Uncyclopedia:VFH/Why?:Write an article?

Article: Why?:Write an article?	Score: -1 mooches
Nominated by:	• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 04:35, Sep 14
For: 6	Nom and For. Part Why?, part UnPoetia, and a wonderful explanation of our purpose here. Also very funny. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 04:35, Sep 14 For. Staircase CUN^t 05:21, September 14, 2009 (UTC) For. --Docile hippopotamus 22:35, September 14, 2009 (UTC) For The guys in the against are right, but I enjoyed it too much to vote with them ChiefjusticeDS 20:31, September 15, 2009 (UTC) For as per vanity, but I think Necropaxx was expecting this. Pup t 22:34, 15/09/2009 That was unexpected. :p • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 02:50, Sep 17 For This summoned quite a bit of laughter from the depths of mah BELLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ... I liked it... MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 22:51, September 20, 2009 (UTC)
Against: 7	Against. Sure, it's nice, but I don't think it warrants a feature. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 15:11, September 14, 2009 (UTC) Against per Guildy. Very short article, one joke, sort of an in-joke at that - made me smile, but not a feature. pillow talk 22:15, September 14, 2009 (UTC) Against. per Hyperbole, and too much of an blantant advertisement. Mn-z 05:02, September 15, 2009 (UTC) Against. It's ok but not a vfh nom. *RomArtusImperator ® (Orate). 19:48, September 19, 2009 (UTC) Heteronormative! Also not laugh out loud, just cute. Orian57** Talk 11:36 22 September 2009 Against Good, but it's not right. mAttlobster. (hello) 22:43, September 22, 2009 (UTC) against. good, not feature. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 04:14, September 23, 2009 (UTC)
Comments	Abstain. I like this, but this is just short. Maybe it could be featured if it had a version for every namespace. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:14, 15 September 2009 Actually, changed my mind, as I actually agree with Socky more than I would like to admit. Sigh. Pup t 03:15, 23/09/2009 Bandwagon abstain --C:\syndrome\_ 15:04, September 21, 2009 (UTC)