From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Article: Kitten Cookbook
|
Score: 13 eaters of the pussy
|
| Nominated by:
|
Zana Dark
|
For: 13
|
 Nomination and for Sorry I beat you to it, BlackFlamingo. ~Formerly Annoying Crap 23:33, 19 January 2011- For. For. For. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:08, 20 January 2011
- Yeah... Has had a real number done on it since it was taken to VFD. 1234 ~
 01:56, 20 January 2011
- For. ~
  13:59, January 20, 2011 (UTC)
- For. the kittens. Aleister 16:29 20-1-'11
- Kitttehs! Heavy metal kittehs! -- Sir SF13 (Talk)
 GUN WotM RotM FBotM VFH SK Maj. ΥΣΣ 0757 EST 21 JAN 2011
- Hahaha I'm allergic to cats... Awful creatures. The cat in soup made my day ;p
 Sir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj • KUN 12:58, January 22, 2011 (UTC)
- Weak for It's good, it just feels like it's missing something. It ends a bit abruptly, and those pop up picture things get a bit old at times. Almost as if you're trying to hard to get them in there. But it is however well written, and pretty funny at that. So I give it a weak for. --
 01:34, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- The pop-ups
 getting a bit old? Maybe one can be taken out, there is one I didn't feel hahahahaha about, the cat in the green thing. Will do so now, thanks. Aleister 1:58 24-1-'11
- Haha! Yes, getting old. Anyway, that pop-up was actually ok. I was talking about
 this one, or  this one. More the second one then the first, but ya... -- 02:21, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Reasoning behind them: To share the 6-finger hand, which is a sight to behold, with our readers. The pot of food, just a boiling-over kitten dish that seemed to fit with the language. On third thought, I'll take out the hand pic and revert back in the kitten in the leaf. The hand is too much of a pop-up lutz which may gives some people nightmares or daydreams. Aleister 2:54 24-1-'11
- Ha! Daydreams more like. Could you imagine a hand job from that hand? Fucking hell... -- 03:07, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Yeayuh.
 TKFU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK  17:53, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Shabidoo 02:16, January 26, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Samaritan Funnybony
   13:14, Jan 26 13:14, January 26, 2011 (UTC)
- Or, in arabic, السامريون as-Sāmariyyūn. And you are a good Smartasitan indeed. Come back Funnybony, some of us miss you. Aleister 13:25 26-1-'11
- For Following the tweaks, edits. Now I have a dish for my prospective dinner party! . --
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 19:15, January 26, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Dr. Fenwick 02:06, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
|
Against: 0
|
#Against. Reluctantly I will go a negative on this as the article doesn't actually give me any typical kitten recipes. I am having friends round you see... Sorry RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 17:53, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- What? It's not "HowTo:Cook kittens" it's "Kitten Cookbook". Which means it's about the book, not about how to cook kittens... -- 18:12, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Ha! I just realized how funny I must sound trying to defend the article when I was the one to give it a Weak for. -- 18:13, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- Yes. Very. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 18:57, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- I'm an idiot. -- 19:58, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
- An idiot, well, OK, but a magical idiot. Which is why your statement about it not being a kitten cookbook is accurate, it is about the Kitten Cookbook. But I will add more to the page to see if it can be beefed - or kittened - up. Aleister 00:20 25-1-'11
- It should be kittened - up. When you say beefed - up it just sounds silly. -- 02:40, January 25, 2011 (UTC)
- A joke. Okay, I added a new section and some other tweeks, the article is getting porked up now. And I'm in touch with Romartus about names of ancient kitten recipies. Aleister 14:47 25-1-'11
|
| Comments
|
- This is a rewrite, so two of the pics (the soup and the kitten in the pot) and some of the words and storyline were on the page already. Decided to rw when I saw the kitten in the soup and had my biggest lol of the week. Meow. Thanks Zana, an unexpected nom. If anyone finds any spelling errors pleaze fixes thim. Thanks. Aleister 16:31 20-1-'11
- I'm abstaining. The concept's ridiculous but not in a way that made me laugh. It's a great rewrite of a silly article, but not a feature in my view. Sorry. --Black Flamingo 21:20, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
Always check the feature queue first.
Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article.Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.
Nomination and for Sorry I beat you to it, BlackFlamingo. ~
22:21, January 27, 2011 (UTC)