Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Rules and procedures:
- Before doing anything else, make sure that you are well versed on Uncyclopedia's deletion policy.
- If you're too lazy to read the deletion policy, please, at least, carefully read this list of rules.
- But seriously, read the deletion policy.
- Do not put anything up for VFD that is not appropriate for VFD.
- Abusers of the policy will be abused by the claw end of a hammer. You have been warned.
- If you have an article that meets the criteria for VFD:
- 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.
- Add
{{vfd}} to the article in question. Failure to do so may invalidate the vote.
- Provide an initial vote (see below) and include a comment as to why you have placed the article on VFD.
- If you are here to vote on the deletion/salvation of articles:
- Thank you.
- No, really, thank you very much.
- Edit the section for the article you are addressing.
- Pick a space under the appropriate heading (Keep, Delete, Comment), add your sig/comment preceded with a *
- * - Creates a bullet for your entry and makes sure that things are formatted correctly (do not put a space before the *).
- 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.
- --~~~~ - Sign and timestamp your vote. Unsigned votes will be removed without prejudice.
- Do not revert edits of the administrators.
- 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.
VFD: Where bad articles go to get
recycled.
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 nailbat before we tear our hair out in frustration.
This also applies to Uncyclopedia In jokes (see: Category:Uncyclopedia In-Jokes).
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 tag to indicate that the article has been kept. You have been warned.
If VFD is full, or if you are an IP or a user of less than 4 days, and you want to report something as potential rubbish for us to vote on in the future, please proceed to the Poopsmith's Lounge. Just remember not to sit on the chairs.
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.
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Boring as shiet. basically a giant list. ---Pelargonium
 (Talk)
 Delete. Knowing little about Danny Phantom most of those descriptions seemed like straight up episode recaps. Those that were more obviously an attempt at humor were eather bad and name-droppy or random and desperate.--Count of Monkey Crisco 06:59, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- The humor is crappy but, again, the article is about a real show. It is a giant list because the author set out to work individual episodes with cheap plays on words rather than writing cleverly. This isn't unique or even rare; after our discussion (below) on Nightwish, I went to Yes (band), and it is the same crap. It would be nice if the author had invented a theme, perhaps a humorous misunderstanding, and stuck to it through the article. It would be nice if all our anonIPs were funny. They aren't, and there are bigger fish to fry. Spıke ¬ 02:17 11-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Never got the expansion promised by the author in '08. The main article isn't that good either, but if I added it there'd be over 20 vfd's... ---Pelargonium (Talk)
- Comment: Actually, since one of the 20 listed articles has officially been kept, you could list one more and not get blocked. --Andorin K. (Silence! I vape you!) 07:23, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- True! the warning above is so scary that people usually don't go close to 20. Spıke ¬ 12:01 10-Nov-09
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
 Keep. Gee guys, didn't realise Uncyclopedia was becoming so strict about taste! Just cos' you don't not all appreciate the subtle humour doesn't mean it should be deleted. How about suggesting ways it could be improved before calling for its destruction. Digi 20:17, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. I can't say I'm a huge fan of the article, but don't think it's too bad. WHY do I not know??? 08:49, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Because. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  KUN SotM UotM PMotM 16:34, 11 November 2009
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Juvenile sex jokes in their lowest, unfunniest state.--Count of Monkey Crisco 22:41, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. In the quaint old days, they would say this is in bad taste with no redeeming qualities, certainly not the second half, a slapped-together news report about reaction to the lack of taste in the first half, which adds more bad taste. Spıke ¬ 23:24 9-Nov-09
- Deleeeete... I'm keeping the picture, though. ---Pelargonium (Talk)
|
| Comments |
- This is one of those articles that may actually predict what will happen with a future Porn Version of Strictly Come Dancing or Dancing With the Stars. Unless...it has already been made...--RomArtus (talk). 13:19, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
 Comment. @Digi: My suggestions for improvement would boil down to "See this section? Get rid of it and try again." repeated five times. Each section is pathetic in its own little way, from the dry and unnecessary section one, the dead horse beating section two, the nothing-but-list section three, the not completely awful but grammatically lousy section four and the desperate for content section five. It's a bad idea, badly executed. Whether it's tasteful or not doesn't figure into it.
|
| Keep |
- Keep. It isn't a total disaster (the list isn't any good and lazy) but at least this one doesn't go off at a tangent and change the subject half way through like of lot of the death row candidates in here. --RomArtus (talk). 13:14, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Needs work, and it really needs to mention Doctor Who. But not too bad. WHY do I not know??? 08:53, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Seems like an attempt to write an essay around an odd photograph. It isn't funny yet, and yes, the list is crap, but I'd like to see it evolve (if it were about anything). Spıke ¬ 23:19 9-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Today is Operation: Emo-Hitler. Time to delete all the cruft that links to Emo-Hitler. This is such cruft. --Count of Monkey Crisco 22:16, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. As an article , it has a few sane moments but quickly reverts to a non-flying Randumbo given half the chance. --RomArtus (talk). 09:40, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Deleting articles that refer to Emo-Hitler is again trying to kill a beast by clipping its toenails. We recently VFD'ed Hajime Socialist Republic as an unfunny piece of some guy's personal alternate reality universe. Today I stumbled on the central piece, HZ Corps., and nominated it for deletion while it was being edited. (Nomination correctly disqualified for technical reasons, though he seems to be misusing the WIP tag.) Modusoperandi has written to the author about why his articles are mysteriously disappearing and how to get them into shape. Likewise, here Emo-Hitler is the smallest of the problems. The larger problem is that the author will continue writing cruft, even though articles keep mysteriously disappearing, unless someone steers him in a funnier direction so we don't have to play catch-up. The problem with Emo-Hitler is the impression that dropping outrageous names is writing comedy. Spıke ¬ 22:53 9-Nov-09 post-edited
- Which author? Every Article in Project: Emo-Hitler has had a different author. I think Emo-Hitler is funny to morons, morons write cruft so The link page on Emo-Hitler is just a handy hunting guide for cruft. --Count of Monkey Crisco 23:53, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- It is a wonderful world when morons wear such a badge on their foreheads. Spıke ¬ 23:57 9-Nov-09
- The article itself has a theme (albeit a made-up one), is about something (and about everything, and thus about nothing), and is mostly babble. But I won't vote Delete (yet), on the strength of those elephant illustrations. Spıke ¬ 00:01 10-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Mostly wibble, written in 2008 and failed to occur. We can tolerate wibble, but false prophets must be expunged. --Count of Monkey Crisco 17:35, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Indeed, it admits at the end that it is history-of-the-future. As your curator for articles on Peru, I would volunteer to save this if it had anything to do with Peru. But I will grab for re-use the photo of a llama in the middle of the Via Expresa. Spıke ¬ 17:48 9-Nov-09
- Delete. As usual , a choice quote sums this up : The Emocaust began in late 2010, and was the direct result of Emo-Hitler's meddling with the space-time continuum to prevent the deaths of My Chemical Romance in a tragic boating accident in late 2007. WTF ? --RomArtus (talk). 13:09, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Substandard, badly formatted little thing. --Count of Monkey Crisco 17:24, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. as per above. ---Pelargonium (Talk)
- Delete. Final paragraph appeared in triplicate--Now fixed. Atrocious concept with atrocious execution. Spıke ¬ 00:07 10-Nov-09
- Delete. Seagull crap. --RomArtus (talk). 12:55, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. It's random, it's name-droppy, it's almost incoherent, it's been here since 2006 with few edits and no improvement. Time to get rid. --UU - natter
 13:18, Nov 9
- Delete. Night soil. --RomArtus (talk). 13:55, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Petri dish shallow. --Count of Monkey Crisco 15:40, November 10, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep. Crap keep. Remove the rubbish and it may live on in my view since 99 red balloons and Nena's unshaved armpits live on in the memory. Perhaps Nena helped bring down the Berlin Wall. --RomArtus (talk). 14:03, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Compared to Zach de la Rocha, this isn't a stupid concept (except for Sections 3 and 4) but a topical article with stupid jokes. Spıke ¬ 12:51 9-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete Stupid and dumb. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 03:08, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm usually lenient with templates but this is even below my standards. --Count of Monkey Crisco 19:36, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Tagging articles with an irrelevant warning label--and this one is guaranteed to be irrelevant to almost all articles (like Law)--has reached the level of an insider's cliché. Spıke ¬ 14:40 9-Nov-09
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep. I had to get all the way through the horrible intro to realize that it was demonstrating hubris, and pretty well. And "believing oneself to be of particular excellance" [sic] is excellant irony, though the author won't know. Yes, it's short and dumb, but kind of cute. Ditto on the list. Spıke ¬ 01:53 8-Nov-09
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Short. Half of it's a list. ---Pelargonium (Talk)
- Delete. Really an intro and a list..and that's it. --RomArtus (talk). 14:31, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep. Unlike most of the articles below, this is about something, it is the joy of stereotyping, and it's funny in places. It's ugly and childish, proposing that people I don't like get shot to death, but it could be whipped into shape. Drop the dumb Latin taxonomy and the long list of translations. Spıke ¬ 12:22 6-Nov-09
- Keep. Apparently an article about Liverpool's working class. It's got enough good in it that I'd rather let the editorial process work it out.
 pillow talk 22:09, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Per above. MrN
   18:54, Nov 7
- Keep. Actually a nice article, some humor. Hackme 03:04, November 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Exterminate - This is a genuine piece of "WTF?" -- DameViktoria
 - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 11:21, 6 Nov
- Gives English humo(u)r a bad name.
 » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 00:45, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Evidently the writer isn't from Liverpool but the overall tone is hateful rather than funny and so I don't think it deserves a stay of execution. --RomArtus (talk). 14:14, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 00:18, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- I just think it'd fare better with deletion. If one of the keep-voters would like, they can start from scratch. The article makes no sense and constitutes prime crap, nothing more. Were I able to, I'd probably just have torched the thing... -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 14:24, 8 Nov
- What's worth keeping about it, the commas? O_o -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 14:24, 8 Nov
- It's fixable. Needs a serious hacking to it, but it's not all carp. Get Mhaille to do it. MrN 21:47, Nov 9
- Why do you always pick on him? Can't you do the {{rewrite}} stuff yourself, Pa?! The time he'd use to fix this stinker up would be retracted from my hopefully first feature he's helping me with... :/ -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 08:39, 10 Nov
- Rewrite? Na. I cut out some crap and now it's not so. Not really a rewrite. MrN 16:06, Nov 10
|
| Keep |
- Keepish A little funny and based on a real "haunted" mansion. --Count of Monkey Crisco 20:08, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Dittoes; it's not free-association babble but oddly describes something real. Spıke ¬ 12:10 10-Nov-09
|
| Delete |
- Delete. NOT FUNNY. pillow talk 18:21, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Written in the style of ED and just not really that funny. » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 01:16, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. It needs exorcising. --RomArtus (talk). 14:07, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 00:17, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Mighty Keep. On grounds of notability, being one of my favorite bands and the relative non-suckiness of the current version. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 •
 • 11:36, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
- Mahm00shA, you seem to have a little time to improve this article to meet the standards of a reader like Romartus. Will you try? Spıke ¬ 01:18 7-Nov-09
- No, thanks. Band articles are not exactly my forte. • MAHMOOSHA 2.0 • • 05:50, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Well, I edited it. (New intro, deleted the "Discography" list, lightly edited throughout, no references to the author.) I know nothing about the band but claim the article is no longer an eyesore. (Anyone have photos?) Spıke ¬ 12:19 7-Nov-09
- I think it has been cut down too much now + no photos either. Radical surgery indeed !--RomArtus (talk). 14:10, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Put back the Discography if you like, which is the bulk of the liposuction. But it's just cheap plays on words. Spıke ¬ 17:27 8-Nov-09
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Gawdawful bandcruft that will probably never receive the rewrite that someone requested at some point. pillow talk 18:12, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Unfunny and it is listing badly on one side. Besides fans - who else will want to waste time reading it for any possible humour ? --RomArtus (talk). 18:37, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- But if fans found it funny (and if fans found that it related to anything) (and I'm not saying it does), wouldn't it be okay? Spıke ¬ 18:42 5-Nov-09
- If someone wants to write an article about a band (for example) and only wants to appeal to hard core fans , they can do it somewhere else. Same for a mad Star Trek fan as well in my view.--RomArtus (talk). 19:00, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- Time for a fan opinion! As a hopeless Nightwish fan, let me point out that notability != humor. Liking the article's subject does not excuse the suckiness of the article. As a Nightwish fan, my
stonevote has been cast. » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 00:57, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- Nuke. I'm a NW fan too, but I would still like to see a -decent- uncyc page about them. Something that invokes laughter. --Dark_ApostropheThe Memory Hole 02:12, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 00:04, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- It does suck. The first sentence of the intro says so. And it invites the reader not to continue. I did, and encountered everything from self-absorption to coding errors. Spıke ¬ 01:54 6-Nov-09
- Make that three. » DJ "Reaper of Fail" Gentoo, now with wit, sarcasm, and even more obscure folk metal. Now in lime green! 01:33, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep This is used on some pages. I certainly don't want it used on any more pages, but it's fine where it is. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 14:00, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. It's not bad, it doesn't hurt anyone, it can have it uses. ~
 14:35, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Useless template. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Hardly used and annoying. Transclude it where it currently exists and nuke it from orbit. pillow talk 23:13, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Nuke. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:46, Nov 4 2009
- Can't we just ban everyone from making templates without permission? It's not like they're ever funny and only a tiny proportion are actually useful. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent
     12:17, November 7, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 23:58, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- This set of templates seems to facilitate intrusive, garish graphics. It isn't "useless"; I simply don't like the use (any more than overuse of fonts, or "ransom-note typography"), but that's a policy question I'll leave to youse. Spıke ¬ 11:08 2-Nov-09
|
| Keep |
- No. I've spoken to several people and they all agree it's useless. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 00:09, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Looks like a useless template. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete We don't need this. Just subst this into the page where it's used. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 18:08, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Subst into the ED article - maybe - but I'd hate to see this used anywhere else. pillow talk 22:35, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~GUN WotM PotM VFH VFP PEEING DU F@H~} Wednesday, 21:42, Nov 4 2009
- delete. allows for repetitive unfunny pointlessness. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 23:55, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Comment. Can't see a reason people would use it. --Docile hippopotamus 10:01, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Potentially useful to tile a background image, as I tried to do recently (Forum:CSS background-image). In actual use only in one article, which would improve immediately by not doing so. Spıke ¬ 10:52 2-Nov-09
- Nope. Useless. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (vote!) 18:08, November 2, 2009 (UTC)
- I set out to be italic and delete the section of Encyclopedia Dramatica (Website) that is the only use of this template, rendering it less of an eyesore and making this template an orphan. But ED is protected. VFD for it, perhaps? Spıke ¬ 18:10 5-Nov-09
- There are limits of being italic and I encourage you to never delete a template from any pages it resides on while it's on VFD. ~ 14:34, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Whoever tagged this "rewrite" was so generous that if he were an Olympic judge, I would win the bronze in figure skating. pillow talk 16:11, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
- For Hype entering the Olympics. Delete this though. --UU - natter 16:58, Oct 28
- Delete. Can I come second in the rowing? --ChiefjusticeDS 14:39, October 29, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. I liked Blue Beetle in Yellow Submarine. Or is he that Olympic gymnast who wears the blue leotard? WHY do I not know??? 21:03, October 29, 2009 (UTC)
- delete. one of those articles that keep votes for it make me want to leave uncyclopedia. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 23:24, November 8, 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Wat? MrN 21:50, Nov 9
|
| Comments |
- Hea guys! One more vote please? I will close based on that. MrN 16:32, Nov 11
|
Archived VFD Discussions
Closed nomination tag to indicate that the article has been kept. You have been warned.
