Uncyclopedia:VFH/archive3

World War I

Featured --—rc (t) 05:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• I found this amazing. Breck 17:55, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I expected to hate it, but it is very nice. For. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:22, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For, though not as good as the original trilogy.--Bradaphraser 22:18, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For , If you haven't seen this war, you've doubtless seen its countless imitators.. --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 11:49, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Totally for. --Rataube 18:47, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Love this and I'm going to lead everyone in a chorus of "We're Going to Hang the Kaiser Under der Linden Tree" Prettiestpretty 14:15, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 01:04, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 03:56, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Conditional for. Before you guys nominate this World War, you should look at World War I (video game).Swordmaster (sorry)
• For lofuckingl!--Nappy The Quarryman 03:33, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Shamelessly voting For my own work--Sir Slackerboya CUN VFH (talk) 23:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• For I suppose I can sign off on this one...=P Strong Rad 01:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - You can't have a WWII without a WWI. --Big Brother 1984 05:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Toilet Door Communication

Featured --—rc (t) 04:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

• For HAH, Sounds so realistic User:Drewsufer 04:55, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• For Heh. --—rc (t) 05:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak For. Reasons are for the weak. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 06:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Meh... --OsirisX 07:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Amazon sealed the deal. - Sikon 11:23, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• For, and not just because it was nominated by RC, you freaking consipiracy theorists...--<<>> 17:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• For--Rataube 16:33, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• For--User:Timewaster 18:13 9 Feb 2006
• For, not sure if I've read the article yet, but the first edit summary is enough to get my vote. --KATIE!! 21:28, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - I saw some great TDC in the Army, and this article does it marvelous comedic justice. 2nd lt. sir wild weasel kun vfh fp ^{sex & violence!} 11:35, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• For --Some user 00:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Good one. Is it just me or are we getting a lot more decent stuff on Unc lately? - David Gerard 14:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• For'. We's gots us some purty good writin' folks 'round these here parts. ~ T. (talk) 04:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• FOr. EmoElmo 15:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
• For I met my wife using the precursor to eHarmony...ForAGoodTimeCall! Strong Rad 03:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Neuroipods

Featured Bwahaha --—rc (t) 07:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nominate. More Euroipods reference. --Xiao Li 09:58, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. I hate meta, I hate euroipods, and I hate the way we keep rubbing it in with Nin, but in spite of that, this article is just plain high quality enough to surpass those barriers. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 10:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• You beat me to it. Strong for. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 16:47, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Funny, with several meaning layers. Better than Fisher Price's retrospective--Rataube 17:22, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• oh dear, this must go on the front page<<>>19:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Please don't hurt me, I was forced into it.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 19:59, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• I can't believe I'm saying this, but For. God(s) help me. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 20:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong for. This deffinatly belongs on the front page. --OsirisX 22:16, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• Some user is such a fucker. For - David Gerard 07:04, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Really sorry Nintendo, but something fishy is going on here. --Some user 07:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• I think it's utter crap and I don't get it...but I am FOR utter crap that I don't get.  :) -- – Mahroww a.k.a. Hoyetii “Art” Emerson  07:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against. No more Euroipods references. - Sikon 07:13, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak against. It's awfully short and really not that funny. And the euroipods pun made it lose a few points in my book. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 12:40, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: It's hardly a euroipods reference at all. As far as I can tell the only part of the entire article that even slightly resembles a reference to euroipods is the title. If someone came here knowing nothing of Uncyclopedia or it's many wandrous adventures, they would still vote for this. I don't think something like the euroipods "scandal" should prevent this article from being featured. If anything it should help the notability of it.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:49, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - it's the inevitable evolution! Made me laugh --Jester
• Against. This trend is quickly going the way of the kitten, methinks. --Winston 04:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
  • You don't like kittens? TERR'IST SYMPATHISER! Now, kitten huffing iPods ... hmmm ... - David Gerard 08:25, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• 4,444 --~ Kakun · talk 08:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• This has to be the best thing this fad has ever produced. Pencils down, close the book, no way this can be topped. In fact, I'm tempted now to huff some of the earlier cohesion attempts simply because this one outclasses them so entirely. For. --Algorithm (talk) 02:19, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - Now that's the stuff. 2nd lt. sir wild weasel kun vfh fp ^{sex & violence!} 11:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Fjord. --Roger The Bum Full sig!
  <a href="http://rdoger6424.jaywebdesigns.com/recipient.php">psychotomimetic</a>
  CLICK HERE!!!!!!!! 03:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against, just fucking against. --Sir gwax (talk) 04:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral: Upon actual inspection, it's not a euroipods clone and, as such, I don't care either way. --Sir gwax (talk) 04:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• For What the hey, let's go another round. --—rc (t) 04:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Midget cockpunching terrorists

Featured --—rc (t) 06:01, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• --KATIE!! 21:26, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Yup. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 21:31, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Definitely. This has gone through several crap incarnations, but finally teh funnee has been discovered. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 21:31, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• Sure I'm actually the guy who did this but an accidental logoff messed up by credit, check who submitted the bottom two cockpunching pics if you don't believe me--Count of Monkey Crisco 21:41, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. The screencap of Mike Tyson's punchout won this vote.--<<>> 21:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. ~ Kakun · talk 22:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. I'm all for ball-busting humor. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 23:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - Well, technically it's cock-busting humor. But it hurts either way. 2nd lt. sir wild weasel kun vfh fp ^{sex & violence!} 11:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - The Metal Gear reference is genius. 131.111.250.142 16:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• For --Some user 06:28, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - I was about to nominate it myself, then got to the end and was most pleased to see the VFH box - David Gerard 14:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• For - Best little article I've read in a while. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 10:03, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• For, very, very for. Prettiestpretty 21:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Third time's the charm. Strong for. --Verizanni 04:06, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Heh, angry midgets are funny... --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 14:52, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. - This made me double over. And not because I ran into a MCT. Swordmaster 07:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Loneliness

Reskin Featured! Yesterday! --KATIE!! 17:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nominate - if only it had been ready for tomorrow - David Gerard 23:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• That format works great for the content. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 23:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Even though it's gonna be featured in less than an hour. =] --KATIE!! 00:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Er... for. Stupid edit conflict. --Cctoide 00:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Why am I voting? It's already on the front page, it doesn't need my support, and I should just FORget it. So bah. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 15:21, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weaker For. Lacks in content, not in funny.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 16:00, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Against Because an against vote matters at this point. Why is this still on this side of the line?--<<>> 17:21, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Why hasn't this been moved below the line yet? --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 18:39, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Giving the illusion of democracy. Or lazy. --KATIE!! 18:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Zen

Featured --—rc (t) 06:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• For: This article pleases me immensely with its simple, slightly quirky humor. --Sir gwax (talk) 05:01, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For: Agreed. It is funny in a different way than a lot of other stuff. It would make a good addition to the features roll. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 05:37, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For This article has achieved enlightenment.--Bradaphraser 06:00, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• FUCK MAYBE! → Mandaliet 08:36, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. It is indeed beautiful in its simplicity. --Zyrac 17:03, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For -- T. (talk) 02:18, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC) Neutral ~ Prune/delete the Zen today section and I'll vote yes. It completely killed the uniqueness of the humour. -- T. (talk) 17:12, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For As the person who initially redid the article from a silly rant about Zen being the sound of a dentist's drill, to the rough form of what it is today, I'm proud to see how everybody else's great contributions since then have grown the article to the point that it's good enough for VFH  :) -- Rei 17:55, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For You're right, the removed section is best left out. Smowton 00:50, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Koan: a conscious marbel kills five chickens = four--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 07:10, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• If it is the destiny of the article to achieve this, then it will be so. Prettiestpretty 19:54, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 06:48, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Against. Funny, but not THAT much. --Rataube 15:23, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --Hobelhouse 23:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. I swear to God I was like the 3rd person to vote for this. Ah, well, whatever.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 23:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. --Sir Xiao Li CUN VFH NS (Talk)
• Definite For. Unlike anything I've seen on Uncyclopedia in its divine simplicity. Logixoul 13:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Richard M. Stallman

Featured --—rc (t) 06:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• Yet another masterpiece from Todd Lyons, funny because it's true. - Sikon 06:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Just the beginning made me laugh so hard I cried. FOR » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 06:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Almost nominated this earlier. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 06:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Thank you, all.  :) And For. --T. (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. The caption for the Wikimedia conference image is priceless. -Deathz0r 13:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Comment ~ Credit Guest for that. It was blank until he fixed it.  ;) --T. (talk) 13:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

• For Excellent.--Bradaphraser 16:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Extreme For Very few Uncyclopedia articles actually make me laugh out loud. This one did. --Logixoul 21:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. --King In Yellow 13:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
• FOR! --80.195.22.150 14:45, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For, as this article concentrates on little, random, funny things while not abandoning a theme. This is somewhat admirable. --Gracenotes 01:13, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Geez, forgot all abou thtis one.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 23:15, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Just because everyone else voted that way. -- – Mahroww a.k.a. Hoyetii “Art” Emerson  23:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
• For Because Against is a really long word. --The Zombiebaron 00:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• For --Some user 01:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Grand Conspiracy

Featured --—rc (t) 08:04, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

This is what Uncyclopedia is all about. --Hobelhouse 03:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

• Strong For! This is brilliant.--Bradaphraser 04:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 19:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - Wayne Kruse 19:20, 23 January 2006 (EST) I like how it touches on the Time Cube theme.
• Oh Ja! --King In Yellow 14:44, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• The spork told me, I had to vote for. --Dac Vin (Down with colorful sigs!) 00:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - Good Stuff, I really like the first paragraph!--Claudius Prime 18:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Inkjet printer says for. Anon32 01:50, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - It rocks, really.
  • Unsigned. --—rc (t) 21:26, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - an excellent conspiracy theory parody. - Sikon 17:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• For! - A soon to be classic.Masterskill 02:39, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Excellent. --—Hinoa KUN (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Shameless self-vote. --Xiao Li 09:50, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
• For(Uncyclopedian 20:55, 6 February 2006 (UTC))

Rocky Mountain Oysters

Featured --—rc (t) 06:20, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

• For: Mmm Good for the whole family! --Keithhackworth
• I have no clue how Prettiestpretty knew I was talking about these the other day, but this article is good. For » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 14:47, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For but only if we use the nutrition facts image and not the testicles image. --Sir gwax (talk) 16:27, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  - Agreed. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 16:54, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  - Also agreed - that image is already in use on Bull anyway, as BigNuts.jpg, only reversed. Oh, and for --some other user 01:29, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. ----OEJ 01:50, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  
• For an' I think the testical picture is fucking amazing crazy awesome --The Zombiebaron 14:25, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  
• Blushing (that means FOR) but really, the testicle image is what got me to thinking "why does this woman look as happy as the Sunmaid Raisin girl? because she is working at a wholesome and honorable job. The testicle image really tells the story and the story was written around the image itself. Prettiestpretty 01:03, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For, but it should be a little less US-centric. Definitely some talent here, but "Prettiestpretty," please remember this is the Internet. --Johnny C. Raven 01:16, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Comment: Rocky mountain oysters are named after the range of montains I live in, which is in the US (and also Canada, but the culture is contiguous, even if the country isn't). It should be rockies-centric, it would make no sense otherwise. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 12:16, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Gross, but also funny. For--Bradaphraser 23:27, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 01:11, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Iam Nuts for it--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 09:54, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I cried. For --Dumbo1 00:44, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For: better written than a lot of articles out there. --Sir gwax (talk) 02:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Gwax, Gwax...trying to vote twice, are we? ;) --—rc (t) 04:55, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
    • He gets that a lot... --~ sin($) ^tan(€) 20:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. Isn't it about time we feature this gem?   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

VCR Manual

Please to feature --—rc (t) 06:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

• Nominate. I wonder what the Cyrillic and Japanese text actually says. - David Gerard 00:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For You would think someone has read those before. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 04:56, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• I rather like this one. For. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 10:26, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Laughed out loud.--Bradaphraser 22:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• Mildly Weak For. Only because it's short, and it hurts to look at. Besides that I really like it.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 22:22, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• Please to voting positive Happy fun article containing super fun happy delicious facts; Ask to where super Oscar Wilde speech lies? --Roger The Bum 23:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
• Affirmatory. This article is pleased me muchly. Reccomendize immediately to VFH. --Hobelhouse 15:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
• When yes voting, the article can move off center or fire place. --Andrusi 18:34, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• For vote with no clever line. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 22:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
• The Cyrillic text says, "This is a song about the most beautiful city in the world. Moscow!" I can replace it with something else, if it fits better in the article. Oh, and for. - Sikon 14:28, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
• For, on the condition that you run the non-English text through BabelFish at least 3 times to completely fuck it sideways sexual intercourse side that has owned that completely. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 20:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
• Congratulations--Rataube 11:18, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
• For. That picture of the uber old VCR is hilarious. --OsirisX 05:52, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Moon hoax

Featured --—rc (t) 05:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

• I Somebody who's not me just finished writing this article, and I think it's definately worthy of the main page, and also main page-friendly. I saw Whoever wrote it seems to have seen this, and thought I they, whoever this mystery figure is, could do better, but instead I thought I'd it seems this unknown person was inspired to write an article based on it instead. Anyway, I'm for, and I wish this dark figure the best of luck in the future. --Carlos the Mean 14:33, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For! - David Gerard 14:51, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Huge For! Hilarious! --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 14:51, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. --KATIE!! 04:10, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• for --Greenirvana 21:52, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For - This is pretty damned funny Neegore 13:01, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Sure, why not? For. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 22:17, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Ehhh, for. True, I'm not so keen on Carlos the Mean, and he should definitely learn to spell the word "definitely" correctly, but you have to appreciate the amount of effort involved here. --Johnny C. Raven 01:51, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

I can speel hoever I lick (It's a joke!) --Sir Carlos the Mean CUN VFP CS CM CUNT (talk) 03:09, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• It starts a lot better than it ends, but heck, I'll give in to the mob. For--Bradaphraser 21:27, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)*
• Weak for Just good enough to get my vote.--Bradaphraser 04:32, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

You can't vote twice for the same, moron! And if you do, don't give it a "weak for" as the second! Pay attention!--Bradaphraser 21:04, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Now this counts as one and a half votes! Hooray! --Sir Carlos the Mean CUN VFP CS CM CUNT (talk) 03:09, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For. I love the nonsensical logic of the jelly comparison. --Zyrac 21:50, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Wow. A parody of people rebuffing conspiracy theories? And I thought the idea of parodying an encyclopedia was original. ;) For. -- Rei 15:23, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Slight against: I really like the premise and the writing but I find that it feels a little rough around the edges. If it were presented as an encyclopedic rebuff of common moon conpiracy theories, with proper grammar and formatting, I'd vote for it in a moment. --Sir gwax (talk) 21:27, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't just complain, edit it! I'm not familiar with proper wiki formatting, and as for the grammar, I think the unprofessionalism this provides is completely appropriate, but if you don't like it, change it! --Sir Carlos the Mean CUN VFP CS CM CUNT (talk) 20:32, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm not complaining, just explaining why I'm voting against it. I expect that if we discuss this anymore here, Keitei'll beat me up and take my lunch money, so don't respond to this (Hi Keitei!!!!!). --Sir gwax (talk) 21:57, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
      • Oops, I did. Oh no! --Sir Carlos the Mean CUN VFP CS CM CUNT (talk) 10:13, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For: I changed my mind, it's awesome. --Sir gwax (talk) 06:03, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against -- lacks teh funnay. Smowton 09:27, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against Good ideas, but it "lacks teh funnay" and is generally a bit incoherent. I'd edit it, if I wasn't a lazy schmuck. If it got itself edited, I'd vote for it. --207.112.86.30 00:12, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Strong for Now I can finally rebut those dirty Communist Lies --APW 23:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Wayne Kruse 19:30, 23 Jan 2006 (EST) This article cracked me up, almost as much as Redundancy and the 100 worst set of articles.
• Yes. This made me chuckle. --The King In Yellow (Talk to the Dalek.) 13:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

External combustion engine

Featured --—rc (t) 05:06, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

• For - To educate the public. 71.126.167.121 04:17, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• 4 dudes, fire. Also, it's a funny play on concepts. --Sir gwax (talk) 01:33, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Dunno if it is feature quality, but I am giggling right now, so I give it a For --Isra1337 02:37, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Okay. >> Mandaliet 06:38, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. It's da bomb! --Doctors Mob 18:54, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For Is funny. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 05:36, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Laugh out loud H.I.-larious, Strongly For -ninebucks 16:54, 2 Jan 20X6
• For Good combination of funny text and pictures. User:Claudius Prime 14:26, 03 JAN 200^ (UTC)
• For Hooray for harnessing spontaneous combustion for the energy crisis!--Bradaphraser 23:41, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For Great article. Its short, gets to the point and is very funny without needing a whole lot of background. An original idea. --Stalin 00:39, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. Brilliant. -- Rei 03:06, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• A tad short, but very thoughtful and amusing. Vote. --T. (talk) 12:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 15:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Against. I don’t understand about physics or engineering or whatever. I shamefully admit that I don’t get it.--Rataube 21:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak for, a bit too short. Anon32 01:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - Wayne Kruse 19:23, 23 January 2006 (EST) Funny article, pic is funny.
• Weak Against. Very short. --71.32.75.47 07:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The Keep Your Finger In The Box Game

Featured --—rc (t) 05:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

• OMFG. --officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 21:14, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Needs some categorization, but still a definate for.--Bradaphraser 21:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Heh. What a great game.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 21:34, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• For: It sounded like a one-note joke but the good writing won me over.--Burnmp3s 02:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 21:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
• Hell's Bells, yeah! --King In Yellow 14:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Whore --The Zombiebaron 17:30, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
• Floor --~ Kakun · talk 11:05, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Pore --Jimothy 01:05, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep my vote in the box -- » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 00:14, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• For --Some user 02:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. Conjures up images of 20 people gathered around a box with their fingers in it. Take notes, kiddies. Swordmaster 22:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• For - In russia, oh nevermind!--Claudius Prime 18:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
• Extreme For. --71.32.75.47 07:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. What a fun article... --~ sin($) ^tan(€) 07:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. I have reservations about the format, but the writing is surprisingly good. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 03:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• I vote For, and I haven't even finished reading it! --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 04:54, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
• FOR. Oh, shit, I just took my finger out in order to vote. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 19:15, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Manhattan Engineering District

Featured Yeah, this one's old. --—rc (t) 04:49, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

• Well written, lots of good images, spiffy formatting. --—rc (t) 05:36, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• Yes, very good. This gets my Good Stuff seal of approval. -Putz 08:41, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• ++ - David Gerard 10:55, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• For --Isra1337 08:04, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• I would. Nrbelex 05:07, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• comic nerd says FOR 64.59.144.22 17:48, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Lovely. --KATIE!! 04:38, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 12:48, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Yes give it to him Prettiestpretty 00:43, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For
  • (appears to be an anonymous IP voter, as per this edit [1]) --Isra1337 00:08, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Gerald Ford.--Hobelhouse 18:44, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• star star star star Early candidate for best picture! Four stars!--Bradaphraser 20:55, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For the pictures. --Rataube 15:11, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• This hasn't made it to the front page yet? What FOR?  :) --T. (talk) 11:57, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

man uncyclopedia

Featured --—rc (t) 06:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

• The original concept was great. I expanded it and think it's pretty good now. Vote » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 12:24, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• It has no pictures, but it wins anyways. --KATIE!! 12:45, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Comment: The picture can be a terminal prompt icon like the one in KDE or GNOME - David Gerard 11:18, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Comment: If it wins, I was going to suggest to rcmurphy that an image of unix prompt with "man uncyclopedia" and a cursor after it would be good for the article. I'd say it would be better than the icon, even. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 08:24, 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Jawohl, man! ƔƔMandaliet 13:31, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Guest 14:26, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. --Ianweller 14:36, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Yep - David Gerard 11:18, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Vote. -- T. (talk) 11:40, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For --Splaka 23:50, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 17:52, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• FOR --Kakun 17:50, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• ForAnother example of a joke so funny, even though I don't get most of it, I see the humor.--Bradaphraser 23:50, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 16:07, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --Algorithm (talk) 22:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
• For. (Check out my image replacement and I may make the whole thingy console like too if there arent objections) --Maj Sir Insertwackynamehere CUN VFH VFP Bur. CMInsertwackynamehere | Talk | Rate 19:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Man, that brings back memories -APW 22:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Old Tech

Featured --—rc (t) 06:07, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

• For I rediscovered this old gem by Cap'n Ben via random page. It is good for something besides Deletion Roulette. --—rc (t) 02:44, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For! ---Rev. Isra (talk) 02:55, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For Very charming and very well crafted. --Sir KP GUN 05:40, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Aye!--Bradaphraser 04:09, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Awesome This is a simply crafted, but great article! Prettiestpretty 14:02, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I am SO for this! Strong RadX 14:11, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Oh my GOODness, yes. --KATIE!! 14:18, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against. Stop nominating obvious and unoriginal jokes. And i'm sure there must be better cap'n Ben works still not featured. --Rataube 19:57, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• In the words of STM: "That's the good shit" (one of the best articles I've seen on the site) » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 19:59, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - good one! Needs more old tech, but featurable now - David Gerard 01:01, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For ~ Kakun 03:24, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For There's life in this ole article yet, I tell yez. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 03:58, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --EvilZak 04:05, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• A Gem. --Dumbo1 00:31, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For, I chuckled. User:Claudius Prime 17:46, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For Excellent. Original concept, funny, very well executed. --195.92.40.49 18:34, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Loved it.  :) Good show, Cap'n. --T. (talk) 12:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
• Honda. Or even Ford. --80.195.22.150 08:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Worst 100 Ways to Deliver Bad News

Featured --—rc (t) 07:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

note: There's some discussion on the VFH discussion page as to whether or not lists should be featured articles. Doug 16:29, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Please read it before voting. --KATIE!! 23:20, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• It's a natural. Nom+For ---Kakun 14:10, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Surprisingly for a Kakun nomination, I'm gonna have to go with a hell yes. --KATIE!! 14:16, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 14:17, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For, although there are a few repeats that should be cleaned up. --Zyrac 14:37, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• weak against BUT if the article is reformatted, the duplicate entries replaced, then I'll happily change the vote to a hearty for Prettiestpretty 15:11, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC) Changing my vote to FOR Prettiestpretty 23:40, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I've started the discussion page, to discuss and fix some of the details. Doug 15:35, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• And the cause of the for that killed your parents was this article. An article that you nominated. Ironic, isn't it? --EvilZak 15:27, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --Doug 15:35, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. I was about to nominate it myself, so you can count it as my nomination if that'll make you feel better. - David Gerard 15:40, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • And it should use Image:Gameover.gif and that should be VFPed - David Gerard 15:44, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 16:05, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For New York Times 2-page ad did it. - Nonymous 19:33, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Sure. Oh, by the way, you're pregnant. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 19:35, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against This is one of the funniest things I've ever read, but it's not an article: it's a list. I'm willing to change my vote if someone can convince me to on the VFH discussion page.--Bradaphraser 20:43, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• EvilZak convinced me on the VFH discussion page. For--Bradaphraser 20:14, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Very, very, very strongly against: I read it all the way through and I thought it was immensely funny but it is by no means front page material. It is a list, not an article; if you want featured lists make a featured lists section or change this to featured thing, but now it's featured article and this is not an article. --Sir gwax (talk) 20:58, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk pages & nonexistent articles yes, but lists no? WTF? Kakun 21:28, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I'm really, really sorry, but you only have For months to live. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 21:14, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against. -- T. (talk) 21:32, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Against. --Rataube 21:35, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• There's one in the spotlight, he doesn't look right to me, get him up Against the wall. --Splaka 00:33, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Funny, but until someone convinces me we should be putting lists on the front page, I will vote against. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 04:58, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. Guest 04:59, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For I do take the point about lists on the front page, but this is hilarious. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 06:51, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. Hell, I edited it. Acid Ammo 13:04, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. And almost every one of those pictures deserves to be nominated as well.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 19:22, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I support quagmire, so No. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 00:38, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I feel that htis page could use significant cleanup before it approaches VFH status, let alone Featuring. I'm also of the schol that is leery of putting lists on frontpage. Against. --Sir Flammable KUN (Na Naaaaa...) 17:13, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• FOR FOR THE LIFE OF FOR --IMBJR 23:52, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Definitely For. --EpicFantasyStory 02:51, 18 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• against this article is not that great, it's pretty funny, but still not that great. Unsigned -- EpicFantasyStory 20:30, 18 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Forbut make sure the imaged used is no the same as the one up in VFP--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 11:16, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
• For Yes, its a list, but it's not a list of actual things. So it's an article. It's very funny.dig412 14:19 19 Janury 206

I Can't Believe it's Not Murder

Featured --—rc (t) 06:18, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

• This Nomination was recently deleted in an insane cleaning spree. By order of Chron himself it has been given a probationary period to redeem itself. Vote now or forever hold your piece. ---Rev. Isra (talk)
  • Though I have no doubt some dickhead will claim it's liberal media bias - David Gerard 11:15, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Fore! --71.126.167.121 12:53, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • For Or possibly conservative bias. That's the wonderful thing about Americans; you can never be sure just which of the Two Approved Biases you'll be accused of at any given time. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 14:49, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • I can't belive it's not featured --Paulgb 21:25, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • For --Isra1337 00:53, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • If it's not biased, it's not Uncyclopedia. For. --Hinoa4 01:01, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Okay, but not excellent. --KATIE!! 04:15, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • For, though the "you'll skip Club Fed" joke is slightly lame. Then again, I've certainly done waaay worse. (Then again again, how many of my articles have ever been featured? Zero, right? Figure it out, Johnny-boy.) --Johnny C. Raven 02:03, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For I can't believe it's not been featured yet. --ANIDN MENOSCWICZ 16:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Ford - Nonymous 03:12, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • For I can't belive it's not featured yet.--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 11:06, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • For
    • Unsigned vote is from IP 71.225.148.52, dated about 10 minutes before this timestamp. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 04:39, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • For--Rataube 11:37, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • I chuckled. I'll give it a for.--Bradaphraser 21:06, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • We the jury find this article GUILTY! Sentence it to the front page! Prettiestpretty 14:09, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 05:58, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • For. --Doug 15:42, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --EpicFantasyStory 20:40, 18 Jan 2006 (UTC)

The

Featured But I absolve myself of blame. --—rc (t) 06:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

• COMMENT Please read this discussion before voting. --—rc (t) 18:51, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Not the page, just the word. Make our definite article a featured article! --Algorithm (talk) 00:18, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Definitely. --KATIE!! 00:27, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Excellent idea! » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 00:37, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Yes. THE is (arguably) THE best article THEir is. -- T. (talk) 02:28, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For lol i dont get it, but w/e. --Slash.f.m 03:14, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Comment shouldn't it be Word of the Day?--Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 05:37, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • [2] --Algorithm (talk) 11:16, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• :D Yes --Caiman 23:29, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Guest 07:40, 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• FOR! - sure, there are better words, but the is the lord of teh ring words. 71.192.174.130 04:20, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Comment - that last vote was from me. My browser's a little screwy, so it's signing me off, and then I forget to sign back in before I leave comments and whatnot. Jlove1982 04:26, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• I approve of this proposal. --Andrusi 16:23, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• 2². That's an awesome idea. Can't wait to see it on the main page! -JBob 00:27, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For --S P I N N I E 05:40, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Yes. Brilliant, man. Great stuff... Unsigned. KATIE!! 00:33, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• A good idea, although sometimes the gimmick feature nominations get a little old. This is funny though, so for. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 00:52, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against Guys, the Emporer has no clothes. This article is even shorter than Euroipods.--Bradaphraser 23:48, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Against. There's no need for more euroipods. I would rather feature Bradaphraser objection --Rataube 15:01, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For', Definitely the best article. And what's more, no talk page for people to complain on. yay. Doug 18:30, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For ~ Kakun 19:12, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Comment Who linked the page? It's the article, not the page by the same name. Unlinked. Don't do it again, thanks. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 20:12, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, won't happan again. --User: 20:35, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• What a perfect way to scare off the low-brows! =P For. Strong RadX 20:25, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - seeing "the" alone in the Featured Article box would be hilarious. - Guest 15:36, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - Great idea. - User:EpicFantasyStory 16:10, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Dead Set AGAINST. Please See Comment. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 04:41, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Dead Set FOR. We're here to be funny; that is darn funny.  ;) -- Rei 03:01, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Did I forget to vote for this? Mercy me, I believe I did! --Algorithm (talk) 01:43, 18 Jan 2006 (UTC)

No More Room In Hell Act

Featured Reaching back in time... --—rc (t) 07:11, 16 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• This article was nominated in the olden days before new nominations went on the top. It's now getting its chance at the top for a limited time only. ---Rev. Isra (talk)
• I just had to nominate this one. Good stuff, could maybe use a good zombie picture. --SOdhner 16:19, 12 Sep 2005 (UTC)
• I am tickled a slight rosy hue. And I'm working on a general-article picture, maybe somebody else could mock up a Zombie Cultural Center? --Monthenor 16:41, 12 Sep 2005 (UTC)
• Mindspillage 14:26, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)
• -- David Gerard 14:33, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)
• Quite worthy indeed  ;) Rei 20:52, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• Looks like front page material to me. --Silius 07:16, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• For --Isra1337 03:55, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• I'm gonna say against cause I can't make up my mind. --KATIE!! 05:10, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • That's what voting neutral is for, which is what I am doing. - Nonymous 15:42, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP
• For I have to vote for one of these after I nearly took Isra's eye out in the IRC room.--Bradaphraser 23:43, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Fore! -- T. (talk) 12:02, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Absolutely splendid -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 22:50, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For -- APW 02:33, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For mainly because of the invention of the term encephalectomosis -- An anonymouse coward 83.67.4.159 01:12, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --Reefus 16:05, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Gratuitous Anime Panty Shot

Featured --—rc (t) 05:46, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For: it's so not what you'd expect; it's great. --Sir gwax (talk) 22:30, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• 1/2 vote as yet - Preeeety good ... needs to be longer - David Gerard 15:40, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For: Really, if the article just consisted of the ship and the phrase "alive and kicking just high enough", I think it'd be worthy. --Petie 17:09, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Hell yeah! --Dac Vin 05:57, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• 1/2 vote for to make it a whole number again. --Isra1337 03:15, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually let's make it a whole vote for. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:57, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --KATIE!! 04:28, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For.--Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 12:46, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For
  • (unsigned vote is from this edit) ---Rev. Isra (talk) 21:32, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For! - That's incredible. I wish it were a little longer, but hey, it's SOOOOO good. of course, to keep the effect in place, that picture should not show up on the front page, but that's just me... Jlove1982 00:19, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 13:31, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For Did I vote for this yet? I'm all for it! Strong RadX 13:45, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• A powerful For by me. ADD 7:37, 1 Jan 2006
• Eh, why not? For--Bradaphraser 20:59, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Weak for --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 10:01, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• FOR X=1 TO 32767: PRINT "YES": NEXT X --Andrusi 13:16, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• fun yes(0) = [] | yes(n) = "For"::yes(n-1); (because Basic is soooo yesterday) Smowton 09:47, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Gerrymandering

Featured --—rc (t) 06:59, 12 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• This very charming article could treacherously stab you in the back at any time. --Sir KP GUN 18:20, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For Loved the little diagrams. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 07:05, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For Subtle, yet coy. Topical, yet deep. I can detect a hint of raspberries, no, wait, yes, its coming, YES! I'm sure its very, very currant. Prettiestpretty 18:40, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For Not only clever but funny too. --Doctors Mob 07:21, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Nice. --KATIE!! 03:00, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks. For. --Isra1337 04:13, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• What's up with the formatting? Outside of that, this is funny. Conditional FOR, if the formatting is cleaned or rcmurphy feels it is suitable for the home page. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 07:42, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Note. The article is about gerrymandering—the creation of political districts in funny shapes. What do you notice about the text? Do you get it now? --Sir KP GUN 12:32, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I am aware of that, but it's all squeezed into little thin chunks. It should look more like a demented chessboard with holes in the middle. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 23:46, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For Though I think it would still be funny without the formatting, possibly even better since it's a damned headache Neegore 12:50, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For Damn that's some good stuff there. Jlove1982 23:05, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For Those diagrams were hilarious T.W. North 15:28, 24 Dec 2005 (EST)

Comment: These really were my favorite part of the entire page. They made the page. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 13:18, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For --Xiao Li 02:06, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For, and I'm just going to have to make the leap of faith on your ability to translate the formatting joke to the front page. --Johnny C. Raven 01:46, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For Clever AND evil!--Bradaphraser 04:42, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For But its missing a connect 4 joke and Othello jokes --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 08:51, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• 151-147. My favorite part is the Wilde quote at the beginning. Swordmaster 20:51, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For I am for this article, however my vote may not count due to redistricting. --bdanials 04:15, 11 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For. Just because the box on the bottom was so fetching funny. Can't we assure that this article gets featured by redistricting somehow? User:NeoEva00/sig

Finding Your Inner Sock Puppet

Featured --Rangley 04:46, 10 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Nomintated and For. Great article and related image. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 00:18, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For This really is a great article and has a rapier sharp wit. Prettiestpretty 01:01, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• This is probably the best in the series so far. An unqualified For. ---Rev. Isra (talk) 01:08, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Definately For   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 04:35, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• In spite of my ever growing intolerence for wiki in-jokes, I vote for. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 05:29, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For. Very funny, intelligent, with high intertextuality. It even makes you think: Uncyclopedia needs more articles like this one. --Rataube 11:50, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For One of the best articles in a long time. Now, who is the puppetmaster of 'Some user' (they're obviously a sockpuppet themselves)? » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 12:00, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

- Aren't we all sock puppets here, Major Ken Kusanagi? --some user's sock puppet 17:08, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Love it. For. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 00:25, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• FOR. Feature the socka. ---Kakun 03:28, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• For But could really do with some 'ghost in the shell' quotes http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113568/quotes

--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+:::14:49, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• This is about me, isn't it? It's always about me, me, me. Well, fuck you all. FOR. --Johnny C. Raven 01:10, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• I like FOod. Buy me a fiRe Truck.--Sir Flammable KUN (Na Naaaaa...) 16:39, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Aaagh! Flaming monkeys stole my rocketship! Those bitches!--King In Yellow 19:39, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Heh, made me chuckle. For--Bradaphraser 22:11, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Oh right, I haven't voted for this yet. --KATIE!! 10:01, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For ~ Kakun 10:35, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Alliteration

Featured No alliteration here, sorry. --—rc (t) 05:01, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Semi-Self Nomination --S P I N N I E 05:43, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For God, I love the English language. And I love this article! --DrAwesome 07:12, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For Formulated Factually for featuring.--Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 11:21, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. "A beautiful work of art." (NY Times) --Unissakävelijä 13:18, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. Pure genius. --Zyrac 15:44, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - David Gerard 15:45, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Okay. aa Mandaliet 15:46, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• 'Amazing Article and assuming an affirmative action. Swordmaster 19:44, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Very Yes - ninebucks 19:47, 5 Jan 20x6
• Absolutely Agreed --Jean-Pierre X.Y.Z. Ravenne 19:54, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. And no i cannot think of that many words that begin with the same letter.   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 23:32, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For - Fine featurable fascination. Jlove1982 00:13, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Affirmative, actively approve - Nonymous 00:20, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Aye - Alliteration appeals awesomely; accordingly, an admin approves, and acts antithetical at assholes articulating "against". --ÆvilZak 03:05, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For If only for the "topless teenager" bit. (Watch the votes come rolling in, now)--Bradaphraser 04:15, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Formidable. --KATIE!! 09:58, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Alrighty. -- T. (talk) 13:25, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Leaves me warm and tingly - YES! Prettiestpretty 14:05, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For--Rataube 02:16, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 03:49, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For- Partly because it's funny, mostly because it's ingenious --Jammygit
• For The effort that must've went into this is staggering. It's also funny. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 01:23, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Nobody cares

Meh --—rc (t) 05:28, 6 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Rejoice, for I have created an article! I promise not to do it often. And, what can I say? I'm lame and I'm nominating it for VFH. So take a look and don't be hatin'. KATIE!! 20:30, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For It's funny, but nobody cares! Bloo 14:24, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I'd vote against, but ennui prevents me from doing so. For. --Hobelhouse 02:41, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• I guess. && Mandaliet 04:05, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For but Nobody cares --Da, Y?YY?YYY?:-:CUN³ NotM BLK |_LG⁸+::: 05:33, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For it amused me and my girlfriend. Epynephrin 05:38, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
  • For it aroused me and my girlfriend. -- » Sir Savethemooses Grand Commanding Officer ... holla atcha boy» 22:46, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Weak For. It's a little too short. But it might grow to an you have two cows scale. I would add some more "nobody cares" expressions to make it less repetitive or make a permanent formula like with the two cows. --Rataube 05:51, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC). Against. Until it gets expanded and/or variated. --Rataube 14:18, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for. Great idea, but a lot of potential left to exploit. I'd suggest more variations on "Nobody cares", unless I'm missing the joke. -JBob 09:33, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Whatever. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 17:07, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. --Sir Volte KUN Talk (+S NS CM Bur. VFP VFH) 18:56, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For I love pics.--Bradaphraser 19:07, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For. officer designate Lugiatm MUN NS CM ZM WH 19:13, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Ayuh - this is the sort of clever flippancy that needs to be prominently displayed as a visual aid against adolescent gobshite-ism.--King In Yellow 19:29, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• Don't care if it is featured --Splaka 03:19, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For... although frankly, I couldn't care less. Guest 07:30, 4 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For, but nobody really cares about what I say. Swordmaster 19:46, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)
• For Kakun 21:35, 5 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Nike Revolution of 2006

Featured though I considered docking it points for whiny voters. --—rc (t) 07:40, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• A major history-changing event such as this deserves recognition. I'm surprised it wasn't already featured months ago. -JBob 23:49, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• I've been waiting for this one to happen since I first read about it in April or May or something. We need to educate the general populace. --Katie loves you! 04:28, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• The map is hilarious. The article is just funny, but well-done. Mmm, well-done. Now I'm hungry, dammit. -.- Mandaliet 06:25, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• I assumed an article this good had been featured. Why wasn't this featured? Feature this, dammit! -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 20:49, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. Not sure why I waited to long to read this. Musta been drunk, I guess. --Johnny C. Raven 01:13, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The fact that this still hasn't been featured yet proves that the so-called "democracy" around here is a travesty. Whoever is keeping this off the front page should be ashamed of himself. --Johnny C. Raven 00:46, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Two questions:

1. Are you kidding?

2. Can you count?

--—rc (t) 07:36, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Wow, this article changed a lot since I started it, changed for the better! For! --Darkdan OUN 03:29, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Guest 03:17, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For Has this really not been featured already? Wow. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 14:56, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For This article is amazing. --Sir AlexMW KUN PS FIYC 15:26, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For At some point THIS ARTICLE MUST BE FEATURED because it is AWESOME. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 19:14, 25 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. But isn't this more UnNews than Uncyclopedia?   t o m p k i n s  blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 06:10, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Alternative Medicine

Featured Reaching back into the magical world of old VFH nominations. --—rc (t) 07:05, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• I'm just trying to imagine what Uncyclopedia would be like with John Gohde on - David Gerard 12:04, 12 Oct 2005 (UTC)
• Against. Not bad, but not front-page material. Rei 03:33, 29 Oct 2005 (UTC)
• For. I like this. Needs some funky pictures, though (but preferably not of extreme colonic irrigation). -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 01:10, 31 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I added a couple of funky pictures. --Spintherism 05:34, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

• We are amused, and by "we" I mean "I". - Mandaliet 21:21, 14 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• teh For --Willy on wheels! 00:03, 24 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• For. Good stuff. Mindspillage 21:36, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. So that's why people where those Che shirts. --Isra1337 03:38, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• One Too. Sj 01:06, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For I'm going to start voting for my own articles, now that it's getting so competitive. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 14:28, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Sure. --KATIE!! 05:10, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For because my image is on it. --S P I N N I E 05:42, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For Please FEATURE THIS ARTICLE. It's very high quality. » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 14:13, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The artist formerly known as God

Featured --—rc (t) 05:03, 30 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Damn fine. Even subtle Q jokes mixed in - David Gerard 22:00, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• Very, very nice! I can not see anything wrong with it. --Chimzar 15:30, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• Whee! ---Mandaliet 06:30, 6 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• I support the nomination of my own article. --Isra1337 02:56, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• You may accuse me of nepotism, but this article warrants another "Aye!" --Fudgesickles! 05:13, 9 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• -For. --Hobelhouse 22:37, 28 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• Original. For --Logixoul 17:41, 29 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• The title is clever enough. For. --KATIE!! 04:41, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For Sheer genius. I can't believe I didn't vote for this before.--Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 12:51, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Great effort. For --Caiman 13:02, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I Fucking Hate the Bermuda Triangle

Featured --—rc (t) 07:01, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• LOL - David Gerard 07:54, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For. --Kafeithekeaton 20:03, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• I Fucking Hate People Who Don't Vote For --EvilZak 20:07, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For --Just Tenn. You were expecting Sophia? 20:44, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

For Desperately needs to be featured --71.126.167.121 02:04, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• For --Stalin 03:16, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For Proof that an article can be factual and funny. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 07:02, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For --Doctors Mob 01:47, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Yes. --KATIE!! 03:21, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For YES Ashibaka 06:46, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Upvote! </Nazi Submarine Captain Impression> » Brig Sir Dawg | t | v | c » 08:15, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• For! --Dac Vin 23:27, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• for lol best article since voice chat...which was like a couple days ago..but still funny as hell --Greenirvana 21:54, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• Big for - A very well executed rant, one that defies the convention that rants usually suck and actually works. 2 thumbs up. Neegore 12:51, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
• I like it Glug...glug...glug...glug T.W. North 15:34, 24 Dec 2005 (EST)