Uncyclopedia:VFH/Dirty Potter

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Re-feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

Dirty Potter (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Article: Dirty Potter	Score: -3
Nominated by:	Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN • Capt.) 19:48, July 31, 2007
For: 11	Nom and For - WOW. --Sir Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN • Capt.) 19:48, July 31, 2007 FOR Front page and cream of the crop now. -- kingkitty ~Fuck you~ 19:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC) For Well, people have been telling me that it's funny. But the audio was done by Jackmehoffer. I just wrote the article. ForestAngel Receive Blessings! 19:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC) 'For, I didn't find some parts funny, but the rest was pure hilarity. It would probably be better if I hd peakers. --Lt. High Gen. Grue The Few The Proud, The Marines 19:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC) For Clearly. I made the audio. I stand behind my product 100%. Dirty Potter is fearsome and all must bow before Ron's ultimate refractory period. Jackmehoffer 22:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC) For -- Thankful Kippy Share blessings Bountiful harvest Weak for A little too much profanity, but overall still pretty funny.-- Phlegm Leoispotter * (garble! jank!) 23:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Fawr ~ Kakun · talk 23:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Meh Somebody told me to. Are you happy? --Trar (talk|contribs|grueslayer) 23:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC) For Funny! Hrodulf 00:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC) For lmao --KingK 00:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Against: 14	No I cannot, with good conscience, allow this to go onto the front page. It's not that I don't like the content (God knows that I've written some odd stuff too. However, there are too many redlinks, and I didn't really laugh too much. Sorry.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 20:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Anyone who knows my comedic tastes knows I'm not voting against due to the content. Sadly it just doesn't do it for me, it desperately needs formatting and cleaning up. Has a lot of potential, just don't think its there yet. Sorry. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 21:13, 31 July 2007 (UTC) NO -RAHB 21:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Against Okay I like the audio, but the article is atrocious. --THINKER 22:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Please don't hate me - It's alright, it just needs some improvement and re-vamping before it can be on the front page. I'm sorry, I can't vote For this as it is now. --Señor DiZtheGreat  CUN AOTM ( Worship me!) (Praise me!) (Join me!) AMEN! 22:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Against The page is crude fanfiction. --Alksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 22:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC) The page can't be a parody of fanfiction because it's about a fanfiction, the audio. I am forced to conclude it is a parody of fanfiction about fanfiction, which makes no sense. --Alksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 23:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC) An article should not rely entirely on its audio. --Alksub - VFH CM WA RV {talk} 23:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Nope. I'd vote for, but there wasn't enough rule 34 as well as the fact that if it's trying to be a parody of shit fanfiction, it has a long way to go (see here to see what i'm talking about here). --» >UF|TLK|▋» 23:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Uhm...this took some thinking but no. It seems like it just sort of repeats itself and gets boring at the end. And Umbridge Goatse-ing should not get boring. Ew. --vyvyan 23:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC) No. Seems like a controversial page, but I can't fathom why. Not Featureworthy and does not need to be treated that way. --SirIsaac 00:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Against. The audio is somewhat funny and clever. The article, however, is not. While the audio obviously took time to create, the article reads like one sex joke after another after another... – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 01:15 Nov 08, 2025 00:15, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Mehness, plain and simple. Not very consistent humorwise. -- 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 01:19, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Couldn't bring myself to listen to the audio. You know how you look at a part of something and decide you can't slog through to the good part? Yeah, that took about twelve seconds for me. Ж Kalir, Awesome Author(alliteration affords additional awesome) 03:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Against. Right, after ForestAngel's shouting below, I listened to the audio then read the article. Still agree with the other against votes. Pretty good audio, but an article in need of more work. It could make it one day though.--Under user 11:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Against — It is the article – not the audio – that would go on the main page. —–Sir Heerenveen, KUN UotM RotM VFH (talk), 1/08 16:38
Comments	Ok, I took down the red link, made the pic SFW, organized it better, and got rid of the thing at the bottom. Happy now??!! And for the millionth time: 'LISTEN TO THE AUDIO 'BEFORE' YOU READ THE ARTICLE!' It's NOT fanfiction! It's just supposed to be about the AUDIO, which is NOT fanfiction!!!! ForestAngel Receive Blessings! 22:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Abstain it needs pictures, formatting, grammar, structure (see formatting) and those templates need to verschwinden themselves. Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) 22:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Forest Angel Read this very VERY carefully, kinda like we talked last night, there are basic elements to get help, make a good article, and be a good person on this website. Yelling is bad, very very very bad, in spite of my grammar. Remember the Time Clause? Re Read those links at the top of your Talk Page again, please, for my sanity and the continued hope that you will become a good Uncyclopedian and make good articles...you're well on you way. We know you've taken personal ownership of that article,it's bloody obvious, but remember things will get edited mercilessly or not, depending on people's likes, opinions, norms, morals, mores, and fetishes. I hope you will calm down some take this to heart, because we want you to become a great Forest Angel. Sir Severian (Sprich mit mir!) 06:54, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

VFH

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH