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. |
| Keep |
- Keep Annoying, but that's kind of the point.--Abc 18:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep What the hell is wrong with you people? Get some better computers if your collective panties are in a wad! It needs a better punchline though maybe. Mr. Briggs Inc. 20:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC) Eh?
- Gasp! Strong Keep! One of the meta-humour pages, so not everyone's going to like it, but some of us are great fans of things like this. --
 (but) Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 21:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- KeepWhy delete it? The article is a good idea in my opinion Randomator 21:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's meta. Which is what the hip kids call cool, nowadays. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 02:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Though metahumour is kind of wearing thin.Rogpyvbc 03:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep There's nothing wrong with it, per say. Sir Judgement F@H UmP VFH {talk} 05:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep but rewrite Take away the stupid punchline; make it something funny.--
 » >ZEROTROUSERS!!! EAT ME!!!! CRAZY PERSON! SMELLY!!! ILLOGIC, BEHOLD!!!!~» 09:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Nom & Beleat. The only POSSIBLE use I see for an annoying page such as this is trolling. I put it to the voters rather than deleting it outright.--<<
 >> 14:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete
 Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 15:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Original, but by god it's annoying. RabbiTechno 15:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Huff - It insulted my amazing 4GBs of RAM HOW DARE IT!!! Capercorn 15:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, didn't do my 256megs much good either! RabbiTechno 15:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Kept; voting closed. —RT. HON. HINOA, KNIGHT COMMANDER OF THE ORDER (BEG FOR MERCY)11:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete Why not? – Smiddle 14:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Execute - Yup, the Capercorn Trials continue. This is a bad article, short, and stupid and has way too much German. Capercorn 23:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- nazijokes=instahuff. I'm sick of this shit --
 » >UF|TLK|▋» 01:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Raze to the Ground - It's just not funny. --Sir Judgement F@H UmP VFH {talk} 05:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete- What a load of rubbish! Randomator 07:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 11:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. -- Mitch
 11:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Executed; voting closed. —RT. HON. HINOA, KNIGHT COMMANDER OF THE ORDER (BEG FOR MERCY)11:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Nom and Delete Shitty satire and no hope for adding substance. TheLemonOfIchabod 06:25, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep this is Uncyclopedia, not Wikipedia.SteveSims 21:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete as per comments. ----OEJ 02:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - hmm, I wonder if deleted articles count towards the 15... Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 02:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- --Uh-oh, I dint count. ----OEJ 02:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete to save the author from wasting huge amounts of time. Also Delete other pages and the two templates. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete
- Schoolcruft --General Insineratehymn 00:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- This article is the "home" article of what appears to be a recently initiated set of articles on an Illinois highschool. Currently it appears the author plans 8 articles in the series, and has started on 3 (counting the main article). They are properly tagged as under construction; the question is, does the community wish to allow these articles to go forward? (As far as I am concerned, 'tis vanity and God knows we don't need to establish a precedent of allowing in-depth articles on kids' local highschools.) ----OEJ 02:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- It always bothers me that there's no official way to say to somebody "look, this article is unlikely to ever be funny, so please don't waste days and days on it unless you know something we don't." Technically I guess we shouldn't have this on here yet but I get your point. Perhaps a reminder of our vanity policies on User:MackMan's talk page would be good? -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 12:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted —Braydie 07:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete - I see no real humour in this. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete When it was young, this article went on a magical journey. (Paragraph of waffle.) Then it came home and was still crap. The End. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Deleted —Braydie 07:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Part of this appears to be plagiarized. Two of the paragraphs appear verbatim here. The rest of it is in no way parodic, satirical, or comedic. It reads like a report someone wrote for school. ----OEJ 03:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Excalibrate True, or close enough. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete It's too bizzare and not funny enough Randomator 21:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete --General Insineratehymn 00:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete - Hopefully the last of many articles beginning with D I will put on here...for now. I will move on to other letters of the alphabet soon. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- DeleteRogpyvbc 06:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Short, non-notable. ----OEJ 15:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Aww - look what you drew! Is it a bird? No mummy, it's a Dinopus!! Well, that's the best drawing of a dinopus I've ever seen! Etc. I promise I'm not drunk or nothing; it's just a funny mood I'm in tonight...! -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- this poop is very shitty --» >UF|TLK|▋» 00:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, but keep the image. It's so bad, it's good. -- Mustkillroy
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Vanity. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:09, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Yes, vanity. The forum referenced is here. There is a user "RarewareFan" and moderators "Sean" and "Behonkiss", so the vanity article is probably referring to specific forum members. ----OEJ 15:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Hello old GameFAQs article. How I have missed you. Must you leave again so soon? Oh well, never mind. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Not exactly sure what this article is, but it seems to be vandalized a lot in its own little way. The original wasn't a keeper, anyway. --TKF 03:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, but will probably succumb to QVFD anyway. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 03:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- STRONG KEEP This is an excellent, laugh-your-ass off article that has length AND oomph, and a few politically correct, sexually ambiguous critics shouldn't be allowed to ruin other people's fun just because they're against free speech and lack a sense of humor. Why do people like that access Uncyclopedia, anyway? Little Bo 01:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)Little Bo
- Keep - God, it's awful, but FUNNY - it's godawful funny!!!' Weebils 01:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Weebils
- UBER-KEEPCapercorn 15:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Sir OCdt Jedravent CUN UmP VFH PLS ACS WH 01:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Keep "Dude looks like a lady!" just delete the dupe article A Guide to Discerning True Women and make it a redirect to this one. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 14:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete Okay, last one. Seems like just a rant to me - maybe somebody had a bad experience? -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 11:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete I reverted this after it got vandalised the other day. Then I read it and thought, "why did I bother?" It's not funny and, as the lady says, just a fairly pathetic rant. Hang on, you are a lady, aren't you? ;) RabbiTechno 15:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Kill. ~
 15:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Interesting nomination. It's better-written than many articles, and longer, and has more illustrations. I don't like it very much, but that's just taste and not an indication of quality. Hmmm. Interesting. --OEJ 19:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- It seemed rather bad irrespective of taste to me, although I'll admit it isn't to mine. The pictures didn't really help to convince me of its merits, to be honest - seems like a place for said person to store the pictures they like to look at to suppress the memories... -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 20:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Having said all that, maybe we should keep it around on here for slightly longer than we might otherwise, and see if anybody (sane) with the right kind of taste turns up to argue for it...? -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 20:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Strange, I don't think the nommie to VFD was unreasonable, but I don't feel strongly enough to vote either pro or con. I just decided to watch the community in action and let the gender reassignment chips fall where they may. --OEJ 02:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep - it's good and la de dah. Weebils 01:41, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Weebils, see my longer comments below, under Sonia Gandhi. This particular article appears to fall under the Uncyclopedia:Vanity Policies, ie, it is an article about someone's favorite webforum. It fails the simplest test for vanity: there is no Wikipedia article on it. It is very likely therefore non-notable and of interest only to the people who frequent that particular forum. --OEJ 02:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- KEEP - another funny article that's incurred the wrath of impotent, wannab humorists nd critics. Weebils 14:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Short, unfunny, and no one has ever heard of the place. --General Insineratehymn 16:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete What he said. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 19:04, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete What they said.Rogpyvbc 00:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Lost me at "the". Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 01:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Short, badly written, no images, smells like toe jam. ----OEJ 17:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Deleted —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- KEEP - another funny article that's incurred the wrath of impotent, wannab humorists nd critics. Weebils 14:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete. Not satire, not funny, insulting piece written primarily by a large number of one-time or short-term editors identified only with IP addresses.Rogpyvbc 00:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. I've used "'tard" on a couple of pages. I hope that those were funnier than this. (Note: They were. True story.) Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 01:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 05:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- More or less the Strongest delete I've ever voted. A horrible article that's just got worse over the years. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 14:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Roman Dog Bird 00:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Deleted.. —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- KEEP - another funny article that's incurred the wrath of impotent, wannab humorists nd critics. Weebils 14:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
Deleted —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- KEEP - another funny article that's incurred the wrath of impotent, wannab humorists nd critics. Weebils 14:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- This page should be a serious vote on deleting after people read and think about each article, and not used just to automatically vote to keep everything. Weebles, do you actually read the stuff you vote on? Rogpyvbc 17:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- A gamer with writing powers could really make this a decent article. Weebils could do it if he wanted to. ----OEJ 17:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Kept —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- The only reason I didn't just delete it was a vague fear I might be missing something? Don't think I am though... -- sannse (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- I don't care. Regardless of whether it has any relevance or not, I think this article is crap. Delete. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- I think it's about the Stephen King novel/film, if that's what you were missing. I've only got a vague idea of the plot though, so I'm not sure I should vote delete in case I'm missing something too... Do tell, somebody more well-read. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 00:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- KEEP - another funny article that's incurred the wrath of impotent, wannab humorists nd critics. Weebils 14:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Execute - My two arch nemiises, Nazis and Commies wraped up in one! Capercorn 15:55, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Or rather wrapped up in two. Very different articles, but both bad in their own ways. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 18:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- nazi jokes are getting dreadfully dull thanks to this crap --» >UF|TLK|▋» 22:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Commu-nazi. Short and randumb. I abstain from Commi-Nazi, however. (Don't think it's worth much, don't find it worthless either.)----OEJ 17:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- In the Soviet Russia, Nazi's delete YOU!--Scott 23:40, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Deleted —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- KEEP - another funny article that's incurred the wrath of impotent, wannab humorists nd critics. Weebils 14:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 03:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Says "molest" in every paragraph, and then starts talking about specific people from GameFAQs. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 17:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. This article is very badly written: for example, "critisizm" is not a word in English, French, Spanish, Urdu, or Martian. Neither is "unleaseshed" or "defencless" or "enviromentalests". The phrase "women went on an outrage" is just wrong; the writer probably meant "women went on a rampage". And the bulk of the article is dumb preteen sex-talk. Christ almighty, this is a bad article. ----OEJ 17:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Shit, pure shit. Roman Dog Bird 00:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yuck --General Insineratehymn 00:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Nytrospawn'd —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
|
| Delete |
- Delete Rogpyvbc 02:29, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't know why people think character assassination referencing genitals and sexual habits equals humor. It's stupid. The article in question here is short, pathetically vicious, lacks pics, and displays the wit of gravel. ----OEJ 03:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - OEJ, don't you think the comparison you made is an insult to gravel? I certainly do. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 04:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Blah blah penis blah blah porn star etc. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Crappy stub. ~ QUILz ( talk | contrib ) 15:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
Nytrospawn'd —Braydie 18:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep This article is absolute genious, you need to be a part of this school to understand it. It is hella funny. Aznphatb0i 18:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- That's exactly why it can't stay - it's funny exclusively to a tiny minority, while being an absolutely huge article that takes up lots of reverting time. Incidentally, I don't think you're going to help your case by vandalising my votes on this or other articles. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 19:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and vanity-tag the hell out of it. It is badly written (the authors need to pay attention in English class) but Wickedpedia has a long article on it and the author(s) spent some time on parodying their school. But vanity tag the sucker. Wait, I'll do it.--OEJ 19:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- KEEP - I think it's funny, too, and I'm not a minority. Weebils 01:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Weebils
- Keep-Girls and Boys are not allowed to leave the cafeteria after dinner at the same time, as it is highly likely that the boys will abduct the girls, take them into the bushes and impregnate them in a matter of seconds.Witt,
 of  UNion Entertain me* 05:40, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- WAIT A DAMN MINNIT -- if Aznphatb0i has been vandalizing votes someone needs to get out the banhammer. I see only two edits to the VFD page on the user's contribution page, so it may have been a case of first-offense offensiveness. --OEJ 20:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I checked the contrib log. Looks like two tampering incidents 6 minutes apart. Not good behavior, Aznphatb0i.--OEJ 20:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep, but rewrite The article is bad, but it is on a topic Uncyc should have a subject on. Jedibob5 12:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ditto It would be replaced by something much worse within the day. Has some funny stuff in there too even though I don't know much about the subject. And long and rambly just means it's in need of a good haircut. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 18:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - it's fine just the way it is. Weebils 02:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Weebils
- Keep - It just needs to be rewritten. Mustkillroy
|
| Delete |
- too long, too stupid --» >UF|TLK|▋» 18:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete for its ramblyness, but keep that Bosch picture. --Smrt-guy 01:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Huff - It r teh suck. Capercorn 02:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep One of those indefinably funny ones: "Later, Barnflimper earned praise from foreign policy experts for his decision to withdraw all troops from Iraq and attack Norway instead, for the fish." -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- The most tentative Keep I can muster. Bits have humor potential. Also, I was a bit harsh on the last article. --Smrt-guy 01:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- STRONG KEEP - it's wikiwonderful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Weebils 02:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Weebils
|
| Delete |
- Delete Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 05:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ~ 16:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Another attempt to be funny by stringing together random made-up facts. (Note: The writer's username is also Barnflimper) Rogpyvbc 01:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Abstain It needs lots of help in having a coherent story that keeps it "together" and a lot of the pointless randomness needs to either be humourously explained or removed. If you do remove it, you're not left with much, but what's left is potentially funny. Maybe we could just lift the jokes off this and stuff them on a page of another politician who has a coherent backstory but lacks zing? -Drdisque 07:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
Keep - why would anyone want to delete it??????????? Weebils 01:57, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Weebils
|
| Delete |
- Delete I don't know who she is, but a large number of people seem to dislike her very much... -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - I saw the older revisions. They was crap. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 14:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Yeah, the version here is representative of the longer-but-nastier early versions. --OEJ 19:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Short. Previous versions were drivel. Blarch --
 Alksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 06:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Rogpyvbc 01:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- In general, Weebils, articles arrive on the Vote For Deletion page because they are 1) no longer being actively developed; 2) underdeveloped to the point of helplessness, 3) very badly written, 4) gratuitously obscene or offensive, or 5) about somebody's otherwise non-notable school, friends, enemy, webpage, forum, garage band, or whatever. As with a non-parody encyclopedia, Uncyc articles should be reasonably well-developed, take something notable or at least non-personal for their subject, and not be offensive for no particular reason. The current version of Sonia Gandhi fits the second criterion: it is so badly underdeveloped it is uninteresting. The earlier version of the article fit the third and fourth criteria: it was needlessly obscene and offensive, and very badly written to boot.
- For the past year and a half Uncyc has moved beyond an "anything goes" Wiki: the earliest articles were sometimes very short and very badly written and were not deleted, but that is no longer the case. As far as I know Uncyc is the largest and best parody encyclopedia online. We have received some notice in other media, and we try to maintain some standards. This article, and most of the others you have voted "Keep" on, do not in my opinion meet those standards.
- Have a look at Uncyclopedia:How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid for more advice on what makes quality writing. --OEJ 02:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Later: Sorry, Weebils, I assumed you had not been around enough to know about the basic policies. I see from your contributions history that you've done quite a lot since early December. You've not done much on the VFD page, though, so perhaps you're not as familiar with it and its policies as you are with other areas of Uncyc. At any rate, I did not mean to talk down to you. Sorry if it came across that way. --OEJ 03:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, VFD should come with a warning: "Viewers who don't like throwing things away may find some scenes disturbing. By the way OEJ, is (1) really a criteria by itself? -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 08:52, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- No, you're right, I think #1 is not a separate criteria and I should have listed it as a kind of precondition or something. That was sloppy writing, and sloppy writing indicates sloppy thinking, and sloppy thinking indicates -- oh damn, I just spilled tomato-turnip chowder all over my shirt, pants, shoes, carpet, dog, and the state capitol -- sloppy personal habits. --OEJ 15:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep -- it's funny as is and doesn't need to be rewritten. Weebils 01:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete - A bit funny, could be rewritten if anyone actually knows who this guy is... Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 15:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Quite bad, actually. Added the VFD tag.--OEJ 19:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per the "mentioning rape = likely crap" rule. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:15, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Just stupid, really.Rogpyvbc 00:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep - no reasons to delete, just people's "opinions," "feelings," and "tastes"Weebils 01:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Weebils
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep - another good article for which there is no reason to drop an axe, sword, knife, or lip. Weebils 01:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
KEEP, Keep, keep Weebils Weebils
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- * Keep It's fine. It's funny. It's a wiki!Weebils 01:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Because one is certainly enough. ~ 16:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. ...and we already have many more than one Hitler. This one has one (1) idea which it regurgitates from start to finish. Bleah.--OEJ 20:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Delete Just about. I think I have low standards for articles with Hitler in the title. Or maybe just a weakness for time travel. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Execute - huff. Capercorn 14:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
|
| Keep |
- Keep, please - love @ 1st sight. Weebils 01:38, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
- Delete - appears to be vanity. Sir Cs1987 UOTM. t. c 15:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Wickedpedia has a stub on a hammer-dulcimer player with this name but it appears to be unrelated. The article to hand is just stupid and nasty. --OEJ 19:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Ugh. Weebils, if you're voting to keep this, there is nothing you will ever vote to delete. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Comments |
- Weebils: See my comments under Sonia Gandhi. This article is almost certainly an example of cyber-bullying -- beating up on a private party for personal reasons. Uncyc's policy on cyberbullying is explained in Cyberbullying: Not funny, not cool, not acceptable. Period. That's probably why it was nominated to VFD. Uncyc allows articles on public persons, even if they're darned unflattering; we DO NOT allow attacks by name on private people. --OEJ 02:53, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
- Gone. -- The Zombiebaron 14:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep it; it's funny.Weebils 01:39, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Gone, and yes Strange but untrue, it was a headshot. -- The Zombiebaron 15:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
|
| Keep |
- Keep I laughed rather a lot. Good little satire on scientists with a decent punchline too. I'm tidying it up a bit. -- (but)
Untrue Whhhy?Whut?How? *Back from the dead* 09:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- keep it's OK
 » His Majesty King George VI (the boxes)     21:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- tidy&keep I agree with Strange But Untrue. Videshi 00:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I like it, it just needs to fit in with the rest of UP better. -Drdisque 07:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
|
| Delete |
|
| Comments |
- Give it a 7-day stay for Strange to save it. --Smrt-guy 01:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
|
