From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Article: UnNews:Awful comedian demands third Bush term
|
Score: 1
|
| Nominated by:
|
For: 7
|
- SN&F - Dunno if this is funny enough, but fuck it I'll throw it up here anyway. -- melodramatic Ape (construct) (Riot Porn) 20:38, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Would have been even funnier if you hadn't reverted my hilarious edit. But still.... mAttlobster. (hello) 20:48, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Good stuff. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 21:58, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
- For. I lolled, and I love the concept. -OptyC Sucks!
 CUN22:59, 10 Sep
- For This is a great example of obvious humour working really well. Although it is a little short I can't think of anywhere to expand to. Orian57 Talk
 14:03 11 September 2009
- For.
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 08:05, September 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Good enough. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:20, 13 September 2009
|
Against: 6
|
- Against. Ehh, this article's true, but it's not funny. Sir Groovester | Contributions | Talk Page 21:43, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. I would say its just a bit too stubby for a feature, and it probably could take a jab or two more at Obama. Mn-z 02:31, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Bland. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 05:47, Sep 11
- Against Fine addition to the site. Not FA material. --THINKER 09:15, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Bit dull --I'mthedaddy 13:25, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Against. As per The Thinker. ChiefjusticeDS 07:49, September 13, 2009 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
- Pee -- melodramatic Ape (construct) (Riot Porn) 20:38, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. I'm going to take some time thinking about this before I vote, if I do vote. I liked the article, which I Pee Reviewed, including pointing out some easily fixable grammatical errors. The author responded, "I think you missed the point though," and self-nommed six minutes later without changing a thing or even taking much time to consider. I know an author is free to decide to not follow any and even all suggestions, and respect that. But what's the point of asking for a review if you'll just ignore it anyway? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court) 01:28, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Here's why, sonny. If you don't get an article Pee Reviewed, you can't self-nom.
 DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 02:54, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Meaning that it's really just a pointless ritual, similar to how I have to say six Hail Marys every time before I urinate. --S0.S0S.0S.0S0 04:02, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Are you even Catholic? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 05:48, Sep 11
- Catholic? I was talking about the lyrics to the 2Pac song. [1] --S0.S0S.0S.0S0 08:04, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Gotcha. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 22:31, Sep 11
- The quotes thing bothered me, too. Ape should have fixed that, at least. And you can self-nominate articles after they've been on Pee for a week, so a review isn't always necessary. Pee review isn't useless, however: I write stuff, put it up for Pee and revise it all the time. This must have seen six or seven reviews, without exaggeration, before I "got it right." Basically, don't lose faith in Pee review, because it is extremely useful. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 12:22, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
- Pee Reviews are totally useful! I cut over 5,000 bytes out of Brooke Shields because of a PR, and it got featured! DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:21, September 12, 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - I didn't ignore the review. I read it, absorbed its suggestions and decided there wasn't anything I particularly wanted to change. I can't be arsed to fix the quotes. If it bothers you that much you can fix it yourself (iz wiki). -- melodramatic Ape (construct) (Riot Porn) 12:50, September 11, 2009 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
