From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This page is an archive. The contents have been moved from another page for reference purposes only, and should be preserved in their current form. Discussion or voting on this page is not current. Any additions you make will probably not be read. The current version of this page can be found at Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion. |
Dragon Ball GT
:Image:Ugly man 2.jpg, Image:Yo Momma.jpg and Image:Uglything1.jpg (don't click these links!)
| Keep |
- Keep I don't support deleting images, although someone should take care of repeat images. I believe that should be done by directing all the uses of the same image linking to the same file, then putting the redundant, and now orphan, image file(s) on QVFD. As a rule, images should be removed by orphanization, then deletion by reason of being unused. --Mnbvcxz 07:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Fuck yes - The blue linked one, that is. The red linked ones can go. -- Thankful Kippy
 Share blessings Bountiful harvest 22:13, Jan. 1, 2009
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
Comment. Okay, rather than this way, here's how you do it. On pages that have these images, replace them all with one version of the image, then list the rest on QVFD as "redundant images". Any other way just makes me sad. Do you want to see me cry? I realize that you just said basically the same thing, mdnbk3xz, but you probably should've realized that you had the solution when you said it yourself, before I said it here after you did. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 07:42, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- My problem is that none of these images are needed. None of them really add anything constructive to the articles they're used in. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 10:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- We are talking about Uncyclopedia, right? Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:17, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- No, were talking about Injokipedia, Bandwagonpedia, Meme-opedia... -Bot of an unregistered user 11:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
(arbitrary outdent) Why were we told not to click these links? This doesn't seem to qualify as a shock image. (I am neutral as to deletion.) --Pentium5dot1|t~^_^~c 17:20, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- If I would see something like that in real life, I would be totally shocked! -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep'd, partly. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Short and unfunny. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 18:28, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete--Romartus 20:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Needs to be surgically removed.
- Delete. Stub that didn't interest me in the slightest. --UU - natter
 20:32, Dec 31
|
| Comments |
- It looks like this had an expand tag that was removed by MrN9000 recently. Therefore, there might be some hidden in-joke in there that I don't see. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 19:00, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- I think he just did that because he thought nobody and more specifically the original author(s) was gonna expand it anyway. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 19:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- The expansion tag is a maintenance tag, meaning if the article is left unedited for 30 days with that tag, it might be deleted by an admin. Its actually supposed to go on articles that are abandoned or might be abandoned in the near future.
P.S. I'm probably going to vote delete as long as there isn't some secret and mysterious reason why this article should be kept. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 19:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- I doubt most people would really use the template that way. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 20:32, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
|
Mythical United States Presidents
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Undecided, conditional delete I hate legacycruft, but if we do get rid of this, we'd also need to get rid of every reference to it in all the articles or it leave the wiki in a worse state than before. Partial remnants of b.s. succession lists are even more annoying the b.s. succession lists themselves. Before we do this, how doing a test run by attempting to purge the much shorter and younger United_States_Emperors b.s. succession list from the wiki? --Mnbvcxz 02:41, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- If you take a look at the edit list, its been hanging around since 2005, mostly with people reverting vandalism edits. The same mentaility that created this list is the same one that created the Zsa Zsa Gabor that was nomm'd for deletion. Dame
 GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 02:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'd vote delete, on the condition that the template also be deleted, as well as the individual succession tables and other references in the articles of the mythical presidents, except when the article depends on the mythical presidency. However, that would probably go a bit beyond the scope of VFD, as it would affect several articles. I'd suggest bringing it up in the forum, but that would probably only result in the discussion going nowhere, the status-quo winning by default, the conversation degenerating into babbling, ending with boobage spam.
Anyway, I'd support deletion as long the admins support a Damnatio memoriae against this article. --Mnbvcxz 04:14, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep. In 2008 I wrote that thing that one time. It was awesome. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 14:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. And I wrote some stuff about Ruffles. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 15:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep because other people said so. --Mnbvcxz 15:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep or redirect to the timeline (can't believe someone hasn't said that yet!). It's certainly no worse than 2007. –—Hv (talk) 1/01 23:03
 Keep. - I don't nuke my dates, I repell them... — Sir Sycamore (talk) 15:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
Kept, if only for nostalgia's sake. - T.L.B.  WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 16:11, Jan 2
|
The Hobo Prince
| Keep |
--Romartus 20:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Writer shows knowledge - even if the humour looks obscure. Invite them to rewrite ?
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Comment to Romartus the bulk of the writing was done of Oct 17, 2005, and only minor formatting fixes have been done since then. Also, the writer is an ip address, who has made no other contributions to this wiki besides one small edit in the anniversaries section a few days before this on Oct 12, 2005. We can't invite the author to re-write because we don't know who he is (ip addresses change over time) and he is, in all likelihood, not on this wiki any more.
I normally check the edit history of an article before nominating it on VFD. Ff it looks like someone is still working on an article, I normally wouldn't nominate or vote for it, unless it was totally beyond redemption. This article has not had any real changes in 3 years, 2 months, 15 days. --Mnbvcxz 20:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- ||Keep||--Romartus 20:21, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Can this be saved by radical surgery ? Would leave a hole in the sequence of fictional American Presidents.
- KEEP!!!!! The woman starred in Queen of Outter Space! Does she deserve to be deleted? Nay! She should be venerated! Rewrite!!!! Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 22:26, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Strong Keep because they said so. Some of the material might be helpful in a rewrite. --Mnbvcxz 22:59, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Edit: It appears to have already been rewritten. --Mnbvcxz 14:41, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep. Another superb rescue job by PP. --UU - natter 09:23, Jan 2
- keep and feature — Sir Sycamore (talk) 16:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
Abstain This is a perfect example of what uncyclopedia looked like in 2005. I'd say abstain right now because her name is on the mythical list of presidents of the united states, and notable subject matter. Maybe a re-write is in order.--Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 21:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)- REWRITTEN and even while it could stand some plumping up, its better than it was before hand. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 01:24, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Kept -- The Zombiebaron 08:01, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Is there anything good about this article? -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 18:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete --Romartus 20:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC). Should have been drowned at birth.
- Delete. Bandcruft. The usual mix of unfunny fan comments and childish hate comments. Will just attract more. --UU - natter 20:40, Dec 31
- I'm voting to delete in spite of the active edit history. 'Cos it sucks. IronLung 07:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 Delete. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 14:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- It looks like its still being worked on. Maybe slap a fix and/or construction tag and see what happens. Its bad, and in all honesty, the ip editor is probably not going to improve it, but we should give him time to fix it. VFD is generally for stuff nobody cares about or stuff that completely beyond redemption. If this article didn't have an active edit history, I'd definitely vote delete.--Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 19:07, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Well, on one hand, I think this is one of those bands that really deserves an acticle (and all the jeering that comes with it), but, on the other hand, I somehow have a feeling that we just don't have enough band geeks here to improve it. -- The Colonel (talk) 11:53, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment it appears to have been VFD'd and then recreated before this discussion was archived. It currently has a {{ICU}} tag. --Mnbvcxz 15:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
Barry Scott
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Upon consulting the corresponding wikipedia article, I discovered that this man is of no interest to anybody. This article is basically a really horrible attempt at a meme. IronLung 07:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete per above. --Mnbvcxz 07:49, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Not exactly, IronLung - a whole bunch of folk in the UK know him for an incredibly irritating advert that's pretty much a UK meme already. However, the page, like the advert, is shite, and has no redeeming value. Therefore: BANG! And the article is gone. --UU - natter 10:15, Jan 1
- Delete -- Thankful Kippy Share blessings Bountiful harvest 22:18, Jan. 1, 2009
|
| Comments |
|
Unquotable:Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. This is far worse than the actual article on Ms. Macapagal-Arroyo that was moved to user space (presumably moved - I haven't been paying much attention lately). What's more, many of the quotes are real, even with citations... Horrendous! c • > • cunwapquc? 18:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- -Romartus 20:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC) delete
- Delete. Listy, unfunny, not any good. --UU - natter 20:59, Dec 31
- Yes. By which I mean, no. IronLung 07:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Aren't Unquotables listy by design? Anyway, delete, this is terrible. –—Hv (talk) 1/01 10:51
|
| Comments |
|
Pi University
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
 This has absolutely nothing to do with this article, unless somebody's gonna delete it. |
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep it uses irony. Could stand a rewrite and an expansion. --Mnbvcxz 23:49, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Potential, and two paragraphs of decent execution. I'll call that a keep. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 00:48, Dec 31
- Keep --Romartus 20:28, 31 December 2008 (UTC). It does have potential but who wants to expand it ?
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
I acknowledge that its initial concept has some potential, but it suffers from an awful execution. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 00:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Bad execution is not a reason for VFD. Generally, only articles with no value whatsoever should be deleted on VFD.--Mnbvcxz 00:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- If you check some of the archives, you may find that a bad execution is considered relevant to deleting articles. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 00:50, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- This was sort of a border-line case, but I still say most users would probably vote keep. --Mnbvcxz 01:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Fine, fine. Invalid nom. I'll put a rewrite template on it. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 00:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Uh, isn't it admins who put the VFDc template on and declare noms closed? I certainly wait for adminny types to do so before smithing it away. It is an invalid nom though, as there's no VFD template on it. --UU - natter 20:54, Dec 31
- I thought I'd save the adminny types the trouble and close the nomination, since it was so obviously invalid. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 21:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 00:48, Dec 31
- Keep. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 03:04, Dec 31
- Keep. Used userspace template. Don't much like it, but hey. Also, no VFD template, so isn't this an invalid nom? --UU - natter 20:50, Dec 31
- Keep Invalid nom, I don't like deleting templates, and 3 other people said keep. --Mnbvcxz 07:17, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep This is the perfect badge of irony. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 22:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
- Keep -RAHB 05:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- I thought we had a policy of not deleting user-space templates. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 21:57, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keept - Unvalid, voted kept, and is all the fuck over the place. -RAHB 05:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
|
Mac OS Z
| Keep |
- ||Keep||--Romartus 20:19, 31 December 2008 (UTC) Dan Dan the Rewrite man ?
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Not much content, not really funny. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 21:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete per above, random, made up subject. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 21:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete -- Thankful Kippy Share blessings Bountiful harvest 13:55, Dec. 31, 2008
- Delete. Short, unfunny, easy call. --UU - natter 20:45, Dec 31
- Kill. IronLung 07:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
Aufstralia
| Keep |
- Keep gets by on cuteness. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 14:03, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 17:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Are admins going to huff this book‽—Flutter (Talk•Games•Fun Pages•Awards•Help) 06:14, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Vague keep. Redlinks and lists and suchlike, but something about it tickled me, although I'd be hard pressed to say why. Maybe it's that mythical christmas spirit, but I'm not bothered about seeing this go. --UU - natter 20:30, Dec 31
- Keep--Romartus 20:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC). A lot of work has gone into this - though I think it could do with some editing. It is a bit of a one joke idea though - stretched out a long way. Is there a place here like purgatory where half bad/half good articles can go until their souls are purged of the unfunny virus ?
|
| Delete |
- HUFF THIS SHIT! This isn't funny. ._. ƨofia;; bitch at me here;; ;] 04:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC) 04:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Oscar Wilde is the last refuge of the unimaginative. Parsat (talk / contribs) 05:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Keep'd. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:18, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete.. If decoded, all it says is: "All people are gay i wants to fuck pamela anderson paris hilton lindsy lohan and my mom all of witch makes me a sick perverted moron" over and over again. Encrypted crap is still crap.--Meta 500 03:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Kept. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 23:21, Dec 29
|
| Keep |
- Keep Very funny. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 03:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep funny in its own way. I could see how someone could find this stupid, but I could also see how someone could find it funny. VFD is about getting rid of useless clutter, not moderately low quality articles. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 03:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. As long as Wikipedia has a page on ducks we need a page on Wikipedia's page on ducks. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 03:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. The first one is not up to much, but the series which this initiates is good. --
 15Mickey20  (Ho ho ho to Mickey) 15:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 19:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Unique in a funny way. --Capercorn FLAME! what? UNATO OWS 03:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
- Fucking KEEP. The page and its series made me laugh, a lot. I'm tempted to VFH this, honestly, and if someone wants to flesh out the series a bit I'll definitely vote for it there. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 05:38, Dec 29
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
 Comment.. What about the entire chain of these articles? 1, 2, 3.--Meta 500 03:21, 28 December 2008 (UTC)- That's what makes this funny. It is a true parody of something on Wikipedia. You know, that thing Uncyclopedia is suppose to be parodying. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 03:31, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Still, I think they could use a touchup. -Meta 500 14:24, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- KKKept --
 TKFU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK  05:42, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
|
Potato brigade
Real time
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Abstain for now It looks like random nonsense, but I get the feeling that there may be something hiding in that article. I don't vote delete unless I'm fairly sure its crap. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 03:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
|
Coke, Mentos, and World Domination
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Orphaned, NRV, stupid. IronLung 07:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- ?Pedia. Might like it. MrN
 13:06, Dec 27
- Huff - On our way to a better future. --Capercorn FLAME! what? UNATO OWS 21:25, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
- De-1337. Could have potential. Too bad that as it is, it's a piece of crap, and I'm too lazy to do anything with it except vote to have it destroyed. --EMC [TALK] 03:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 19:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Cripes -- TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 05:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Utter bullpiss of the highest order. --Nachlader 00:44, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Delete This is not a game --   01:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Comment - This actually IS a game, if you had bothered to click that link. Also: I've added the VFD template to it.--Uncreative Username 01:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
- I was being sarcastic but since my colleagues feel strongly about keeping it, I'm retracting my vote.-- 15:43, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Abstain I just found it funny for some reason.--Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 01:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Kept - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 05:40, Dec 29
|
Roswell, New Mexico
Night of the Living Dead
Pop
| Keep |
- Keep.The version we have now is a unfunnyized version, but I like the older versions.(note:I am not british)~ [Citation Needed is here. Let's talk.] 19:49, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Per above because someone else said so.--Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 20:50, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Not even one of its older versions is worth keeping. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 00:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Kerkill I see no old versions that are funny. And the current one is stupid as well. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 07:51, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Stupid and short. I don't think the person was trying to be funny. --Kareljanis 12:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete.--Sycamore (Talk) 18:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. This version is short and sucks, older versions are largely longer due to being listy, and they also suck. --UU - natter 08:38, Dec 23
- Delete- Short, dull, and pointless.----Metalhead94 T C 21:10, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
- Huff - Bye bye. --Capercorn FLAME! what? UNATO OWS 21:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Abstain British subject, and its a lot longer in the older versions. I'd wait to see what an British person thinks of it before voting delete.--Mnbvcxz 01:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
|
Annihilate! -
Keep. — 
Comment.. What about the entire chain of these articles? 
){kind=link}
