Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 14:49, April 27, 2013 by Aleister in Chains (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.

Template:Philosophical Badasses

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 26434 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. Totally overtaken by Template:Philosophy. How does an article like Plato acquire three overlapping nav-templates? Spıke Ѧ 11:21 27-Apr-13
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. Agreed. I prefer Template:Philosophy to this. Sir ScottPat Icons-flag-gb Scotland Flag 1 UnS CUN VFH (talk) 11:32, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
  3. Dis template, she in trouble. Aleister 14:48 27-4-'13

Moomin Church of His Spaghettiness

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 26469 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (2)
  1. This article has existed since 2005 but has only been added to by Anons and by one user without a talk page. Everything it has approaching humor is a coded reference to a named person who is not famous. Spıke Ѧ 00:38 26-Apr-13
  2. Too much emphasis on a non-notable person, supposedly the leader of said "religion". The idea of a splinter-break off group from Pastafarianism is good, but the execution leaves much to be desired. -- Simsilikesims(♀GUN) Talk here. 00:49, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

George Dubya Bush

Score: 3
Elapsed Time: 26905 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (3)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. This article is mixture of advocacy and randumbo. The article references an in-universe that only exists in the writer's mind, and throws random insults at George W. Bush. You can't make fun of Bush Jr. for being a gay Eskimo, but this article tries. If we need an attack article against George W. Bush, this isn't it. --Mn-z 19:45, April 7, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete.There is no such negative here as "advocacy". Randumbo, yes, there you've got this page by its tail. About a hateful man, and I didn't need to look at it much to vote to sink that ship. Aleister 22:06 7-4-'13
  3. Symbol delete vote Delete.There is already a page on Bush that depicts him (satirically) as a great President so delete this one as it is over the top fantasy and not encyclopedic. Sir ScottPat Icons-flag-gb Scotland Flag 1 UnS CUN VFH (talk) 11:45, April 11, 2013 (UTC)
  • Aleister defends "advocacy" against it being grounds for deletion, because advocacy is his business, from his hatchet-job on Ann Coulter (She is so hideous that anything said about her is funny?) to his recent photo collage to show that the US Air Force is engaged in murder. In fact, an article written to convince rather than amuse should be written somewhere else (as Aleister does anyway). I tirelessly argue against the Omnipotent State--but not here. My problem with this nomination is that, for both Bush and Obama, we have tolerated multiple articles with multiple, incompatible approaches. The Dubya article is definitely more churlish than Bush's "official" page here, but we have tolerated that for the simple reason that it keeps the churls away from the real one. Spıke Ѧ 14:33 9-Apr-13
    Sticks and stones may break my bones (depending on the size, velocity, and fragility of the sticks, and the size and velocity of the stones in connection to where they hit me on the body - some bones are bigger than others and less likely to break from casual contact with sticks and stones.) but words will never hurt me (unless that one time in band camp where I was dressed down for wearing my marcher's hat backwards). Aleister 12:17 First day of The Masters '13
    p.s. Upon rereading the David Coulter article, it's not a hatchet job as much as an honoring of a great comedian and character actor. "Ann" (David's character) has a habit of writing hatchet jobs on what she terms "liberals" or "progressives" with book titles such as Demons, Baby Killers, Walking Cow Dung, and Havoc, Haters, and Satanic Holidays. He is very funny.
  • Well, the page is linked to extensively by other pages, and some articles just stagnate. --The Infinite Otaku Emperor 02:41, April 12, 2013 (UTC) (I can't figure out how to link my sig to my crappy page!)

Great Time Travel War of 1871

Score: 2
Elapsed Time: 26957 hours
Keep (0)

No keep votes.

Delete (2)
  1. Symbol delete vote Delete. This is a wacky-war about nothing and everything if I ever saw one. --Mn-z 15:59, April 5, 2013 (UTC)
  2. Symbol delete vote Delete. In the boldface-heavy Intro, author reserves the right to write about everything that "was ever or ever shall be"--and ensures that virtually all readers click to somewhere else. (By the way, Oh, What a Lovely War was a provocative anti-war movie; but, after using it in a Wildeism, author drops it in favor of no theme at all.) Spıke Ѧ 16:36 5-Apr-13
  • I haven't read much of it but it seems to be a satirical take on a Sci-Fi movie type war blown out of potential. I can see that the author has chosen Nazis in his subject (as always) however I think with some changes it could be improved. Sir ScottPat Icons-flag-gb Scotland Flag 1 UnS CUN VFH (talk) 11:58, April 11, 2013 (UTC)

Archived VFD Discussions


Personal tools