Keep |
- Keep. It's fine. It's at least as good as, if not better than, the derivative Britney article. pillow talk 04:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with Zombiebaron, but I agree with Hyperbole. Heck, I agree with everyone! Agreement hug! --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)
- Keep. I agree with me. Who says this is good. And Enzo Aquarius on this article's talk page, who also quite likes it. I don't agree with Taco Wiz. Come up with your own idea for an UnNews next time dude. --UU - natter 08:53, Aug 21
- Keep Not that it impressed me all that much, but it's certainly a solid article, and not crap. -RAHB 09:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- strong keep. i thought this was rather well done, so i checked the history...it's a THE classic! SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 13:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- What the shit Rather good, even if I don't know who the fuck she is --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 13:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
|
Comments |
- I mean, the article is stupid, but why delete some old UnNews that nobody cares about anyway? There is no point in putting ICU/NRVs on UnNewses or putting them up for deletion because soon enough everyone will forget about them forever. Seriously. And Taco, by the way, I think you just realized that there was some article dangerously similar to yours and wanted it gone. And, I took your article out of the Recent UnNews because you this was your first UnNews, and it wasn't too sharp. It took me twenty before I started putting my articles on there. I just had to refine my skills. Don't rush to put your articles on the template, just hone your skills and then feel free. As for now, don't do it. ~ Readmesoon
- Thanks for the input Readmesoon. I, however, don't really see where your opinion on this matter comes from. Nowhere does it say that only experienced users can put their articles onto the the RecentNews and RecentArticle templates. In fact, I think more people should put their articles on those templates, but they don't know that those templates exist. So, how about in the future, when you decide to start enforcing made up policies, you consider the second rule first. -- The Zombiebaron 05:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I think the policy is that, since we don't have a feature system for UnNews, editors are encouraged to take articles out of the template if they think they suck. No? pillow talk 07:24, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Not really. Unless it's complete and utter rubbish (one liner/OMFG GAYZ/etc) we shouldn't take anything out, everyone has a place here and everyone has the same editorial rights as everyone else.~ 12:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- I have seen quite a few UnNews removed from the template by various people over the months I have been around. I for one thought that it was normal practice for people to keep an eye on what was there, and remove as they saw fit. Maybe this point needs further discussion or clarification? MrN 13:58, Aug 21
- As most things here, I'd say common sense. If it's not horrendously bad, let it be. I don't see anything bad with a noob trying to publicize his/hers Unnews bit. It's not different from the recent articles part. We don't need yet another set of rules. ~ 14:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Just for the record, I really don't like the concept that it takes hours and hours of work, followed by a sometimes-month-long VFH process, to get on the front page... unless you're writing in the UnNews space. Then it just has to be "not horrendously bad." When I've mentioned this before, I've got the answer "Oh, we just informally police the template to keep it high-quality." Now I'm being told that we don't and shouldn't do that. pillow talk 14:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Remember the days when you were new here? Would you like a fellow editor, who is not an admin, to remove something you were so happy that got two lines, which is nothing like a feature, on the first page, just because you're new and your not up to some of the users' standards? Personally I don't like imposing strict codes of what some people consider to be quality writing (again, not referring to the obvious crap) because a. the front page is not a holy temple b.this site is not about VFH and c.humor is subjective. For this specific case, I'd discuss it with the writer on his talk page, and make some suggestions regarding the article - and not remove his entry just because I think he's not good enough. Again, Recent Unnews is like recent articles, it has no official status for all parties who find it offensive. ~ 15:51, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Kept. Voting closed. ~ 17:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
|