Uncyclopedia:VFH/Fisher Price

Article: Fisher Price	Score: -3
Nominated by:	*Sir* Manforman 21:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
For: 2	Nom & For Comon' how could this not be featured already? It's been an in-joke for so long, 4.252.99.182 needs CUN.--*Sir* Manforman 21:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC) go eat shit fuckers wait I mean For--General And Min. THE DUDE MAN 21:24, 29 August 2007 (UTC) For - Ingest feces, imbeciles! --*Sir* Starnestommy (Talk • Contribs • CUN • Capt.) 23:44, August 29, 2007
Against: 5	STRONG AGAINST! OK, I don't know what's up right now, but it seems like a rash of crappy pages have been finding their way to VFH. This is not good. This is worthless, absolute crap. The only reason it even still exists is for Fisher Price: A Retrospective, an incredibly funny article that has been featured. Nothing more. In fact, most recently I proposed it for deletion in the IRC and the only conceivable reason for keeping it that anyone could come up with was "Well, the retrospective wouldn't make sense otherwise!" So, please, let this die already, and please don't bring it back.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 23:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC) When hell freezes over. This is spam, nothing more and nothing less. The only thing funny about it is the retropective. ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 29/08/2007 @ 23:44 No. Miss, it's a one-liner. --Asema 23:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC) go eat shit manforman You have to be kidding me. Fisher Price: A Retrospective is funny. "Go eat shit fuckers" is not. In fact, this was featured, in a way — the main page was replaced with "go eat shit fuckers" the day the retrospective was featured. Thus this is totally unnecessary. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:47 Aug 29, 2007 AGAINST. Short picless in-jokes are not the face Uncyclopedia should present to the world. It's OK to pull our pants down and light our farts amongst ourselves. It's stupid to put it on the front page. ----OEJ 00:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Comments	But it's been an in-joke for so long Ljlego. And 4.252.99.182 needs a higher rank, doesn't he?--*Sir* Manforman 23:48, 29 August 2007 (UTC) TYATU is an in-joke, but will it ever be featured? No. ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 29/08/2007 @ 23:51 Euroipods is an injoke, and it was featured.--*Sir* Manforman 23:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC) That was also against all votes. Rc acted on his own IIRC. ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 29/08/2007 @ 23:54 Besides, wasn't the feature what started the in-joke? It wasn't featured because it was an in-joke. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:47 Aug 29, 2007 Only an injoke because the retrospective is so damn good. And injokes do not necessarily merit feature. Case in point, Euroipods. Sure it got featured, but Uncyclopedia:VFH/archive2#Euroipods shows us that Rcmurphy was clearly acting against the community's will when he featured it. Chances are great that the consensus would be the same today. As a writer of a couple of FAs, I must say that I am very disappointed to see my hard work (and that of e\|m\|c, DrSkullthumper, TheLedBalloon, Shandon, Mhaille, Todd Lyons, Volte, Cornbread, Contestant, David Gerard, Keitei, RadicalX, Savethemooses, Hardwick Fundlebuggy, Modusoperandi, and hundreds of others) being eclipsed by some one off crap page that an IP thought was funny.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 23:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC) I'm disappointed that you're such a whore. -- Kippy the Elf Talk Works ☃ 15:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC) Didn't an admin replace the main page with "Go Eat Shit Fuckers" once? Wouldn't that count as some sort of a feature? ~ Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p. 29/08/2007 @ 23:58 I have retracted my vote after seeing the comments above and the fact that the main page was replaced with "Go eat shit fuckers" --*Sir* Manforman 00:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)