Forum:Unsure about bulk huffing.
I was paring down of the the 4 or so stupid lists under the pope article and vian an innocuous looking link I stumbled onto the work of user:Banal tie. I sent one randumb and listy article, ironic pope, to VFD where it was speed huffed in a 5-0 vote.
But look at Banal tie's work:
- Church of the Ironic Cheesecake.Inc
- The Manifesto of the Church of the Ironic Cheesecake.Inc
- Bernard Quill
- The Baker
- Anti-Baker
- The Divine Cookbook
That's a little microcosm of articles about an invented religion that hardly relate to anything but each other, and the collections has been steadily expanded over the course of 15 months.
Yeah, I see what you did there but these articles range from slightly below mediocre to not-interesting at all. A bit of it is redundant too, with paragraphs being reprinted in more than one article. There's obviously been a fair amount of work put into these and I see that Mr. Quill (who is likely also Banal tie) bought an ugly coat and everything and took photos of himself in front of the local public middle school for the occasion but the fact of the matter is that it's just not that good.
I'd feel a little guilty VFD'ing all this work because it would seem like a personal attack against one writer. Am I being too sentimental or should the whole cheesecake thing be genocide-huffed to the last descendant article? --Count of Monkey Crisco 14:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- To be honest, I don't think we should be deleting full articles like this. This is something that someone has worked on for quite a while, contains enough funny in part to be acceptable, maybe you'd like to add some more universal humour to the pages, but in themselves they are fine in my book. QVFD should be about getting rid of all those one line or one paragraph articles that someone threw up 6 months ago and never touched again. It should be for the no hopers, the cruft, and the stuff that looks like it was written by some 12 year old during his dinner hour. But enough about STM's articles. Lets use QVFD for what is should be for..... -- Sir Mhaille
(talk to me)
- No, I got the first article huffed via regular VFD. I used the term "speed huffed" because it it was posted, voted out, deleted and off the queue in a very short amount of time less than 5 hours I think. Sorry if I was unclear.--Count of Monkey Crisco 18:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Bulk huffing sucks cheese. Hulk buffing, on the other hand, rules!
No, seriously, I hate this stupid deletionism culture >:-( -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 19:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)- Why can't we all just have a sit, hold hands, and plot the downfall of society? Why all the anger? Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 21:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ooh, that would work too. I can help, I have access to a large mallet. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 21:29, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Not great, but not crap. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
- Why do we have to have stupid stuff like 'quality' and 'humour'? Why can't we just keep everything? -- emancipated Ape (construct) (Riot Porn) 21:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- If (part of) the goal is to reduce the number of articles that only relate to each other, have you considered making all but one of the articles sub-articles of the other? --monika 22:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
- Isn't that maybe part of the humour, though? Somebody made up a bunch of articles to cross-reference each other, whch makes the articles seem much more official and encyclopedia-ey. Going back to The Count's comments, though, 5 hours seems like an awfully short time to have completely gone through VFD. --
Spillin DylanTALKEDITS
22:12, Jan 24 2008
- Isn't that maybe part of the humour, though? Somebody made up a bunch of articles to cross-reference each other, whch makes the articles seem much more official and encyclopedia-ey. Going back to The Count's comments, though, 5 hours seems like an awfully short time to have completely gone through VFD. --
