From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Article: Essay in the Jones of text
|
Score: 1 In the score of scoreds is:
|
| Nominated by:
|
 Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! 19:45, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
|
For: 5
|
- Nom/For A gem from Multiliteralist. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! 19:45, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Genuine surrealism, as opposed to zaniness - which most people mistake for surrealism. Take my word for it - I take a lot of drugs, and I know surrealism when I see it. Rabbi Techno
 kvetch  Contribs  FOXES 18:17, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I don't know what else to say --Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 13:34, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Almost my what but then remembered. Style
 Guide 19:42, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
- My oh wired. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:03, 2 December 2009
|
Against: 4
|
- I dun geddit. Is this supposed to be a collection of typos that make it hilarious? If it is then I liked ChiefjusticeDS's blurb on his userpage better. Also I don't think Chief's blurb is featureable either. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Monday, 00:14, Nov 30 2009
- Against. I love surrealism, but sorry, don't get this. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court) 20:00, December 2, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. Colourless green ideas sleep furiously. Also, I really don't see the point, it gets old quite quickly, and I failed to find anything interesting beyond the basic idea which, as I mentioned, gets old quickly. Good surrealism can still captivate by sort of making sense in its nonsense - this doesn't. --UU - natter
 13:52, Dec 4
- Against. More a page leader for humour-free trolls over at Illogicpedia.
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 15:29, December 4, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
- Comment. Typos? What typos? See the talk page for details. Style Guide 11:38, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
