Uncyclopedia:VFH/Chuck Norris

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Re-feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

Chuck Norris (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Article: Chuck Norris	Score: 16 Tedious memés.
Nominated by:	nom P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:33, Sep 9, 2007
For: 20	nom + 4 Chuck Norris has finally been given the respect His Holiness deserves! P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:33, Sep 9, 2007 I've taken up meditation lately. It really feels great. Ж Kalir with all the grace of a tin can 02:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Self-for-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 14:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC) FRO because i said so.--Oh Nut. 14:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Dig a little per RAHB on some parts, but still quite funny.. definitely enough for my vote. --THINKER 16:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC) For Far superior to the original. --General Insineratehymn 19:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC) For The original article was embarrassingly awful. This is still Chuck Norris, but somehow it's great. The Oblong Lobster 19:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC) As much as I'm a fan of [Norris], this article is written decently enough to be worthy of a feature     EugeneKay wuz here (whine thank)   22:26, 9 September 2007 (UTC)   Conditional For - As long as this article remains at least 99.9% meme-free for the next 6 months, I'll be fine with it being featured. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN • Capt.) 02:00, September 10, 2007 Conditional For. As soon as this hits the front page it's gonna get raped twice as hard as it might be now. It needs to be semi-protected during its 2-day stay. ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 10/09/2007 @ 02:22 For with funk this is a lot better than what it was --Pie-tony 16:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC) For oh yeah...he'd kill the VFH with his pinky. Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) For Very nice --Masterd 20:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC) Yep ~ 21:26, 10 September 2007 (UTC) For. -- Mitch 04:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC) For It's good, finally! • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 19:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC) For. -- The Zombiebaron 22:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC) For Why not? Well, dignity, but who really takes that into account anymore... --Señor DiZtheGreat  CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 22:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC) For Tons better than the last version and I liked the "Life as a meme" section. Now how long till it gets vandalised?... -- (Bonner) (Talk) 22:37, 15 September 2007 (UTC) For I can't sleep at night without voting for Chuck. He'll come and get me! --- UnIdiot | | Talk | Contribs - 02:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Against: 4	Against You guys seriously think that just because the article got rewritten from subpar quality to par quality, that it is suddenly deserving to be featured?--Little Jimmy 07:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Weak against -- 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 11:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC) Another weak against. Its a million times better than the old page, and its going to be featured anyway, but it just doesn't say front page for me. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) Yet another weak against. Don't tell Chuck. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 03:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Comments	Abstain I'm very glad that it was rewritten. And in comparison to the old version of the article, this is literary genius. Unfortunately, I don't find it very funny. I'm all for its feature, if others find it featurable, so I won't vote against, and in fact this article is a sign that Uncyc is really becoming a better site every day, eliminating the petty memes that once cluttered the site. I just can't bring myself to for it though, keeping in the tradition of wanting to put the funniest articles on the main page. It's still a great rewrite though, and I hope it stays for a long time. -RAHB 03:12, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Abs. Woah, spooky, came back from reading the article with a comment in mind, only to find RAHB had already written it. Some time ago. /me takes hat off to RAHB's precognitive mind-reading powers. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 11:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Yeah, I'm good at that. For example, I know that some time in the next week, you'll masturbate. Watch, I'll be right. It's magic. -RAHB 01:39, 11 September 2007 (UTC) Abs. For the same reasons as above. I'm not sure that articles should be featured, based on improvement. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  11:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC) I hope every one of the people who voted for takes the time to clean the irrelevant Norris references out of 50 articles. There are only 1800 such articles left to go -- I've done maybe 150 or so. Unfortunately, featuring this means the uncreative memists will be encouraged to add more such references. ----OEJ 19:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

VFH

---

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH

Click to feature this article

Always check the feature queue first.

Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article. Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.