Uncyclopedia talk:QuickVFD

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the QuickVFD page.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Uncyclopedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be Civil Assume Bad Faith Don't Be A Dick No Cyberbullying

		This article was nominated for deletion on July 10, 2008. The result of the discussion was Keep.

Damn fine idea. --Uvula Donor 14:18, 28 Mar 2005 (EST)

where?

where do i post the articles that need to be deleted?

---

Magic man 14:56, July 7, 2010 (UTC)

Seems to be slowing down

Whats happened:

1. More Admins, less need to go through VFD?
2. Less crud?
3. Less Scrutiny?

--Elvis 14:06, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I occasionally have this compulsive need to correct someone's grammer. It's annoying, I know, but it doesn't happen often, so don't worry.Two-oh-six-point-two-five-three-point-nine-five-point-five 22:04, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I occasionally have this compulsive need to prevent people editing the comments of others. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Ferard

I'm sad you deleted the Ferard page. Yes it was short but it could have been expanded on things to do. I thought it was funny. :(

Fun things to do with your pets

Is there a log? Why was List of fun things you can do with your pets deleted? Not funny or offensive?Just want to know.Thanks--Jondel 01:57, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I don't see that the page ever existed. Are you sure that's the title? --Rcmurphy 02:33, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Never mind, I see from your user page that it's List of fun things to do with your pet. Short pages like that aren't usually encouraged. If you'd like to recreate it as a longer article, or change the page to Undictionary:Pet or something like that (Undictionary pages are typically stubby), feel free to do so. --Rcmurphy 02:39, 6 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks .I'll create a scrapbook version then publish when it is long enough. --Jondel 03:57, 7 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I uploaded it . Hope it grows.Pls see List of fun things to do with your pet.--Jondel 03:30, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Etiquette of the QVFD

I'm assuming it's bad form for an Admin to add something to QVFD and then nuke it themselves? I've been following that policy, so as to allow another Admin a poke at the turds I find. --IMBJR 11:49, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

The point of quickvfd (originally) was for non-sysops to point out pages that are short and should be deleted for obvious reasons. As a personal rule-of-thumb, I usually move pages with more than two paragraphs, or pages with an edit history from more than two people. If I come across a page so blatantly crappy myself, I just delete it. Be linent though, if you are unsure you could always use normal VFD. --Paulgb Talk 13:54, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Basically what Paulgb said I use it as a half way house between immediate deletion and VFD --Sir Elvis KUN | Petition 15:39, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

And I don't think I've ever added something to QVFD. I have whacked a lot of stuff listed here tho. I guess I just make the judgement call myself. If it's short (two paragraphs or so) and it sucks, I whack it without question if one of the following applies:

1 logged in user edited it, and not much links there.
or
1-3 anon users have edited it, and not much links there.

If neither of those two situations apply, and it sucks, I generally VFD it. --Famine 19:51, 4 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Tag for QVFD on page, but no entry

If someone has put a VFD tag on a page, but there is no entry in VFD or QVFD for discussion/voting, can I remove the tag? The article in question is Ralph Nader, which I do not think is a bad article. -- Rei 01:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

If it is an anonymous user or a semi-new registered user, then yes, you can remove the VFD tag (say, after an hour), with such a summary as "VFD tag added with no entry on the VFD". NRV tags may be removed if they were added improperly (without timestamp, or with sig, or by anonymous users who obviously are doing it just to be annoying). There should be no QVFD tag though. --Splaka 05:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The specific tag (I just went and checked) was NRV. The user who added it has only been around since Feb. 23rd. I removed the tag, with a note for them to re-add it and add a voting entry if they felt it was removed in error, as well as to discuss the issue. I hope that I've dealt with this properly. -- Rei 17:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

NRV tags do not have voting pages associated with them and are not supposed to be removed from pages except for in the ways described on VFD. NRV is meant to be a free-standing method of marking a page for possible deletion. In the future if you come across a page that's NRV tagged, leave it along unless you feel the article needs saving, in which case, see VFD for what to do. If you ever come across a VFD tagged page that's not on VFD, post it on VFD with a vote or a note that you're just posting a previously tagged page; if it shouldn't be tagged, it will probably survive voting. --Sir gwax (talk) 17:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Incidentally, I reverted your change. --Sir gwax (talk) 17:55, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

That's fine; I thought I was following Splak's advice; I guess I was wrong. I'm a bit confused then as to what I do to appeal this listing, since it's an NRV entry, not a VFD entry, and NRV entries don't get a voting listing. Do I start an entry on VFD even though this is an NRV tag? -- Rei 19:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

If you are desperate/lazy, you can replace the NRV tag with a VFD tag, and put it on VFD with a keep opening vote. Or you can just expand/format/improve the article and remove NRV. --Splaka 04:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Done - it's now on VFD so that it can come to a vote. Thanks! -- Rei 17:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

nrv

Ive taken away the nrv/dead end/ugly tags off some articles that i tried to improve. (at least) one of them is/was? my own. is this a misdeed?--D. G. Neree 01:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

If the article is significantly improved by your edit, we won't kill you. If not, then I hope you have a will written. ;D —Hinoa KUN (talk) 01:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

cheers--D. G. Neree 01:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Old versions of Images

I wonder why the old versions of images i dumped in QVFD on 8th Sep haven't been addressed while the ones dumped after it are being acted upon? is there a problem deleting old versions of imgs? -- mowgli 06:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Contesting a QVFD

IMO we need a Template:Hangon to allow people to contest QVFDs. See Wikipedia:Template:Hangon for more information. Pentium5dot1 04:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Specifically, I am trying to contest the deletion of that page whose title looks like "SHIT" but is made of unwieldy block characters. I feel that the article would have a fair chance to improve if it were NRV'd to attract attention, but it needs to be moved to a different title that isn't so hard to deal with. The block characters within the page can stay (making use of Template:Title for the title). Pentium5dot1 04:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

It was NRV'd, but deleted shortly after. Ok, I'll restore it back with the NRV on, and good luck to you making a good article, articles on all the odd characters you can get tend to be very difficult to make good. If you need more than a week to work on it, just move it to userspace or something. Or if you think it needs a different title, though it shouldn't need a different title if it's well linked from other similar articles. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 14:58, 11 Nov 2006

It is not well linked, specifically because its title is so hard to type. I feel that a move is necessary, and as stated on the author's talk page I will also put the article to a Pee Review once I have moved it. Pentium5dot1 19:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

• Oops! Sorry I didn't realize there was a {{NoQVFD}} template. Pentium5dot1 19:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

All three articles I wrote were listed at QVFD!

Hello. I started contributing to Uncyclopedia three days ago.

I wrote three articles - Wah lau!, Money No Enough and The person who wrote this article. All three were listed on QVFD, and of these three, only Wah lau! has not yet been deleted.

I understand why you wish to delete the person who wrote this article. It was short, and quite crappy. The inspiration for creating this article came from a red link in the quote of Wah lau! I intended to expand the article at a later date, but it was deleted before I could do so. Note that the person who wrote this article, if of good quality, would be useful for quotes (which I understand are widely used at the start of Uncyclopedia articles).

However, I wish to contest the deletion of Money No Enough, and the proposed deletion of Wah lau!

Money No Enough, as its Wikipedia article, which I wrote and added a link to in the Uncyclopedia article, states, is Singapore's all-time highest-grossing film. It was written by Jack Neo, who went on to write and produce other successful Singaporean films, such as I Not Stupid and Homerun. The film is about three Singaporeans facing a shortage of money (hence the title "Money No Enough"). I thought the article would be easier to write - and funnier - if it focused on the problem of "Money No Enough" (shortage of money) instead of the movie (after all, Mozilla Firefox is a magical girl).

Wah lau! is not a company at all. Would any real company try to increase the number of "complain kings" and the use of Singlish? "Wah lau!" is actually a common Singlish phrase, which is used in complaints - for example: "Wah lau! I have so much homework to do!" The government is trying to discourage the use of Singlish, so they launched the Speak Good English Movement, which failed. Again, to make the article funnier, I wrote that Wah lau! was a company. I hope that clears things up, and explains the humour in the article.

I asked three friends (all Singaporeans, of course) to read the Money No Enough and Wah lau! articles, and they all agreed that the articles were funny.

After writing Wah lau! and Money No Enough, I intended to write more articles on Singaporean topics, to add more Singaporean humour to Uncyclopedia. This setback forces me to reconsider that.

If deleting the articles was a mistake, please undelete them. Otherwise, please post on my talk page, further explanation on why the articles should remain deleted. I would appreciate any feedback that helps me to improve the articles.

--Whitekings 15:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

User_talk:Whitekings

Ok, all done (unless he disagrees)-- -Kjhf!- (feeling chatty?) 16:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

NRV?

The instructions still mention NRV, but not ICU. Can someone edit this? I could, but I don't want to get into trouble for editing an important page. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 12:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Just have. Thanks for noticing. -Kjhf!- (feeling chatty?) 16:29, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Why is the Undictionary method…

being deprecated? It seems that such redirects work fine on most PCs (although not on my Mac with Safari, as it happens.) — Lenoxus 01:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

As other Uncyclopedians seem to suggest, it is Undictionary itself that is being deprecated. Any suggestions on how to revive it? Pentium5dot1 00:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It isn't really, I find a lot of it pretty funny. You're welcome to move funny stubs there. Make sure they're actually funny though. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 03:02, 07 May 2007

You all hate me

I put several articles on none were deleted but one when I forgot to log off for my brother. --Capercorn FLAME! what? UNATO OWS 01:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

And I forgot again freaking perfect. --The Great Yellow Crayon Get PWNED Yellow 130 is teh pwnz 01:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Can the author request the deletion of any of their articles?

A question ^^^ --Moneke 06:48, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep, though if it's been standing for a while, you might want to take it to VFD instead. —Hinoa talk.kun 06:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

So does the author have the right to delete that work if they don't want it to be on the site anymore? Cos they wrote it do they still have power over it? --Moneke 07:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

...ah, one of the hard questions. I'm not too sure, really. I want to say yes, but then again, other people may have edited... I dunno. Ask in Help or the Dump? —Hinoa talk.kun 07:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

On this one the edits were just fixing spelling and vandalism, not real content... good to go? --Moneke 07:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think so. —Hinoa talk.kun 07:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! ;) --Moneke 07:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

SOMEONE PLEASE BAN THIS GUY NOW

User:Jimbo suck whales's penises - He's posting shit about me!

Exactly why?

Why was my article List of PUs deleted?

Probably because it sucked. I see the word "List" in the title and the first thing I think of is "Delete." That's probably why. I would say read up on HTBFANJS and give it another go, preferably without resorting to lists. sirsysrq @ 20:31 Apr 17

Also read: UN:LIST. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 21:47, Apr 17

Request to take down Adam Carolla page

The only truly non offensive picture on Uncyclopedia. Oh.

Smuggler has requested that I take down the Adam Carolla page, and I will comply to those wishes. It was an inconsiderate attempt at humor, and I have been receiving lots of messages concerning this from Smuggler. I wasn't really happy about the Adam Carolla page the last few days anyway, and I believe that Smuggler is right that my attempts were "slanderous and unprofessional" in those words. Please take down the page.

I will also think twice about writing about celebrities -- I will not be doing so anymore apart from the two I had just written. My writing had tended to sound like a rant or a pissing match, and I don't tolerate that about myself. Again, please take down the Adam Carolla page for me. Thank you. --teflongone001 11:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)Teflongone001

I don't see anything wrong with it. It's fact based, not mean and not stupid. The only bad thing that I can see about it is that it's about Adam Carolla (take that, Adam Carolla!). One person didn't like it? So what? If everything that offended/annoyed/aroused one person was deleted, there would be nothing here at all. Then we'd be in a void. A void! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 18:18, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I laughed. I cried. Then I read the Adam Carolla article. But that's a tale for another day. I too can't see anything wrong with what you'd written. Keep it and delete the whingebag I say. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Delet Page

The page: Alamo is small and there is another one called: Battle of the Alamo which is pretty big. I request that the smalelr one be deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darth Cruentus (talk • contribs)

• Try listing Alamo on UN:VFD (remember to place the {{VFD}} tag on Alamo when nominating) and if the vote is successful make a redirect to Battle of the Alamo. (you may want to mention that you want to make a redirect to that if Alamo is deleted)--—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sawblade5 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

OK Stop it with Posting Vandalized State Pages On QVFD.

Over the last few weeks here I have noticed that people are posting older pages as 1 liners when they are currently in a vandalized State. I think it should be posted on the rules on top to remind people to check the article history to see if its indeed vandalism before getting trigger happy with QVFD. I had to put a Hangon tag on a older article that made this list because it got listed when it was a 1 liner vandalized state and I was hoping that it would not get deleted like that. So guys please check the history before posting to QVFD. You can tell right when these 1 liners get created by checking Special:NewPages or watching for them on Freenode on IRC at the Channel #cvn-wikia-uncyc . The latter will tell you right away when an IP turns a big article into a crap 1 liner. --—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sawblade5 (talk • contribs) 10:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Category postings

Although I think SOAUU is alright, re-listing stuff an admin said no to is not so cool. When I say redundent I mean that the cat is probabaly a little obscure and uneccecaery (we're not a study aid) or random and confusing which harms my attmept to manage content and improve articles. In an ideal world funny stuff would be in articles not categories. Sometimes there will be the odd one that only really applys to one or two articles or is just a little silly. This is ideally kept to minimum. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 17:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah. You realize, of course, that comedy must be free? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thats we don't have to pay you. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 21:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I meant that you can't categorize comedy, man (except for the categories). Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

You're right about that - but anarchy is not really comedy. It does help the running of the site to have content in some sort of basic order - thats not a curb on content by any means (Its about helping content - not categories). Much of the QVFD and the anti-vadallism that I do along with others is becuase of the owrk I have done with these and much of the improvment that has taken place has been done through categories. That's not to say that everybody should be doing it, it's a one man job really. I would say that any categories I place on QVFD serve little purpose to be funny in an intelligent way, or serve to help organize content. That does not mean that they should be re-posted if you say no though. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

When posting cats, make sure they're empty (if there's a similar but better cat, change the cats to that one first, etc), and, if you must add a comment, list them as "pointless" rather than redundant. Pointless is more specific and it makes me ever so happy to destroy pointlessness. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll do that:) — Sir Sycamore (talk) 21:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry for going a little overboard, but I don't like to be called a honkey. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what a honkey would say. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what a honkey would say. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Peace out, bro. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I can dig it. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That's great, yo. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 23:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Geography of Romania no longer a good example

It is mentioned at the top of the page as an example of combining multiple stubs into a decent article, but somewhere along the line it degenerated into a stub of its own. Is it okay if I remove the wikilink? --Pentium5dot1 t~^_^~c 05:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Or you could have looked through the history of the article to find when it was vandalised and fixed it... MrN  Fork you! 04:44, Mar 23

Sorry. The problem was that I did a cursory (read: inadequate) search through the history and wrongly concluded that there was no good revision that was sufficiently recent. --Pentium5dot1 t~^_^~c 06:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Delete this page

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/User:Mordillo/Jew contains defamation to a few people i know and they would like to see this removed.

Nope, Not likely to happen for 3 reasons: (1)Mordillo's an admin and (2)He is also a Jew and (3) Userpage articles don't generally get deleted except upon author request or cyberbullying issues. You shoulda seen the original Jew article before it was colonized if you thought the version on his user page was offensive. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 02:20, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Lame vanity article

Delete it, post-haste, plz: Dan Stalcup 04:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Tono

Apparently my article "Tono" sucked so bad that it didn't need a vote to be deleted. I'd like to go about appealing this, and putting it up for a vote. If I'm going to suck, I'd like to suck for as many people as possible.

Kilna 07:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

As a general rule, three lines (on a one-note joke) does not a great page make...particularly on an obscure subject. A one-note page like AAAAAAAAA! works because it was the first. Repetition has its place, but only if it's the first. Also, repetition has its place, but only if it's the first. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

If it's any consolation it did get too votes before it was deleted. It's more that it was about some video that no one knows about. MrN  Fork you! 08:29, Aug 12

Just a note- don't ban me!

I removed Rip Van Winkle before because it was less than a week old. HELPME, I've fallen and I can't get up!/ Talk to me or die!/ My daddy!(ew) 01:18, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Im new...

Im new, but ive seen several pages that could have been added here. What is the requirement that is needed to add articles here? Rifting Contribs ... dont fall in....Complain 365 - LOB 01:52, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

You have to have been on Uncyclopedia for a long time before you can add pages here. Three whole days! I know! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 02:44, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer, it will be hard but I can wait. Rifting Contribs ... dont fall in....Complain 365 - LOB 02:45, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

confused

Can someone please explain why opacity is even a page. its a copy of wikpedia. there is no comedic value to it at all.  ~  The*  (say shit) (My train wrecks) Π   ~  20:38, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

As you may or may not have noticed, the text on the page becomes gradually less opaque. Literally. -- Simsilikesims(♀UN) Talk here. 20:45, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Category:EDiots

Why is this category listed for deletion? --EDiot 05:11, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

UN hates ED.--FcukmanLOOS3R!!! 10:23, August 24, 2011 (UTC)

Man, being black is so great!

Having to stay away from anything on the internet in order not to get deeply offended/lose faith in humanity really is fucking awesome! No, really, I'm not kidding, It's fucking great.

Having to watch YouTube videos while taking all precautionary measures not to accidentally glance at the comments; having to take all precautionary measures not to look at the comments of anything at all; banning myself from looking at anything in fear of me getting pissed off at accidentally happening upon the latest Islamophobic ranting from some fucking conservative scum; finding out people think the Bell Curve is the greatest scientific achievement that explains everything; despising humanity; becoming a horrible, jaded, far left socialist, quasi-fascist, Mussolini admiring, misanthropic, pretentious, fat, basement dwelling, wiki-philiac, authoritarian moonbat...

Man, it's awesome living a horrible life getting bumfucked by capitalists, and having people hate you because their capitalist bumfucking gets them more money than your capitalist bumfucking (we're both getting 9001% less than what the work is actually worth, but never mind that; niggers are lazy and are poor because they're lazy, QED.)

Yeah, mind if you do me a solid and just huff this quality article, I need to go masturbate to my latest fantasy of taking over the world and pwning all conservatives/CEO capitalist exploiters while crying at my utter inability to change this neoliberal, democratic fuckhole you call earth. --Hodifa 15:54, October 11, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sensing sarcasm here. What you actually mean is nominate this article to be featured on the front page and send you a printed copy in an elegant yet tasteful frame. I'll get right on it sir/madam/freak. --ChiefjusticePSX 16:23, October 11, 2011 (UTC)

Example of combination article was deleted

Therefore, we don't know what you're talking about. Rickyrab 15:34, December 17, 2011 (UTC)

My rationale for QVFDing "The game of tag"

I found that the page The game of tag redirects to Tag (game), which is a redirect that people are unlikely to follow. In fact, only one page links to this redirect. See my point? -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 23:29, April 15, 2012 (UTC)

New guideline

I tentatively added a guideline ("Where to look for QVFDable pages") to the top that says, "Also look at Special:NewFiles - new images - and Special:UnusedFiles. Unused photos should be deleted promptly especially if they have no satirical value and/or are copyright violations." - but it's in a comment so no one can see it without editing the source of the page. Please approve this guideline so I can go and uncomment it. -- This has been an automated message by Cute Zekrom (talk) 00:03, May 12, 2012 (UTC)

Just found out something

If you QVFD a page AND a talkpage with the QVFD-button, (I don't mean manually, with copying the name and pasting it here or anything) the other page... it DISAPPEARS! It seems you can only QVFD a page OR talkpage! Cool! OMG!!! It`s Cat the Colourful, Jesus Christ!!! 06:11 14 May 2012

Let me try it. Hey, when was the last time ANYONE checked MiniLuv for new posts? I've got 3. -- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0)] 19:49, May 14, 2012 (UTC)

Crappy titles should be protected

In the past month I've seen a load of page titles that don't make any sense or were supposed to be user pages. These should be salted. Really. You can't make a decent article at "BrynCohan1337" or whatever the hell that was. -- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0)] 21:58, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

What I've seen is someone filing the exact same text in the same name both in mainspace and in userspace; that is, BrynCohan1337 would be accompanied by User:BrynCohan1337, without necessarily registering such a user. Points to a single culprit. As for salting them, I doubt the usefulness, because whoever it is moves on, and in any case has near-infinite alternatives. Spıke ¬ 22:27 25-May-12

Okay, what usually gets salted? (Other than pages such as TPDNE.) -- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0)] 22:29, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Dunno. I am all for that one remaining protected, as I've used it in a pipe if I want a deliberate red-link. Spıke ¬ 22:32 25-May-12

Okay. -- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0)] 22:34, May 25, 2012 (UTC)

Talk pages

Just reminding you all that talk pages don't get deleted except in extraordinary cases such as cyber bullying, shock images, etc. So you can stop putting them on QVFD. --Hotadmin4u69 ^[TALK] 03:26 Jun 29 2012

And this is unrelated to the two talkpages of pure vandalism that got put on here today. Those were crap. --Hotadmin4u69 ^[TALK] 03:29 Jun 29 2012

Also spambots! -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 03:54, June 29, 2012 (UTC)

The next person who invalidly puts a userpage or talkpage on QVFD gets their own userpage and talkpage deleted for 8.74 seconds. --Hotadmin4u69 ^[TALK] 17:31 Sep 14 2012

NOBODY READS THIS PAGE, just saying. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!) 23:21, September 14, 2012 (UTC)

I read it, you fucker. ~ BB ~ (T) ~ Fri, Sep 14 '12 23:47 (UTC)