User:Hyperbole/Good articles/archive

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< User:Hyperbole | Good articles
Revision as of 06:48, April 27, 2011 by Fnoodle (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Boobshake

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
  • meh --Mnb'z 06:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments

User:Hyperbole/Super_Secret_Girlie_Page!

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments

Uncyclopedia:Unspecial Pages

Score: -2
Good
  • Close enough semi-unlinked to page that I think is slightly amusing. --Mnb'z 20:18, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments
  • Not Promoted --Mnb'z 06:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

George Washington Carver

Score: +4
Good
  • fwhore just failed VFH. --Mnb'z 08:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Good. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 17:25, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • For and at some point we should probably have a rule that six "for" votes on VFH can just be directly promoted to the list. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 22:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Good. IronLung 00:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments

Promoted. --Absolutely Not Benson 21:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Dear Jenna

Score: +4
Good

Symbol for vote For.. --Absolutely Not Benson 22:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Not Good
  • meh --Mnb'z 01:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments

Promoted --Mnb'z 18:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Proto-badger

Score: +4
Good
  • Funny stub found while image categorizing. --Mnb'z 05:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For. What are you talking about? The images weren't categorized at all. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 17:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For. Random as all hell, but has some excellent lines and a pretty hilarious picture. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 19:47, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Symbol for vote For.. --Absolutely Not Benson 22:07, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Not Good
Comments
  • I was doing a rodent image blitz, I just clicked on that out of curiosity. --Mnb'z 19:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Promoted--Mnb'z 18:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Leporiphobia

Score: +5
Good
  • Good what I would call a quasi-quasi feature, was at +7, but didn't make quasi feature. --Mnb'z 05:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yeah, it's a good article, and anything that got more than 6 for votes on VFH almost certainly belongs on the VFG list. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 04:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Good. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 18:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Symbol for vote For.. --Absolutely Not Benson 22:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

  1. For bunnies. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:10, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments
  • Promoted --Mnb'z 18:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Mnbvcxz/Super_Secret_Girlie_Page!

Score: +4
Good
  • For more of a test to see how many voting this gets. Also, there is a warning template on the top. READ IT and don't eye rape yourself. --Mnb'z 19:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Ugh, I can't believe I'm voting for. Why the hell am I voting for? Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 04:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Why in the name of Oscar Wilde are you voting for on that? --Mnb'z 05:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Woohoo! -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 18:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Symbol for vote For.. --Absolutely Not Benson 22:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Not Good
Comments
  • It needs more pregnant Bridget Midget. Enough for me to touch myself to.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  22:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Promoted --Mnb'z 18:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

UnBooks:A UTP: Link Gets Pregnant and Dies

Score: -2
Good
  • Fwhore --Mnb'z 05:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
  • I'm afraid I have never understood this article. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 20:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
  • I love the idea but the script/execution leaves something to be desired. It could be so much funnier.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  12:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
  • It's too... um... MS Painty. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments
  • Not to bring forth the "Vote for Inquisition", but what should I do to improve it? --Mnb'z 18:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Socky and Dr. Strange, are those "not good" votes or just comments? --Mnb'z 07:04, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Not Promoted--Mnb'z 18:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Gay Jesus

Score: +4
Good
  • Nom+For. Let's burn in hell. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 20:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Whore vote: Cmon' it's a parody of anthropomorphic Jesus saturation not an exploitation thereof.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  23:01, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol for vote Good. IronLung 04:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol for vote Let's all jump on the bandwagon!--J-Shea 03:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments
  • Just interested in some feedback. Could the text be reformatted into VFH material? As-is it's just a fun, goofy page with lots of images.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  20:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I will never try to VFH this in any way. I'm still vividly remembering the extreme indignation of a few people who almost soiled themselves over it.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  20:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I copied your comment from the thingy below. You can just remove it if you want. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 20:16, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
It gives us something to talk about....so, come here often?--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  20:22, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Once in a while... -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 20:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Fascinating.......I hear that little bastard groundhog Phil claimed winter wasn't over recently--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  20:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
That sounds very interesting... -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 20:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Abstain. It's really well put together, but it was so painfully self-conscious and apologetic for its own existence that it kind of turned me off, honestly. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 04:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Wow!. Constructive negative criticism from someone who clearly read it with an open mind! I appreciate the effort. You are correct sir, the article wallows in apologizing for itself from start to finish, which was intentional.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  08:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Japanese Stomping Fish

Score: +4
Good
  • Good first image is funny, along with the intro. --Mnb'z 06:10, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol for vote Good. IronLung 04:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Good. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 18:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, I think this is exactly what VFG is all about. Too weird for feature, and yet: kicks ass. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 21:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments

Slime Cube

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments
  • abstain I'd have the feeling that it would be funny if I got the reference. --Mnb'z 05:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
THE ANSWER YOU SEEK IS PROVIDED WITHIN THE ARTICLE ITSELF! IT IS TRUE AND ALL POWERFUL. CONSIDER YOURSELF EDUCATED! Also, if you missed the link at the end: http://www.timecube.com/ -OptyC Sucks! Icons-flag-us CUN17:47, 20 Feb

Laws of Physics

Score: +4
Good
P.S.: wow. I can finish a sentence without expletives or whoring. Oh, never mind.
Not Good
Comments

Southern People

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments

Promoted. IronLung 20:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

snakes on a plane

Score: -2
Good
Not Good
  • Meh. It's got some hilarious stuff in there, but honestly, I suspect that most of it is stolen from other websites. Also: contains many jokes well past their expiration date. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 04:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • per above quite cliche. --Mnb'z 05:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Shit. IronLung 20:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments

Not promoted. IronLung 20:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


Connery Canard

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments
  • Comment:. Don't forget the Cosby Canard Despite some minor randomizer action, it's good too.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  09:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Promoted. IronLung 20:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

George Washington Carver

Score: -2
Good
  • fwhore first rewrite. --Mnb'z 19:05, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
  • Conditional against unless it fails VFH, in which case for. Seriously, this is fucking brilliant. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 19:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  • self against clutter removal. This is probably going to be dead for days. --Mnb'z 17:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments
  • Why are you voting against it if its VFH worthy? I can see you point in not wanting a featured or quasi-featured on the list of good articles. But, it make take weeks for it to get off VFH. Wouldn't it make more sense to vote for it now, then strike it from the list if and when it gets featured or quasi featured? --Mnb'z 20:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I don't know. I don't want features on the VFG list, and I'm not totally sure what to do if something is so hilarious you nom it. I think what I am gonna do is wait a day or two to see how it does on VFH and then reappraise the situation. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 21:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Honestly, I didn't think this article was that good. It only got a 5 on humor on the last review. But that does raise the issue of what to do with the occasional VFH worthy article that gets here.
  • I'd say we should have a policy of putting any article that is nominated for VFH and fails on this list. Except those that are almost unanimously rejected, i.e. finish at a net -3 or worse, and have 3 or fewer gross for votes. People would have already read the article, so the revote won't take much work.--Mnb'z 02:41, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
  • I'd rather handle that informally than make it policy :) But, sure, part of my whole idea with VFG was a way to spotlight articles where people can't agree on whether or not they're awesome. Hence the "6 for votes = promoted" rule. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 02:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Do you have any idea what do with articles that get VFH nommed when then are on this list. I would suggest voiding the nomination, so we don't have nominations sitting in limbo for weeks. It can always be renominated here. --Mnb'z 05:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Not Promoted, on VFH --Mnb'z 18:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Ghetto White Boy Syndrome

Score: +5
Good
  • Symbol for vote Nom Nom Nom (and for) I wonder if it is at least a good article? Icons-flag-pi Pirate Lord__Sonic80 (Yell  •  Latest literary excretion) __ 22:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For. I'm still there.--DRStrangesig5 Sherman Fingertalk  22:59, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Weakish for. Prose needs some work, but there are definitely laughs to be had. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 04:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Good --Mnb'z 05:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
  • {Symbol for vote Good. IronLung 04:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments

Dihydrogen oxide

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments

Stereogram

Score: +4
Good
  • Nom+4. I think this is great. Again, doubt it would get featured due to its niche nature, but it's definitely good. --UU - natter UU Manhole 15:39, Feb 13
  • Holy crap That's brilliant. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 17:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Thom Yorke has discovered Uncyc. --Nachlader 19:09, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Hallucinogenic. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 12:34, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments

ICarly

Score: +4
Good
  • For seeing how many people will vote for this. --Mnb'z 18:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For. It's overlong, but the intro is very, very funny. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 18:57, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For. This is the first article I recreated. --Meganew 15:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Good. IronLung 03:10, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
  • For. It starts out well, though it's quite long and stuff. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 12:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
  • Um. Uselessly over-long, hard for me to even understand, repetitive images, some flat jokes. It went well at the start though. --Nachlader 19:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments

That woman

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments

UnNews:Google Earth 5.0 With Ocean Released; Ocean is Full of Water, Fish Discovered, Boats Discovered, Atlantis Discovered

Score: -2
Good
  • Self-Nom. Would be interested in hearing what people think of this, since I'm not going to bother PEE with it. --Nachlader 18:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
  • Having trouble with this one. The parody of Google Earth/ Google Ocean seems a little unclear to me. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 19:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Not Good. --Meganew 17:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

  • meh per above --Mnb'z 17:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments
  • Comment. In response to Hyperbole, Google recently released 'Google Ocean', they probably still have the note referring to it on the Google main page. Also, the article provides a source. If this isn't what you meant, then I'm confused. --Nachlader 19:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • What I mean is, I understand what it's about, but I don't understand specifically what about Google Ocean, or the public reaction to Google Ocean, or the public reaction to Google Earth, it parodies. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 19:25, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Oh, I see. I'm unsure about the general reaction to Google Ocean, but my initial thought was that it was like they made a program for people who can't be bothered to go out and see the ocean for themselves (hinted by the final quote) and that they don't know a single thing about the ocean prior to the Google program. I don't speak for others, obviously, but that was my reaction and I thought I could see an UnNews article via a parody. --Nachlader 19:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Sounds reasonable to me. I just don't think the concept comes out quite strong enough in the article itself, since the article seems to imply that mankind itself has never seen the ocean. Maybe if it were more clear that the journalist was just an ignoramus. Might have to modulate into first-person a little to accomplish that. Just my $0.02. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 19:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • I was in a pickle over how I'd address the article as a journalist: plainly, I wanted to mimic a journalist who uses puns in their stories ("that won't sink to the bottom anytime soon", "testing of the waters" etc), as I've been watching a lot of The Day Today recently. I wasn't too confident about writing as someone who is evidently very overexcited and astonished by the 'discovery'. This was my first UnNews article, I don't usually think of such ideas, so I didn't want to miss out on the punsome journalist opportunity. I see what you mean about the concept, which may have been the gap I sensed, but didn't quite identify. Frankly, I'm glad with the first effort anyway. --Nachlader 19:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Not promoted. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 19:14, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Kung Fu

Score: +4
Good
  • Yes. A little jumbled, but really pretty hilarious. Tinymasaru.gifpillow talk 18:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, ma'am. Messy, but funny. --Nachlader 19:01, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
  • It gets my support. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 09:42, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Close enough --Mnb'z 17:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Not Good
Comments

Hans Blix and the Weapons Inspectors

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments
    • Promoted via rules. --Meganew 16:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

UnNews:Massacre at Brookfield Zoo

Score: +4
Good
Not Good
Comments
Personal tools
projects