Uncyclopedia:VFH/AIDS (Space Program)

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Re-feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

AIDS (Space Program) (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Article: AIDS (Space Program)	Score: 5 starving Africans
Nominated by:	CartoonDiablo 19:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
For: 8	Self nom and for -- CartoonDiablo For --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN) 21:03, Jan. 12, 2008  For. This is so terrible, it's wonderful. -- \o/ 23:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC) Dig I believe I voted in favor last time also. --THINKER 00:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC) Yea Africa could just learn from the US and fake a moon landing or two. --Dr. Love 06:08, 13 January 2008 Wtfloldongs I want that last image to be the one. It's just... hahaha.     EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank)   06:09, Sunday 13 January 2008   FOR C>L>A>S>S>I>C --DJ Irreverent 13:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC) Oh my God! --THE 18:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)  For.... don't try this at home! --Vana 17:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Against: 3	No --Bassguy 01:27, 13 January 2008 (UTC) Ehhh... Nah... -- Kaizer the Bjorn takkun (nya nya) (1961 model!) Check out T61! 02:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC) Against. Either this sailed further over my head than the average orbiting satellite, or I just didn't find it funny. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 14:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Comments	I'd hate to be niggardly, but is there a pee review for this self nom? -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 01:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC) Ooo, see I'd thought about that too then I remembered the first nom.. perhaps that was before the 1 week on PR rule was implemented.. --THINKER 01:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC) This was peed guys, Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/ AIDS (Space Program)--Æ 01:36, 13 January 2008 (UTC) So then like.. question answered, man.. --THINKER 01:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC) Abstain I put it to you that those men are actually from Irian Jaya or PNG and if there's one thing that gets me abstaining in the strongest possible terms it's erroneous, misleading and trap-of-the-hearting information like this. Shame on you. Sean.hoyland - tak() 13:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC) abstain for now. a good idea, but not executed well enough to be feature-worthy IMO. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 21:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

VFH

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH