Uncyclopedia:VFH/John Scherer/Outrage!

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Re-feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

John Scherer/Outrage! (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Article: John Scherer/Outrage!	Score: 3 bastards on the internet who stole my stuff
Nominated by:	MrN 03:33, Dec 16
For: 10	For Looks like comedic gold to me. MrN 03:33, Dec 16 Obvious for. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 03:34, Dec 16 He's gayer than Mr. Winkler... Colin ALL YOUR BASEHeaney! Casa Bey Superfly Portfolio 03:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC) Conditional For as long as wikia's lawyers don't have any problem with it.--Mnbvcxz 05:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC) For. Not very funny, but worthy of a feature just to annoy him so long as (as Mnbvcxz says) his lawyers don't sue the hell out of us for it. RabbiTechno 12:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC) For. Per Mrn. Nothing in this vote should be construed as a waiver, relinquishment or election of rights or remedies by M.O.Rdillo or of The Cabal Inc. Both The Cabal, Inc. and Mr. Dillo expressly reserve all rights and remedies under all applicable laws. ~ Mordillo where is my SHITTY? 12:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC) For. I love reality based humo(u)r. The letter and article which generated it are far more funny in tandem. The threat letter's seriousness is far more hilarious to me than anything an "intentional humor" writer could ever generate. Just 2¢ and one vote from the freak --    11:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC) Yes Per 'Dillo. Except replace all instances of "Mordillo" with the name "Master Cylinder". -RAHB 02:00, 19 December 2008 (UTC)  FUCK YEAH! I'm supporting! Reminds me of the other articles that have letters to other people. |Si Plebius Dato' Joe ang Kyurem CUN|IC Kill | 10:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)  For.I can't think of a bigger Fuck You! sent in Mr. Scherer's direction than featuring this. And that, my friends, is what makes this funny to me. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 21:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Against: 7	Against. Unless I'm missing something, besides my left nipple (which I lost in the war), this isn't original. Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 05:03, 16 December 2008 (UTC) neh We could actually write a great parody, not just cut and paste some crappy legal document --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 06:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC) Against. It's okay, but compared to other in-jokes that have been featured, this one falls behind. It's more a wall of text and a intarweb protest than something that could really deserve being featured. Also, no images. --Nachlader 10:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC) Against. Because featured articles should be featured on the basis of humor. And this article ain't got it. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 16:04, Dec 16  Against.--Sycamore (Talk) 11:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Against. Amusing in the right context, but not in a featured article context. I see the irony, but I don't see the point in featuring it. Also per DJI. --UU - natter 11:05, Dec 20 against. i think we could use this as a basis for a featured article, rather than just feature the letter itself. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 21:17, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
Comments	Well, I think it's funny because it's someone asking a wiki who do nothing but create articles which are deliberately false not to create articles which are deliberately false. MrN 22:08, Dec 16 That, MrN, would be ironic. You know our American friends won't understand! :-) RabbiTechno 11:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC) This doesn't look like it's pulling the cheese to be featured. There's a very rough draft of an article which uses the letter but adds "original content" at John Scherer: Genesis of a Lawsuit. If the community consensus is that this approach is worthwhile we can work on that instead. ----OEJ 20:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC) This is a different take on the subject. I don't generally endorse the bullying of a full grown adult who has no hesitation in garnering spotlights, but since this subject has generated some vibes here, I may as well just join the party and inject my share of opinions (or whatever you call it) to the controversy. --The Colonel (talk) 03:21, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

VFH

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH