Uncyclopedia:VFH/Michael Clarke Duncan

VFH overview

All nominations

Feature queue

Re-feature queue

Recently featured

Recently failed

Archive

Rules

Michael Clarke Duncan (history, logs) (feature) (remove)

Article: Michael Clarke Duncan	Score: -3.5 racists
Nominated by:	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 08:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
For: 6.5	This is still one of the funniest articles and we should feature it. Bollocks to the prudes. -- 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 08:19, 26 July 2009 (UTC) For per TKF. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 13:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC) For MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 18:49, 26 July 2009 (UTC) For Yes. I think it would work on the front page, though the stub template would need linking to the article rather than the edit. MrN 18:56, Jul 26 bollocks as per TKF. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 18:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Strong for. Not an in-joke, just a funny picture and captiony thingy. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 02:20, Jul 28 For. 70.254.68.216 02:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Against: 10	Against Personally, I didn't find this piece very funny. It was more confusing than anything else, actually. A picture... means I'm racist? Sure, it's decent and safe from deletion (as we've seen twice), but like other one liners, no where near feature. Staircase CUNt 19:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)  Against. Thank you Mario, but VFP is on another page Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 05:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Against. Nothing to do with prudishness, everything to do with not actually finding it funny. --UU - natter 08:48, Jul 27 Against. - I don't like novelty articles, even if they're funny, which this one isn't really.--Sycamore (Talk) 14:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Yeah...No. Nameable • mumble? • (UnScr:PWotM) 15:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Are you guys serious? ~ Readmesoon 18:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC) Against. Didn't I just vote against this... no, that was Abe Vigoda. The reason why in-jokes work is because we're all in on them. The reason we have featured articles is to get the interest of people outside the community, drag them in, and turn them into Uncyclopedian. Funny in-joke, so definite keep, but no FA. Pup t 01:16, 28/07/2009 NO. the more things change, the more they stay the same I guess. --THINKER 04:49, 28 July 2009 (UTC) Against. Cigar-smokin' cane-totin' Snowman wannabe. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 19:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC) Against. It sucks. I don't know what anyone would nominate it. InMooseWeTrust 20:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Comments	Haha! Opinion change! MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 18:59, 26 July 2009 (UTC) You bugger! I was only 19 days old back then! I'm going to go find those pictures of you... MrN 19:05, Jul 26 Good! I want everyone to know how flexible I am. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 19:08, 26 July 2009 (UTC) General Comment - Like when My first article on Uncyclopedia was nominated, people voted against it because it required almost no effort, while articles belwo people spent hours of work on are getting voting against because "It wasn't good enough" or some other reason. The same thing should be happening now. However, a picture of a black guy and a caption saying that I am racsist is apparently far better than the rest of the articles on VFH that you guys voted against, going by all of your 'Strong For's. What I'm trying to say is that if this article deserves to be featured, so do most of the other ones nominated right now as well. I think you guys should take that into consideration before you vote 'For' this article. Staircase CUNt 02:30, 28 July 2009 (UTC) Equally general comment, which is totally not directed at anyone in particular, even though only one person used the phrase "general comment," similarly to the way that only one person used the words "strong for:" I read this and I laughed. Whatever article I voted against that you're pissed at me for, I read and didn't laugh. That's it. I don't give a fuck what took more work and I will never vote for an article because of that. I spent weeks working on my first few articles, and the first unnews I tried took like half an hour to come up with and write before it got featured. Effort doesn't always cause funny, and funny doesn't always require effort. - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 04:23, Jul 28 Yeah, I see I sort of singled you out with the 'Strong For' thing, but I meant it as a general message to everyone. Well, uh, sorry guys, I wasn't in the best of moods, and I just stumbled across here and thought "This isn't funny. What the hell." But, we all have our own opinions. So, uh, Neglect my above comment if you wish. Staircase CUNt 04:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

VFH

← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH