From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Article: Samuel L. Vacuum
|
Score: 14 Blackuums
|
| Nominated by:
|
Mn-z 05:39, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
|
For: 18
|
 nom +4 A short, and possibly in-jokey, but rather funny article. Was on VFG --Mn-z 05:39, September 29, 2009 (UTC)- First person, but funny. I can dig it. And I like the crappy picture! --
 Roman Dog Bird  08:36, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- FOR Something different, something good. Good Nom. mAttlobster. (hello) 11:50, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- For, with two minor annoyances. First, 'dillo's right about the picture. Second, Mormons? I suppose it must be a non-sequitur, because it does not make sense. But then again that's why it's in trivia... • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 16:20, Sep 29
- For. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 10:47, 30 September 2009
- For. ~
 12:11, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- for. heh. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 18:09, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
 Bless. But it needs another picture.  Don   Puttano cHeDDs       02:19,1October,2009- For. Any article on mothafuckin' Sam is fine by me. Cause normally our asses would be dead as fried chicken, but Sam's in a transitional period, and righ now he likes being a mothafuckin' machine. Funnybony 20:07, October 2, 2009 (UTC)
- For. The rest of the article could say "BENSON WAS HERE" for all I care, I just want to see that image on the front page. Colin
 ALL YOUR BASEHeaney! Casa Bey Superfly Portfolio 03:42, October 3, 2009 (UTC)
- Godspeed, <insert name here>. --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!) 22:45, October 5, 2009 (UTC)
- For. IronLung 22:50, October 9, 2009 (UTC)
- feels vaguely retarded. so I'll vote for -- Soldat Teh PWNerator (pwnt!) 17:47, Oct 10
- For --EMC [TALK] 21:28 Oct 10 2009
- Weak For. I like it, but at the same time don't think it really belongs on the front page, but what the hell. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 04:15, October 11, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I laughed. But the against peple have a point, I just enjoyed it too much to go against. ChiefjusticeDS 08:31, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. At first I thought too in jokey but it was just so MOTHERSUCKING Funny! Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 15:05, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Wow. I missed voting. Dam. Well screw you I'm still voting. MrN
 22:44, Oct 17
|
Against: 4
|
- Against. Just goes to show that jokes can date badly as well,
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 21:27, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- Against Good piece but too meta, and a one trick pony. Fine for the site, but not FA. --THINKER 10:11, October 4, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. I'm with the THINKist on this one. --UU - natter
 12:37, Oct 4
- Against. Humour is in the eyes of the beholder. My eyes must be shut. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court) 16:33, October 12, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
- Conditional For. Surprisingly good, but change that awful picture and you get my for. ~ 06:44, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
- Oh what the hell. I'll stop being an anal prick. Which is an oxymoron really. Also, Socky, it's much better. ~ 12:11, September 30, 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, I changed the image. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 12:24, 30 September 2009
- Comment. I think the image is supposed to be intentionally bad. Mn-z 16:58, September 29, 2009 (UTC)
Is this better? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 11:08, 30 September 2009
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
Always check the feature queue first.
Note: the queue slot won't be properly filled until the {{FA}} code (with correct date) is on the article.Just follow the instructions if you're unsure.
nom +4 A short, and possibly in-jokey, but rather funny article. Was on 
Bless. But it needs another picture. 
19:51, October 12, 2009 (UTC)