This page is an archive. The contents have been moved from another page for reference purposes only, and should be preserved in their current form. Discussion or voting on this page is not current. Any additions you make will probably not be read.
What? I see the "poorly made" (which isn't a strike against it), but I fail to see the "hilarious". More odd than funny. Doesn't even rate a meh. Against. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 04:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
A classic image from one of Uncyc's older 'choppers that I've always been a fan of. Nom and for. - DonLeddytheCrunch (Nyah, see, nyah!) 16:51, Jun 22
Against Votes: 4
That does not look anything like a borg. This looks like a borg. Silver clothes and weird green eye-beam do not make a borg, in my opinion. That aside, the silver clothes and the green eye-beam are pretty ugly. They hurt my eyes too look at — as does his left arm. And they don't make me laugh. -- TheZombiebaron 17:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Shameful self-nom after getting a slight confidence boost from Modusoperandi's somewhat positive response at UN:REEF. //Berry; speak to me// 14:07 20 June 2008
For Votes: 3
I don't vote much on VFP, so forgive me if I'm doing this wrong...(are you not allowed self-votes on VFP?). Also for, the quality of the chopping is very good in this and it's quite funny. - [15:44 20 June] SirFSt.DonPlebYettie(talk)QotFBFFNotMRotMUNPotMUGotMCUNPEESRUnProvise
Against. The fact that a famed occultist is in a boat in a plate full of porridge may be a nice little bit of photo-manipulation wizardry (although, the mixed mediums do tear at the edges of the imagined reality), but it doesn't really make me laugh. I had more of a "Oh. That's a nice idea." style reaction. -- TheZombiebaron 16:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Per ZB It's nice, but not all that funny. Also the mixed pictures are pretty noticeable. -RAHB 19:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Against. Per the above really. Also, that looks like no porridge I ever ate. Baked beans, possibly. --UU - natter13:52, Jun 23
Self nom and for - because image noms are almost dead so a little humour should be cool on main page --Major'GUN' Ggarfield, Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 00:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Against Votes: 4
I don't get it and it frightens me. But for some constructive criticism, the upper left side of her lip (my left, not her left), there's a part where it doesn't connect up right at all. I don't know if that was intentional, but it's very inconsistent with the rest of the image. -RAHB 02:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
For. Puns are dull, unless you're the one playing with them. A pun of a pun is godly, no matter how it's conceived. This is how the world works. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 03:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
"A pun is the lowest form of humor, unless you thought of it yourself." -- Oscar Wilde. (also that whole text thing I like to talk about...) -- TheZombiebaron 03:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I quite agree with the text. It is a shitty play on words.--Sgt. Fluffy 19:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Nope. It's like deja vu all over again. Or should I say, deja poo. You see what I did there? What?! You think it's stupid!? Well, in France they think I'm a genius! A genius!SirModusoperandiBoinc! 17:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Good God, no. Finally an image about which I can honestly say "this picture is shit" without offending anyone. -- Sir CodeineK·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 20:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Against It's just so watered down. Also, another ego trip for Readmesoon. -RAHB 18:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Against - on the grounds that it poorly done and was never funny. Ever. -- TheZombiebaron 19:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Against - The Chuck Norris meme should have officially died once and for all sometime between the Mountain Dew commercial and the endorsement of Mike Huckabee. -- Thankful KippyShare blessingsBountiful harvest 21:39, Jul. 3, 2008
Nom+For Goes great with Dishwasher, but I think it stands alone also. I look, I laugh... MrN 21:04, Jun 6
And so, our brave hero went where no keyboard key had gone before: VFP. As he brushed aside comments of "text based article" and "fuck you", he placed what he had brought in his satchel before the feet of the VFP god: Self-for. He held his breath.~MinitrueSirSysRq!Talk!Sex!=/GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 21:36 Jun 6
yeah like it -- 90.206.92.186 21:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
For Explains a lot actually.--Sgt. Fluffy 06:52, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Against Votes: 11
Against; not only is it extremely textbased (yeah, I have this thing about that), but also, the caption "Beeper that always interrupts me watch Deal Or No Deal" should read "Beeper that always interrupts me while I'm watching Deal Or No Deal" (or some similar grammatically correct capation). On a similar note, the title "How Dishwashers Work" is entirely inaccurate - this is a schematic which outline the parts of a dishwasher, and in no way details how they all function together to make dishes clean. But hey, maybe the title was on purpose. -- TheZombiebaron 01:44, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
While I didn't expect to please you, I did leave the title as How Dishwashers Work to be sarcastic. As for the grammatical error, I completely missed it. Thanks for catching it, I'll be sure to fix it tomorrow. ~MinitrueSirSysRq!Talk!Sex!=/GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 01:50 Jun 7
In addition to what ZB said, the labelings aren't really all that funny. Comments like "something" and "something else" and "yellow tube" do not scream "FEATURE ME! I'M COMEDIC GENIUS!" Anybody could take a picture of anything and label it "this thing is here, this is something, this doesn't do anything" and it's been done so often before that if I were going to vote for any image similar to this, it would be one made a long long time ago, and not this one in particular. -RAHB 03:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Hard to read The picture is hard to read, and will probably be harder if it is blown up , considering that the image isnt a vector file.--Nytrospawn 17:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Against. The "Deal or No Deal" thing and "under the door" are hilarious, but the rest of them aren't very funny. Also, it's very hard to read. In other words: the same reasons as everyone else. « Arotenbe « aka arotenbe, AaronR, etc. « Now what did I do? « 02:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Against. RAHB puts his finger on it fairly well. Sorry Sys, but no chuckle for me = no vote from me. --SirU.U.Esq.VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee12:50, Jun 11
Against. Sorry, I did actually find the image humorous, but after reading the votes of everybody else I'm convinced that this just shouldn't be put on the front page. Something in my gut tells me so. Maybe heartburn. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 03:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Something, Something else are hardly comedic genius... as RAHB said; works in the article because of the brilliant prose/tone, not here. --SirDJ~Irreverent 12:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Against. Funny, but not by enough. It doesn't leave a lasting impression. With more thought, it could be a winner, but not in this state. --by Dr. Fraktur, the neighbourhood chiropractortalkprojects 21:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
You better make this more clear SysRq! MrN 21:04, Jun 6 oh, he did... MrN 22:02, Jun 6
Hmmmm This may set the precedent for labeling things in a funny way, not much skill involved but it is pretty funny. Still, abstain. --SirDJ~Irreverent 18:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)4
For. A classic of art. If you don't love it, you're insane. --by Dr. Fraktur, the neighbourhood chiropractortalkprojects 21:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Against Votes: 7
Against. While its non-existence does have a certain charm, it also has the opposite of that. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 11:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Against; I can't see the man standing behind the piano. Please make him move visible. I suggest the "crop" tool. -- TheZombiebaron 17:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Against. Again, still not a picture of a man with an enormous moustache. Um? WHERE IS THE PICTURE??? MrN 17:35, Jun 6
Weak against While the chop is very well done, that stem...thing, whatever it's called, the green bit, just isn't working for me. If you could find a way to implement that a little cleaner into the design, I'd be a for, even though I have no idea what the concept is really supposed to be. -RAHB 23:56, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Like RAHB said, the main body of the pineapple is a very nice piece of work. However, its just not making me laugh. Perhaps you could donate it to a fruity wiki in search of a logo, or use it in a fruity reskin. Basically, what I'm saying, is that its a pretty good looking image (it could benefit, as RAHB said, from making the stem-thing more congruent with the overall style), but its just not what I envision as a feature image. -- TheZombiebaron 00:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Against. Pineapples have the stem/leafy bit growing out of the top, not the center. This looks more like a pineapple inside an egg. I'm sure you agree that's ridiculous. Even if it was done real pineappley, it wouldn't be all that funny. SirModusoperandiBoinc! 11:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't get it. A knife, Barney, porno, and candy? What? Also, tomato-based image. --Pleb SYNDROMECUNmedicate(butt poop!!!!) 13:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
The shading is way off. Try using the crop tool. It will help. -- TheZombiebaron 15:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Against. It's real. So it's not a chop - strike one. You've cut the letters out of a Toblerone box or two, and hacked some about really badly to look vaguely like different letters, then made a not particularly amusing message - strike 2. Text-based image - strike 3. Still, glad it passed the time while you were in school. --UU - natter15:46, Jul 7
Ahahahahaha--NO. Not funny at all. Against. --by Dr. Fraktur, the neighbourhood chiropractortalkprojects 00:56, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Heh, I made that with my friends in school. I took that picture. GG. its real, sorry my friend. LOL. Quoting Zombiebaron: The shading is way off. Try using the crop tool. It will help. -- Zombiebaron GG.
crap
Against. Sorry, but it's not that well done, is it? The colours don't match for a start, and it looks like the "J" is drawn on. Is this an MS paint job? Whatever, it's also a text-based joke, and not a brilliant one at that. Now will someone do the obligatory bad "tastes funny" gag please? Or did I just do that as well? --UU - natter17:58, Jul 8
Tastes funny. For good measure. -RAHB 22:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
This is possibly the worst red link we've ever had on VFP. Scrap it and start over. -RAHB 22:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I much preferred the last redlink. This is just a cheap imitation. -- Sir CodeineK·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 00:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
The skin tone of the head doesn't match the skin town of the feet. And don't tell me that his feet are in the shade. Because that would just be stupid. -- TheZombiebaron 03:05, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
ZOMBIEBARON YOU'VE BEEN TO SKIN TOWN??? Le Cejak•<3:16, 10 Jul 2008>
I WANNA SEE IT!!!1!!1!111!11!11!111! --SirDJ~Irreverent 04:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
hey i like it-Bobofosho2 20:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Against Votes: 5
Against; this image in in black and white. I hate black and white. The text and the total lack of funny, though, I'm fine with. -- TheZombiebaron 20:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Wow, it's Calvin and Hobbes cut out and put onto a photo. As amazed as I am by that feat, I'm puzzled by the total lack of funny. –SirSkullthumper,MD(criticize•writings•critchat) 20:56 Jul 11, 2008
Against I did not intend this to be VFP, it is funny when put into the context of the article and I realize it is just tracer bullet put onto a background, in fact i don't find any of my picture VFP quality --Auk 21:16, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I can see water reflection shadow thingies on the dolphin. The burger isn't underwater. I can also see where you cut its head off.I can also see the contrasts are way different. I can also see London. I can also see France. I can also see Against. Also it isn't funny. -RAHB 06:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Self for - I know it's not perfect, and it's a little in-jokey, but it's worth a shot I suppose. (Bonner) (Talk) Jul 13, 10:43
Against Votes: 4
Against While I don't mind a bit of injoke now and then, this is far too injokey to put on the main page. People simply won't get it. And while it only takes about three minutes in uncyc IRC to find out who Olipro is, no previous experience could possibly prepare one for this. -RAHB 11:00, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, those dildos have a little bit of white stuff on them (it's hardly noticeable in the thumb, I just wanted to make that joke). -RAHB 11:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Against. Sorry. Same as above... MrN 15:48, Jul 13
Against, if we're talking Olipro-inspired-movie-posters, I much prefer this one. But, that being said, I would never vote for it on VFP. Because its an injoke. And its vanity. -- TheZombiebaron 17:59, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Against. In-joke and vanity. Also, I've been on IRC, like, five or six whole times in the last year, sometimes for minutes and still haven't encountered this "Olipro". I'm inclined to believe there's some sort of Keyser Soze-style spook story going on here. --UU - natter12:16, Jul 14
Against Not doin' it for me. -RAHB 22:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
That weird yellow fuzzy stuff at the bottom of the screen hurts my quality sensors, and my funny sensors aren't picking up anything. -- TheZombiebaron 07:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Against. I actually like the idea, but it's so zoomed in, you can't tell what it is at all, which kind of defeats the object - you need to at least be able to recognise what it is for the joke to work at all. --UU - natter09:10, Jul 14
Okay, you want to know? First of all, it's not zoomed in. It's 8-bit pixels. You know, in Super Mario the pixels are huge, but the game is still playable. On a cell phone (which as a far smaller screen) it would be logical (and funny) if the pixels would look huge, rendering the game unplayable. It's because it uses TV-qualified pixels. You get it now, UU? OR in a nutshell: video game console pixels are too big for mobile phones!!! --SirGeneralMinisterG5FIYCUPotM[Y]#21 F@HKUN 10:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I said I like the idea, so I do get it. But let me put it another way - that may be your intention, but it leaves the pic unrecognisable, and without the recognition factor, it looks like a few large pixels on a phone screen, which is not a funny image in and of itself. The caption kinda explains it, I guess, but it still doesn't make the picture funny. Do you get what I mean now? And I don't hate you. The only person I hate stole my bike in 1994. Unless that was you. In which case: bastard. --UU - natter10:56, Jul 14
04:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
WHAT THE FUCK! Indeed. -- 
Abstain. --
WHAT THE FUCK! This picture touched me in my special places. :( 
Berry; speak to me // 14:07 20 June 2008
Major'GUN' Ggarfield, Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 00:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
21:04, Jun 6 21:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
(Bonner) 
(Talk) Jul 13, 10:43
