrators.
  5. If an article survives VFD, do not resubmit it for at least 1 month or you will get a bollocking.
  6. If you are neither an Administrator nor a designated Poopsmith, do not remove anything from VFD; doing so will get you banned for a very long time.

Pages for Deletion


Make sure that you have read the rules (above) and the deletion policy. Please don't nominate Main Page or Votes for Deletion; that joke has been done so many times we might just beat you with a nail bat before we tear our hair out in frustration. This also applies to Featured Articles and Uncyclopedia In-Jokes.

How to quickly find VFDable articles (using special pages):

Notes for Administrators:

  • Allow at least 24 hours before closing a nomination or deleting an article.
  • Remember to delete any unused images from deleted articles and, if necessary, check what links to the article and remove any backlinks. Make sure to delete any broken redirects created as well.
  • To avoid confusion, try to remove closed nominations which cause the page to exceed to 20 articles.
  • If a nomination is kept, please add {{Oldvfd}} to the article's talk page.

To add an article, edit this section, and follow the directions in the comments.

Don't flood VFD full of articles, or at least leave a space between your nominations.

If you increase the number of articles on VFD to over 20, you will be blocked for 1 day, no exceptions. This means do not increase the number of active votes on VFD to over twenty. Inactive votes are shown with either a red link (where they have been deleted), or with the 🔒 Closed nomination H T D Oldvfd Archive tag to indicate that the article has been kept. You have been warned.

Please remember to check an article's history, in case of recent or long term vandalism, before nominating an article. Also, check the article's talk page and 'What links here' for prior nominations. If the article has been nominated before there will be a link from a VFD archive page.

AAAAAAAAA! (language)

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 27733 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (1)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. There is a bit of humor here--the absurdity of "encrypting" a message by squeezing out all the information--but the great majority of this article is imitative of our feature AAAAAAAA!. Spıke Ѧ 14:04 4-Mar-13

Uncyclopedia vs Powershot, Flamewar of the Ages/Forum:LET US DECLARE JIHAD AGAINST THE BENSON-HATING INFIDELS and Uncyclopedia vs Powershot, Flamewar of the Ages/Forum:THE AGE OF BENSON IS OVER. POWESHOT WILL SUCCEED WHERE HE HAS FAILED.

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 27756 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. As below. Spıke Ѧ 14:51 3-Mar-13
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. per above. --Mn-z 19:26, March 3, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Somewhere between the two.                               Puppy's talk page10:42 03 Mar 2013

Uncyclopedia vs Powershot, Flamewar of the Ages/Forum:BENSONSHOT IS BETTER THAN POWERSHOT

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 27758 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. pointless banter forum from 2006 that was deleted, recreated in 2007, and moved to mainspace as archive to support an inside joke about point forum bantering from 2006. --Mn-z 12:31, March 3, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Per above. Worth deleting whether or not the main article stays. Spıke Ѧ 12:38 3-Mar-13
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. Doesn't belong in main space.                               Puppy's talk page01:52 03 Mar 2013

Unquotable:William Shatner

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 27786 hours
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep. Since we're not purging this category, thank goddess, William Shatner's page is essential to it just because...William Shatner. And please don't guy these articles, which is just as bad as deleting them. And does everyone know our main page is broken? Aleister 12:10 2-3-'13
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. This article is not really about anything. There isn't anything that stands out as awful, but there isn't much humor or potential here. --Mn-z 09:20, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Yes, there is. Section 1.3 notes that Shatner sounds like a certain station-master on the line toward Nuneaton, as astonishing as that seems. Making sport of his halting delivery and bad acting is legitimate (Shatner's mainspace article is gone and it now redirects to an article where this is the only joke, illustrated by following every word with a comma) but most of the rest of the article is not original comedy but an effort to ridicule Shatner using his own words. Spıke Ѧ 13:29 2-Mar-13

Unquotable:Glenn Beck

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 27787 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. The author seems to confuse advocacy with humor. --Mn-z 07:44, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. It does not confuse advocacy with humor at all: It takes the side of advocacy. Its existence in the Unquotable space is a green light to advocate by repeating actual Beck quotes by which Beck makes you laugh at him (but primarily if you disagree with him), but some of the quotes are extrapolation for the sake of caricature, for the sake of advocacy. Spıke Ѧ 13:23 2-Mar-13
  • I have no objection with using humour as a conduit for advocacy, but this article does nothing for me on the humour front. The only thing stopping me from voting to delete is my lack of familiarity with Glenn Beck. As he is commonly known in the US, and some of this article may rely on reader's foreknowledge - which I lack - I'm not really in the best place to make a judgement. But from my perspective, this is an unfunny article that relies upon foreknowledge that is somewhat parochial. I see it in a similar light to Zoe Tay below, except that he is well known in the anglosphere.                               Puppy's talk page08:08 02 Mar 2013

Unquotable:George W. Bush

Score: 0
Elapsed Time: 27787 hours
Keep (2)
  1. I like this. George W's clangers are many and varied. While we are by far not unique in having a collection of them, it doesn't reduce the humour value of having a page of them. The random element allows the page to be kept at a reasonable size. It's very dated, but has merit.                               Puppy's talk page07:54 02 Mar 2013
  2. OK, I'll hold my nose and vote to keep it. If it makes the idiot look like more of an idiot, all power to us idiots for keeping it. Aleister 13:39 2-3-'13
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. This seems to be nothing more than a list of randomly generated real George W. Bush quotes. While I've seen worse examples of this, it would fall under the category of "borrowed humor." --Mn-z 07:33, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
    This page should be kept, and I urge keep votes, but I have a personal duty to vote to delete anything to do with this guy (EDIT:I guess except things that make him look bad, which doesn't take much). Why he is not in prison is one of the mysteries of modern life. Aleister 12:06 2-3-'13
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. "Uncyclopedia is a place for original comedy writing." All the comedy on this page was (inadvertently) supplied by Bush and is not original. This page adds nothing, only yet another place on the Web where Bush opponents can read quotes with which they are already familiar where Bush makes a fool of himself. Spıke Ѧ 13:16 2-Mar-13
  • Symbol comment vote Comment. this article is somewhat funny. My reason for deletion has more to do with lack of originality. --Mn-z 08:01, March 2, 2013 (UTC)

Unquotable:Deep Thoughts

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 27787 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. this article attempts to parody a Saturday Night Live sketch. However, it seems closer to "borrowed humor" and scattershot than parody, and I don't think there is anything savable in the article. --Mn-z 07:27, March 2, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Agree.                               Puppy's talk page07:46 02 Mar 2013
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete. The meandering introduction is as close as we get to an explanation of where author stole some of the assembled pieces of stand-up comedy. Uncyclopedia is a place for original comedy writing, not a collection of funny stuff done elsewhere or available elsewhere. Checking the history since Some user's last edit, this page has the problem for which we struggle against listcruft: It attracts more of the same, in this case from Anons who have heard good stand-up and could not make a contribution align with the theme of an article, if this article had one. Spıke Ѧ 13:13 2-Mar-13

Inland Northwest

Score: 1
Elapsed Time: 27855 hours
Keep (1)
  1. Symbol keep vote Keep (formerly nominator). Anon restored his best version and I tried to add the "other 20%" necessary to tip off the reader that this is a send-up of a Boise booster, not the earnest work of one. Spıke Ѧ 22:30 3-Mar-13
Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote 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. --Mn-z 13:41, February 28, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. I can't see funny, or potential.                               Puppy's talk page10:33 28 Feb 2013
  • Symbol delete vote 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. Spıke Ѧ 12:03 27-Feb-13
  • 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?                               Puppy's talk page01:58 28 Feb 2013
    I did exactly that yesterday, and concluded exactly that. Saw in the history that 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. 14:14 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? Spıke Ѧ 15:45 28-Feb-13

  • Note please: Anon is in this morning at Talk:Inland Northwest, insisting that the Boise boosterism is a put-on and that, with just "another 20%," the reader would have enjoyed the article: For instance, the guy-wired mast that the booster touts is hundreds of miles from Boise. I laid it on him to fix up the article and supply the needed 20% himself. Spıke Ѧ 12:41 3-Mar-13

101 Things You Should Not Do

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 27897 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. List                               Puppy's talk page05:57 25 Feb 2013
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Seemed funny at first, but i noticed the overly amount of immature humor.. i thought it would be fine apart from that everything was put in bold for no reason, but the text wall and the chuck norris joke at the end ruined it for me. HTBFANJS clearly states Chuck Norris jokes and 'facts' are unfunny 99,5% of the time. --RockoRocks (talk) 22:02, March 1, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete (formerly Abstain). Every attempt at humor on this page, from the one-liner "Things" to the quotations, has as its strategy either meme-cruft, imitation, or repeating something ad nauseam. My original reasoning, below, that it stands on its own does not mean it cannot be felled, and my advice on its talk page does not mean that any of the writers will ever take it, and I think they won't. Spıke Ѧ 00:16 4-Mar-13
  • Symbol comment vote 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. Spıke Ѧ 18:11 25-Feb-13

For ongoing discussion of global issues

This header does not count toward the limit on nominations.

Archived VFD Discussions


Personal tools