Talk:The Aristocrats

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to The Aristocrats. This is also a forum for spreading libelous rumors about the article's subject. This is not a forum for general discussion about what you did last night. We have the Village Dump for things like that.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Uncyclopedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be Civil Assume Bad Faith Don't Be A Dick No Cyberbullying	Article policies How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid Satirical point of view Verifiability vs. Complete Bollocks

It is my hope that other writers on uncyclopedia will be able to add to this well known comedy insider joke, so that it will have it's very own special Uncyclopedia imprint upon it. I have given the basic outlines of the joke, now it is up to you to elaborate on the build up, keeping the punchline intact. As it stands now, as a "clean" joke, it doesn't make much sense nor is it very funny (unless your sense of humor is beyond warped). So, please. Rather than mark this for deletion, see what you can do to make this sick, if not funny. I challenge you.

---

Good god man, I disagree. This joke, at least, on the uncyclopedia, should ALWAYS be clean. I think that's the brilliant part. This is probably the first time I've actually laughed hard at the joke--constantly expecting it to go blue, but having it not. 216.196.193.58 01:57, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

---

Ahahahahahah.. at first I went "What the hell? An accurate entry in Uncyclopedia?", then I read it. I agree with the user above.. this is likely the first time I've actually laughed at this joke! --Dalar 07:33, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

A dirty joke would be accurate. I'm just a newbie but I thought accuracy was a BAD thing in the Uncyclopedia. --Hessef 07:50, 23 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I think that the juxtaposition of what users read and what is expected will only remain funny as long as we continue to vary the joke even beyond simply being clean where users expect filth. I think the intro and finale should be standard across all jokes, but that the middle should be almost random.

This getting progressively more and more funny. C was priceless. D is even funnier, having every ounce of sexual tension contained in C, but raising the stakes considerably, without turning blue. --Marcos_Malo S7fc BOotS | Talk 07:16, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

I find even discussing the joke smacks of the dread seriousness I move that all discussion be made in mock Esperanto. Ee Tinkukinkulon kay ese jokulo eeb plusgood sino la dirticulos perro die dadaisme isis funnyplus-o tambien, oy! Nerdgod 13:19, 24 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Muhaha

Would my version be too dirty to include? I'm thinking it would be... http://www.dead-frog.com/aristocrats/joke.php?id=1275 --Joewithajay 23:17, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Niice

I have a link to this article. I used to link to the wikipedia version but this is so much more. Seán 07:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

My text came out all weird.

For some reason, the example T came out all long. I'm not sure why that happened.

The problem is that you used spaces to indent paragraphs. In a wiki, that formats that text as computer code. Use new lines to indicate new paragraphs. --Sir KP GUN 22:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

What about an Amish Aristocrats article?

Sort of like the Amish tourettes article, except where they turn on lightbulbs, use cell phones, drive around on a motorcycle, etc....