Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion/Archive229

Graham Greene

Score: 1
Keep (3)	Keep. Notable subject, reasonable stub. Needs work.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:06, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Keep. Romartus volunteered. Aleister 19:36 5-2-'11 Kip the Dip Sir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj • KUN 22:44, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (4)	Delete. Very little here, and none of it is really worth keeping. pillow talk 21:43, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. Graham Greene is more funny than this article. Coronium 22:33, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Per above. Spıke ¬ 22:50 3-Feb-11 Give it to Romartus. 1234 ~ 16:51, 5 February 2011
Comments	Send it to my page for a rework. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 09:35, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Agreed, thanks. I'll change my vote as required. Spıke ¬ 19:03 5-Feb-11 Periods -- 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 04:53, February 8, 2011 (UTC)

Graham Coxon

Score: -2
Keep (5)	:) So while none of the other G articles here today are worth arguing over, I am going to have to disagree that this article has nothing to do with Graham Coxon, it does, that its also nice to have some British content, especially content not worth being deleted as most British content is very huffable, and that this article is not huff material. :) --Shabidoo 23:09, February 3, 2011 (UTC) "Most British content is very huffable"? I respectfully disagree as follows: poopy. --UU - natter 09:39, Feb 4 Keep. This little piece of bandcruft is now passable and is definitely about something, despite not having a photograph of the subject, something I'm sure Shabidoo can provide. Surely not as huffable as most other British content.... Spıke ¬ 00:23, 1:52 5-Feb-11 Im not sure if thats a compliment or a knife in the back spike. I love how you confuse me. --Shabidoo 02:30, February 8, 2011 (UTC) Neither; based on your vote, I took you for a Coxon fan. Spıke ¬ 02:32 8-Feb-11 Okay, in that case i neither love you nor hate you. See notes below --Shabidoo 03:22, February 8, 2011 (UTC) Keep. Black flamingo slobbered on it, and may continue slobbering. So keep. Aleister 1:14 6-2-'11 Keep because I've just rewritten about 95% of it and hope to continue. However I think we should huff everything ever written by Mhaille, Sog, UU and every other British user. --Black Flamingo How odd... it doesn't suck nearly so much any more. 1234 ~ 03:20, 6 February 2011
Delete (3)	Delete. Graham Coxon is, apparently, the frontman for Blur. This article has absolutely fucking nothing to do with him. pillow talk 21:41, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Nah - he's the guitarist, not the frontman. Mind you, the article still sucks, and that's from a "British" perspective. I say, what? --UU - natter 09:39, Feb 4 Delete. Not about the subject. Coronium 17:49, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	I've cleaned up the first section of this 2005-cruft; any author who starts any page, "Little is known about..." should be perma-banned, but puberty may have done our job for us. This is about something, and is an attempt at humor, as the band Blur is referred to as Bleugh--in each of two separate sections. As no one has noticed this, the article doesn't seem to have a constituency--not one with a pulse. Spıke ¬ 19:11 4-Feb-11 Where's the introduction? 1234 ~ 16:50, 5 February 2011 As we discussed on your talk page, the former Section 1 is now the intro, a sort of career summary; a better intro requires an Uncyclopedian who is actually familiar with Coxon. Paging.... Spıke ¬ 19:45 5-Feb-11 I have uploaded three photos of coxon and placed them on the page (i welcome anyone to move them or delete them as you think necessary--Shabidoo 03:22, February 8, 2011 (UTC) Spliffed -- 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 22:16, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

OMFuckinGodium

Score: 4
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (4)	Delete. Random, badly written drivel. Coronium 11:29, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Is it an expression? an element? a disease? or merely a vehicle to ridicule Al Gore? The article has the preachiness of a HowTo, but it's not about anything. Spıke ¬ 15:57 5-Feb-11 I think I'm allergic to this article. The entire notion seems to be redundant with some of the stuff to which it links, or it seems to be, at least. Hard to tell, since it's so all over the place. Feck. 1234 ~ 07:35, 6 February 2011 Delete. I entered this article thinking it would be about the Negura Bunget album OM being so godly. Why are people so tasteless these days? --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 12:46, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

Empire of Antarctica

Score: 4
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (4)	Socky pointed me to this as a 'page to destroy', which I took as that I should try to clean it up. I mean, how better to destroy something than to make it good? But when I tried going through it and found it to be almost entirely random cruft with very few jokes and no overall angle or funny, I sort of gave up. Perhaps someone more acquainted with the art of saving pages might be able to do something to it, but I'm just no seeing the redeeming value here. Older revisions just seem to be more of the same but shorter. 1234 ~ 19:15, 4 February 2011 Awful. Author also has Kingdom of Antarctica, with more nonsense numbers and exclamation points. Spıke ¬ 20:15 4-Feb-11 Delete.If we delete this, the other articles that relate to this particular 'canon' would also have to go too. It is part of some unfunny vanity universe which means it cannot be improved/edited/etc by outsiders i.e. everyone else who contributes to this website. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 08:22, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. Badly written vanity. Coronium 11:31, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

Graham Norton

Score: 4
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (4)	Delete. How to write an article about a gay celebrity: 1) Say that he's gay. 2) Say that he's gay fifty thousand more times. 3) Hit "Publish." (I'm still getting used to the fact that the Save button says "Publish.") pillow talk 21:46, February 3, 2011 (UTC) I take it he's gay. Could be worse, Hyperbole: The button could now read, "Become famous!!!" Spıke ¬ 22:53 3-Feb-11 PS--Today, the Save button says, Save. Spıke ¬ 15:53 5-Feb-11 He's so gay! ...so? 1234 ~ 01:39, 6 February 2011 Not funny. Coronium 13:25, February 6, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Comment. Norton is quite openly gay - so this article isn't really saying anything that is funny/shocking. He is a regular fixture, institution on British TV - despite coming from Ireland and appearing in the classic TV series Father Ted. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 17:41, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Gradient

Score: 4
Keep (1)	Keep. Just for the coding itself. It's dry but well-written, and obviously exceptional in the work put in on it. I'll move some of it to one of my "this is interesting stuff I like" pages. Aleister 13:37 4-2-'11 p.s. Then why don't "we" find a funny pic for it? Something out of context that would make it funny, but I wouldn't want to write the color code for the pic. I'll check it out. I saved the page to one of my user pages for enjoyment later in case it's huffed. 2:28 5-2-'11 p.s.s. I put a pic on the page that seems relevant and interesting.
Delete (5)	Delete. I appreciate that a lot of work seems to have gone into this. But the end result is a completely factual, unfunny article about gradients, with a color gradient effect applied to it. That's not really worthy of keeping. pillow talk 21:36, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. I'm with Hype on this - dull spork with a colour effect. --UU - natter 09:32, Feb 4 Delete. I can't see it making anyone laugh, although it's a clever idea. The article isn't about that sort of gradient anyway.... Coronium 17:47, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Off the fence. Despite my comment below, there is not a single thing funny about this article, and its Byzantine coding ensures that no one is ever, ever going to edit it to make it so. Spıke ¬ 20:18 4-Feb-11 Not funny, and things can be as well-coded and/or pretty as some sort of masterwork and easily not be funny. Not that this is well-coded, which indeed, as Spike says, will probably just scare folk off. 1234 ~ 01:17, 5 February 2011
Comments	We usually cut some slack for "articles in the style of the thing they're about," and this dry spork about gradients uses gradients--every letter is a different color. Obsessive. Spıke ¬ 22:41 3-Feb-11 I copied it to ?pedia. Seemed appropriate - though not funny, it's completely insane, at least from a coding perspective. 1234 ~ 07:18, 6 February 2011

DONKEY.BAS

Score: 0
Keep (4)	Really? I think this is a really good stub. It made me smile, and it really ought to stick around. pillow talk 21:22, February 3, 2011 (UTC) I completely agree with above. There is no lack of obvious humour, the humour that is in there is nothing but obvious. It doesnt matter that the game is 30 years old. You dont have to know the game to get the article. Theres nothing wrong with this article being short, it doesnt have to be long. Its not that bad. --Shabidoo 23:15, February 3, 2011 (UTC) As long as someone wants to chew on it, I don't see a problem with it staying... *eyes Hyperbole suspiciously* Anyhow, the fix should cover it if not. 1234 ~ 07:46, 4 February 2011 Keep. Work from a very new and promising user. I'd like to see this one just ride on the Expansion tag for a month...--Sycamore (Talk) 09:57, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (4)	Delete. Stubby, and no obvious humour. Coronium 16:56, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. It's weird we even have to vote on something this obvious. Just knock it over the head and drag it into the bushes. Aleister 17:00 3-2-'11 Delete. Literally one paragraph about a game from 30 years ago that no one ought to remember. And don't need external links to the source code either.Spıke ¬ 17:28 3-Feb-11 Delete. Though I don't have a problem with its lack of obvious humor, I don't think it is nearly long enough(even by stub standards). --
Comments	Not Voting. Sycamore attached the expansion tag. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 21:18, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Note: If this does get deleted, could some kindly admin stick it in my userspace? I have ideas. pillow talk 21:25, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Kurupt. -- 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 05:14, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Being dead

Score: -1
Keep (4)	As for the comments but in terms of keep the thing. --Shabidoo 23:59, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Keep. This is funny.--Sycamore (Talk) 06:41, February 2, 2011 (UTC) Keep This nomination, as well as most other nominations in the past year, concerns me. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 01:40, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Not good, but not delete-worthy, either. 1234 ~ 16:12, 3 February 2011
Delete (3)	Death is a Complete Uber Bitch. In my opinion, to redeem this article, it would require quoticide and getting rid of the list, after which it would be a tiny one or one and a half paragraph stub whose contents are covered a lot better in Dead. → I am greatSoup? 22:19 1-Feb-11 ← Delete. All you seriously need to know about being dead can be found in You Are Dead. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 22:50, February 1, 2011 (UTC) EXTERMINATE! - Another n00b 16:00, February 3, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	I did a little quoticide. It's a complete article, about something, that is funny at times. Problem is that it isn't so much an original humor essay but a series of Screwing In A Lightbulb-style jokes about attitudes toward death. Spıke ¬ 22:43 1-Feb-11 Yeah, I guess so. I went through and got rid of the red links, but I'll ride this vote out cause I'm still unsure on how necessary it is when we have Dead. The one-liner jokes could probably be put into a section on the Dead article, since it seems to be a bit disjointed itself (although still a lot better than this one). → I am greatSoup? 22:52 1-Feb-11 ← Scarf. -- 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 05:12, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Grammar Police

Score: -4
Keep (5)	Keep. I fixed it up a little. Still not great, but okay. -- 00:40, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Rewritten except for the section on History. Spıke ¬ 01:32 4-Feb-11 Keep. --~  13:08, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Keep. Seems now to have improved somewhat since it was wheeled into the VFD basement.--RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 09:20, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Hi, actual article! 1234 ~ 07:32, 6 February 2011
Delete (1)	Delete. We could redirect to Grammar nazi or Grammar concentration camp or Grammar Communism; whatever. None of them are great, but they're all better than this. pillow talk 21:50, February 3, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Wikipedia says Lynne Truss is an English journalist who wrote The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation. (I would add a hyphen.) That sounds like a grammar Nazi worth a biography, but the article does nothing with it, but gambols into Randumbo. Spıke ¬ 23:16 3-Feb-11 PS--She is also a BBC Radio 4 host who wrote a book subtitled The Utter Bloody Rudeness of the World Today. Starting to look eminently deserving of a ridiculous bio here. Spıke ¬ 23:22 3-Feb-11 Eats, Shoots and Leaves. A panda who doesn't want to pay the bill and goes out guns blazing. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 09:20, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Kept --ChiefjusticeXBox360 12:54, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Grahamtopolis

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete. Complete fucking nonsense; wouldn't be surprised to learn that it's vanity. pillow talk 21:48, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. Complete fucking nonsense; if it's not vanity I'll cut my foot off and eat it. Yum ! Coronium 22:38, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Seven grade-schoolers in Sherwood, Oregon (identified by code name) imagine their town is a (yawn) sovereign nation. Clear vanity. Spıke ¬ 22:58 3-Feb-11 Delete.If this turns out to be students planning their own 'Columbine', we will be deleting history. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 19:03, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Yawn. Random, nonsensical vanity. What a fine combination. 1234 ~ 07:31, 6 February 2011
Comments

Graduate student

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete. As far as I can tell, this is a factual article about moles, with the title "Graduate student." pillow talk 21:37, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Has a concept, although a completely effortless one. Spıke ¬ 22:44 3-Feb-11 Delete. As far as I can tell, this iszzzzzzzzZzzZZZZZzzZZZZzzz. --UU - natter 09:35, Feb 4 Delete.. Graduate students are not moles. They are beavers. Coronium 17:48, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Um, those would be co-eds. Spıke ¬ 02:15 5-Feb-11 Ahahaha no. As much as I love the idea of literally treating them as moles, it's just stupid. 1234 ~ 01:58, 5 February 2011
Comments

Grampians

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete. I've seen this article attempted before: find something totally uninteresting and say it's uninteresting. It's hard to satirize things when there isn't really anything to say about them. pillow talk 21:51, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Self-deprecation humor has to be done with more care. Lead by stressing how un-notable and boring the topic is, and you've both broken the Encyclopedia canon and made your reader go away. Spıke ¬ 23:06 3-Feb-11 Delete. --Roman Dog Bird 08:13, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Delete. --Count of Monkey Crisco 01:47, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Delete. I thought this was going to be about some mountains in Scotland. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 08:31, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

Grace Nortey

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete. Random, asinine, etc. pillow talk 21:30, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Only recently, it has been reviewed that Grace Nortey is a well known slut! Searching for the page on Wikipedia yields: "the actress is real, however the article is almost entirely a hoax." Spıke ¬ 22:38 3-Feb-11 Delete. Because it sucks. --UU - natter 09:29, Feb 4 Ugh. Stormtroopers of Death could not save this article. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 15:47, February 4, 2011 (UTC) ...trout. 1234 ~ 01:55, 5 February 2011
Comments

Grabbed by the Ghoulies

Score: 6
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (6)	Delete. Some kind of child molestation video game thing that we don't need. pillow talk 21:29, February 3, 2011 (UTC) this game fucking sucks --Roman Dog Bird 21:42, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Go, nads. Go. Ghoulies are nuts. This article isn't. This article on a nonexistent Microsoft game is an overlong ode to grabbing one's own or those of others. Spıke ¬ 22:36 3-Feb-11 Delete. Actually, it's a real game, and a fairly accurate article. It's just not funny and doesn't belong here. --UU - natter 09:28, Feb 4 Per UU. 1234 ~ 01:53, 5 February 2011 Delete. Takes a single, childish, joke about ball grabbing and tries to turn it into an article. --
Comments

O'Fish clan

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete.. Unfunny nonsense. Coronium 17:24, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Pointless. --UU - natter 09:24, Feb 4 That's just... what? Really doesn't seem worth it. 1234 ~ 01:26, 5 February 2011 Delete. What Spike said, but I find the concept inadequate. --Count of Monkey Crisco 01:45, February 5, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Author has come up with a title but forgets to serve the rest of the article. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 09:39, February 5, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Adequate concept: Examine the family tree of McDonald's Mr. Filet O'Fish. Poor execution: no photos, and half the links are red. Could be saved, not sure it's worth doing. Spıke ¬ 17:30 3-Feb-11

Granada

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete. Basically just a conceptless mess; inferior to a blank page. pillow talk 21:53, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. Ugly. Coronium 22:35, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete. I crossed paths with author Bob the Wikipedian last summer on Hyphenation, but this one shows signs of being typed in one session without slowing down to think. Doesn't do anything real with the comedy song by Allan Sherman or Ronald Reagan's invasion of the Caribbean island. Doesn't do anything at all. Spıke ¬ 23:04 3-Feb-11 hello muddah --hello faddah 08:12, February 4, 2011 (UTC) Delete. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 15:50, February 4, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Also a redirect Grenada. Spıke ¬ 23:04 3-Feb-11

Category:Sandwich Wars

Score: 3
Keep (5)	Keep Pointless, becoming far too frequent nomination. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 06:06, January 31, 2011 (UTC) keep, its a meta discussion. --Shabidoo 18:27, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Keep. LET'S DELETE THE WHOLE SITE, I FIND IT POINTLESS!!! → I am greatSoup? 21:08 1-Feb-11 ← And then we can delete the whole interweb :) --Shabidoo 21:19, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Pointless -- 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 21:15, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Keep. I stand by what I've said on this issue here and before and I've not read anything to convince me otherwise.--Sycamore (Talk) 06:43, February 2, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (8)	Pointless, mostly unused category. 1234 ~ 00:35, 31 January 2011 Delete. How is chutney in Sandwich Wars and ham salad isn't? Spıke ¬ 00:51 31-Jan-11 *Sigh* - It only has 3 articles in it... Smuff [cite your sources or die] 08:28, January 31, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Dexter obviously is debating it. Dexter can go listen to Brokencyde. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 16:08, January 31, 2011 (UTC) Delete. category that doesn't categorize. Thankfully, we don't have enough sandwich-based wacky war articles to populate a category. --Mn-z 01:11, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Delete. What Lyrithya said. --Scofield 15:44, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Delete..IMO, our categories should either be funny or serve some sort of useful categorizing purpose. This category doesn't meet either of those criteria. Coronium 17:25, February 3, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. Also... we need a policy over whether it's cool to decategorize people's userpages. pillow talk 21:27, February 3, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Again. If itsd a pointless catrgory, empty it and then QVFD it. Don't bring it here unless there would be any real debate over it.--Sycamore (Talk) 09:51, January 31, 2011 (UTC) To be a smartass, it appears as though Dex is against deleting this, so I believe that does constitute actual "debate" over deleting this. On a more serious note, this category is on two user-pages, and removing categories from userpages feels a a bit "bold" to me. I've done it before, but normally when I was renaming/merging categories or removing nonexistent categories, but I felt like I'm going a bit beyond my authority to do it. --Mn-z 01:11, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Yeah. And another problem is, though, where do we draw the line between categories worth emptying and putting on qvfd and small, odd categories that really do merit keeping? In what I might find worthless, others might find merit, and visa versa; is that not the entire point of VFD? And yeah, this one only had two (I added it to one of my PLS entries later)... say I had just emptied it and listed it on qvfd - what if it had had four? Just a couple more... not a terrible stretch. Still easy to empty... call me paranoid, but I'd really prefer to err on the side of caution with these. 1234 ~ 05:14, 1 February 2011 It's a sad case that the keeping of funny and useful categories is beyond the basic reasoning of several contribuiters here, meaning more time spent on buracracy at VFD - arguably in an ideal state only stuff thats dodged an ICU a few months ago should be on here, VFD today is now (in relation to activity elsewhere on the site) a massive collborative effort to account for the common sense deficit and 'legacy building' pastimes.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:24, February 1, 2011 (UTC) I share Mn-z's reluctance to visit lots of articles and remove categories from them, to take a freshly "empty" category to QVFD; that seems sneaky so as to avoid debate. And I disagree that people with different thresholds for deletion are incapable of reason. Spıke ¬ 14:36 1-Feb-11 There most certainly is a LOT of time being spent ripping down mediochre articles rather than a) chasing after the truly horrible and painful to read stuff of which there is a lot and rather than b) improving articles and rather than c)writing them. Ripping down categories = wikipedia style admin rather than making things parodiac and funny. --Shabidoo 15:09, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Reverting to smart-ass mode again, the article is currently standing at 4 for and 6 against after about 2 days, so that looks like there is in fact debate over this. --Mn-z 21:42, February 1, 2011 (UTC) It's 5 for and 8 against now, and none of the for votes say anything positive about the thing we're voting on. Spıke ¬ 23:11 3-Feb-11 Eh, it only takes a few seconds to look at an vote on a category, though... not like a terribly long article which one theoretically should actually read. 1234 ~ 16:35, 1 February 2011 (A reply to Sycamore's vote) So you're standing by that it should be quick deleted and thus voting that it shouldn't be deleted? 1234 ~ 03:04, 3 February 2011

Gadzooks

Score: -3
Keep (4)	Copy-edited. Spotty execution but great concept: Gadzooks is presented as the archetypal stand-in for swear words. (Our Euphemism goes in a different direction entirely.) Has an example TV script from when there were only 3 networks and they all censored themselves. Intro is preachy and Section 2 is childish, but the article knows what it's doing, and does it, a little bit. Spıke ¬ 00:55 31-Jan-11 Keep. Nice copy editing Spike. --Shabidoo 20:56, January 31, 2011 (UTC) I like the introduction. 1234 ~ 05:20, 1 February 2011 GADZOOKS!!!!! --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 23:11, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (1)	Delete. Unfunny stub with little future prospects. Coronium 19:56, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Anon added a section on the apparel chain-store of the same name. It was poor and ultimately removed, but it's another direction the article could follow. NXWave and Syndrome disagreed on whether this belongs in UnScripts; I agree with Syndrome that the script is merely an example. Spıke ¬ 00:58 31-Jan-11 Kept --ChiefjusticeXBox360 09:59, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

The Colour of Money

Score: 2
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (2)	While making this more accessible to people unfamiliar with the show might help, that's also just bad writing. From the wikipedia article, though, I'm not even sure what is supposed to be funny about this one. 1234 ~ 17:44, 29 January 2011 Delete. The joke is that some people are superstitious, are wedded to a victim story, and are tricked into exchanging something for something of lesser value. Wait--those are jokes from this British version of Let's Make a Deal. What humor is added by this article about the show? Spıke ¬ 17:07 30-Jan-11
Comments	Well guess we can't decide this one? Idunno try again next month??? -- 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 07:23, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Assassination

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Some pretty bad writing in here. --Scofield 13:46, February 1, 2011 (UTC) Delete and redirect to Assassin, though even that one droops toward the end. Spıke ¬ 14:19 strikethrough 21:42 1-Feb-11 Let's nominate it too, then! --Scofield 15:42, February 1, 2011 (UTC) What SPIKE said. No need to delete everything, Scofield. I did a quick trimming of Assassin. It isn't great, but it isn't as retarded anymore and is worth a redirct to now. → I am greatSoup? 21:34 1-Feb-11 ← Listcruft gone. Thanks, Bevanz, that's what Assassin needed. Spıke ¬ 21:42 1-Feb-11 Yeah, I think something as vital as assassins needs representation on here. It could probably use a total rewrite, but I've been pretty busy lately, so I might not be able to get around to it. However, I did have time to get rid of the listcruft you mentioned, trim out some hastily-written sentences that I can only assume were added by 13 year olds, and rewrite a few less-intelligible parts that I thought should stay. And I added a picture, yay! → I am greatSoup? 21:48 1-Feb-11 ← Delete. It looks more like a stub some user or IP had left off on editing and never came back to finish. DJ Mixerr 00:16, February 2, 2011 (UTC) User:DJ Mixerr/sig Redirect. 1234 ~ 01:11, 2 February 2011
Comments	yup --Roman Dog Bird 01:02, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

Garnet Til Alexandros XVII

Score: 4
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (4)	Yay, game crap! It's just bad. 1234 ~ 18:22, 29 January 2011 I saw that and found the desk hitting my face. Smuff [cite your sources or die] 00:18, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. lame. Coronium 19:58, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Hopeless. Just hopeless. --Scofield 15:48, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	The templates, they hurts ours eyeses. Gamecruft, you say? then I'll abstain in case this is about something--though the article itself never says what. Spıke ¬ 16:59 30-Jan-11

The CELTA course

Score: 0
Keep (2)	Keep. I dont think this needs deleting. --Shabidoo 03:28, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Very keep. Very amusing. incidentally it's a good idea to have an idea of what you're nominating - if in doubt, always ask.--Sycamore (Talk) 19:07, January 30, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (2)	The only part I found decent, the good cop, laconic cop dealy, could apply to anything teaching-related. Doesn't actually seem terribly important to... eh... whatever this is. 1234 ~ 17:31, 29 January 2011 Delete. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 20:49, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Again, the concept is adequate: ridicule a version of what in the US is called English as a Second Language. The execution is marred by the author's self-indulgence, the first person, and nagging the reader. And we are not in the typewriter era, needing to conserve our little bottle of white-out (Tipp-ex); having duplicated a section head, you are to correct it, not laugh at yourself and call it humo(u)r. Spıke ¬ 17:12 30-Jan-11 Actually, if an article is unclear what it is, that's never a good sign. I don't mean subjects, mind; those are typically easily looked up if all else fails, but the directions of the articles themselves. Perhaps what this one needs is just someone to clean it up. 1234 ~ 19:18, 30 January 2011 Fribble. -- 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 21:18, February 1, 2011 (UTC)

Reel time strategy game

Score: 4
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (4)	What, even, is this? I'd say it doesn't make sense, but I'm too confused to even be sure about that. Except apparently the article doesn't know, either... 1234 ~ 17:28, 29 January 2011 Delete. As not even any audiophiles in the audience have a collection of reel-to-reel tapes, and as the resulting pun in the title means that no one except nominator will ever trip over this article, it is essentially an article about nothing. And it abandons even tape reels as it veers into preachy, nagging, masturbation jokes, obscenity, and stereotypes. Spıke ¬ 17:16 30-Jan-11 Delete. - It's nothing like I was expecting it to be; asides from the word "game" in the title, I didn't even know what it's about. Smuff [cite your sources or die] 08:37, January 31, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Not funny. --Scofield 17:07, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Abstain.. It's generally a crap article but I found some of jokes earlier on mildly amusing. Coronium 20:00, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Internet wars

Score: 0
Keep (4)	Keep. --Retard 20:29, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Keep. - Another n00b 20:41, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Lulz inb4 "wacky wars" Fish fucker 22:46, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Keep.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:50, January 29, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (4)	Delete.. hurts my brain. Coronium 17:26, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Yay, nonsense! But seriously, eh? 1234 ~ 07:43, 29 January 2011 Delete. Who's Ronald? --~  17:03, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Leet and memes. Treating the early Internet as a medieval war could be promising, but get serious about being funny. Spıke ¬ 17:33 30-Jan-11
Comments	Porn. -- 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 23:08, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Pleonasm

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	While I appreciate the notion of making articles in the style of the things they are about, it still needs to be funny, which this isn't. It mostly just came across as confusing, at least at first, as it wasn't exactly being that true to itself. 1234 ~ 17:22, 29 January 2011 Delete. The author doesn't really seem to understand exactly what pleonasm is, and I can't see anything which can be done to sort this apart from starting again from scratch. Coronium 18:29, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Pleonasm is redundancy--Wikipedia provides as examples "black darkness" and "burning fire." Author here--obviously not a native English speaker, and that is why he thinks that pleonasm is a word anyone uses--mixes occasional pleonasm with mere repetitiveness, and when we get to the final list, mistakenly assumes that the mere use of a pleonasm is funny in its own right. It becomes a meme, while trying to tell jokes in your new, adopted language. Spıke ¬ 17:24 30-Jan-11 Your spoken discourse surrounds me everywhere, like my mum's nags but disguised with the costume of an artificial wig. SPIKE covered it well enough.→ I am greatSoup? 20:58 31-Jan-11 ← Delete. You're the boss, SPIKE. --Scofield 17:13, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

The IA Family

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	What is this and why would it be funny? Shortbread in it for anyone who can say. 1234 ~ 17:48, 29 January 2011 I wanted shortbread, but all I got was this lousy teeshirt. It must be funny somehow. I put in a pic and caption and moved on. Will check back to see if someone gets the shortbread. Aleister 18:12 29-1-'11 Delete. People shouldn't be exposed to this sort of nonsense. Coronium 16:15, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Overt vanity, right? Spıke ¬ 17:03 30-Jan-11 Delete. I- uh... what? → I am greatSoup? 23:46 31-Jan-11 ← Delete. Get this out of my sight. --Scofield 15:51, February 1, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

Youtube Poop War

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	Delete. Stupid. 'Nuff said. --~  13:51, January 31, 2011 (UTC) Very. Morphing Youtube, poop, Super Mario, and Wacky War is not a concept at all, but total incoherence. Pro tip, don't do a War Infobox unless you can get it right. Spıke ¬ 13:56 31-Jan-11 Flush! - Down to Illogicopedia it goes. -- Kippy the Elf Talk Works ☃ 14:00, Jan. 31, 2011 @Kip: I'd really rather it didn't. We could do without this on either. 1234 ~ 15:38, 31 January 2011 A shame really. As a fan of these kinds of videos, I thought this would be a little amusing. Unfortunately, this doesn't make the cut. There's funnier stuff on the actual Youtube Poop wiki (yes there is one). --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 16:13, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

Pokai

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	It's... complete nonsense? 1234 ~ 17:50, 29 January 2011 Horrible. I put in a random pic to funny it up about 300% and give it some random storyline context, so delete the pic with the article. Aleister 18:26 29-1-'11 Delete. This is just terrible. Coronium 18:32, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Delete. The single paragraph of prose is totally incoherent. I assume the remainder (a list of Fun Facts) is too. No one but Anons here. Spıke ¬ 17:01 30-Jan-11 Delete.Isle of Randumbo.--RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 23:11, January 31, 2011 (UTC)
Comments

Pokemon (Show)

Score: 8
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (8)	come on --Roman Dog Bird 03:13, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Obliterate. Pokecruft started months ago that never officially got off the ground. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 13:38, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Ban Any Pokemon articles from being created ever, please. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 14:01, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. unfunny shit. Coronium 16:12, January 30, 2011 (UTC) A fine ass ginger that an angry black man would like to fuck Even if you care about Pokemon, there is no reason you'd care about this author's reaction to it. Spıke ¬ 16:50 30-Jan-11 I'm impressed. That's just random, bad, etc etc. 1234 ~ 17:45, 30 January 2011 DIE DIE DIE!!! But not completely. We could put some of the stuff on "The Characters" thing on page Pokémon (The Funny Version). After that "Funny Version" page would be full, better and stuff, We can replace the whole Pokemon page into the "Funny Version". I think the Pokemon page is bit lame. After this it would be better. Cat the Colourful 06:58, January 31, 2011  Against. You're kidding me right? That one looks worse than the original. --Wilytank can be a pain in the ass. 16:04, January 31, 2011 (UTC) OH! I just water gun'd in my pants! Also, I agree with Wily, that "Funny Version" is terrible. → I am greatSoup? 20:52 31-Jan-11 ←
Comments	I've reverted vandalism from this month by Rawr604 and Ripoff996, which doesn't change the nature of the article. Spıke ¬ 16:50 30-Jan-11

Absolutely Fucking Nuts

Score: 5
Keep (0)	No keep votes.
Delete (5)	This isn't good -- 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 21:45, January 29, 2011 (UTC) I'M GOING NUCKING FUTS!! It's true. -- 03:25, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Delete.. Absolutely fucking nuts. Coronium 16:12, January 30, 2011 (UTC) "This article is a random string of characters and typeage spawned by someone snorting crack." So says a template. This is sandbox material. Pursuit of a comedy goal is Uncyclopedia. The joy of flouting all known goals is Illogicopedia. Trade it there for future draft choices. Spıke ¬ 16:52 30-Jan-11 I fail to see how this is amusing. Not to mention it's redundant with a whole slew of other crap... 1234 ~ 17:46, 30 January 2011
Comments

Holy Martian Empire

Score: 1
Keep (4)	I would suggest speaking to the guy that wrote it and engaging in ways to improve an article that, although may not tickle YOUR funny bone, clearly amused the contributor(s) who worked on it. This is FAR from the worse article I've seen on Uncyclopedia, whilst again I would argue against words such as unimprovable when people have shown that articles of this nature CAN be improved on a regular basis. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) Keep I see nothing wrong with this stub. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 17:02, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Keep. Per Mhaille.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:50, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Oh, and keep, I guess. 1234 ~ 17:12, 30 January 2011
Delete (5)	Delete please. It's some article full of jibberish and practically no humor. --Revolutionary, Anti-Bensonist, and TYATU Boss Uncyclopedian Meganew (Chat) (Care for a peek at my work?) (SUCK IT, FROGGY!) 18:56, January 27, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Random. And not in a good way. Coronium 21:52, January 27, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Why is it that a martian civilization always finds its way into bad articles? "And Popeye became emperor of Mars..." and so forth. Ughhh, no redeeming value. -- Sf13 2103 EST 27 JAN 2011 this blows --Roman Dog Bird 03:53, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Delete. The author seems aware of the Holy Roman Empire to attempt to pun that with this.Otherwise this is one of those unimprovable articles that would require a contributor to get inside the writer's head to understand what he is attempting do here. I can't say I am bothered on that score with this one. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 07:53, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	You idiots, you forgot the {{VFD}} tag. 1234 ~ 16:44, 28 January 2011 Carpet. -- 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 23:07, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Egypt

Score: -3
Keep (6)	Doesn't need to be destroy forever, just needs a strong revolution. -- 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 06:39, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Keep. Another country along with the States that has a lot of back taxes to the crown. Pay up you honky fuckers.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:48, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Eh, it's bad, but it resembles an article and has something going on, and whatnot, so whatever. 1234 ~ 17:08, 29 January 2011 Keep. Though perhaps it should be re-edited and directed to a page on Egypt that changes the spelling of the country to the standard English name for the country.--RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 18:19, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Keep. Why would we delete this. Seriously!!???!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! --Shabidoo 03:28, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Keep. A decent article, though the substitution of the name is tedious. This is a joke nomination in reaction to Mubarak's evident shutdown of the Internet nationwide, much as when Pakistan, in May, was set to block Uncyclopedia over depictions of the Prophet, e|m|c replaced our article on them with a redirect--promptly reverted by the Chief Justice. Spıke ¬ 17:30 30-Jan-11
Delete (3)	Strong Delete Come on, guys. It's the law now. No internet in Egypt. We don't want to be criminals, now do we? - Not particularly sincere, Sir ColinAYBCUNVFHWhoringMore Whoring at 02:08, Saturday 29 January 2011 - Kerkill Let's get rid of Fredd, too. You know, for good measure. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 02:39, January 29, 2011 (UTC) Delete. That's not Cleopatra, that's Elizabeth Taylor. So this article isn't real. Why does that sand lion have big rolling-eyes? Who made this page? They should go back to school. Aleister 18:15 29-1-'11
Comments	Vreipeit. -- 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 23:07, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Barnstars

Score: -3
Keep (3)	Keep. Eh... It needs some cleaning up, that's for shure. But I like it. -- 03:27, January 30, 2011 Keep.. Could do with some more work, but the "Can I have one ? No" made me laugh too hard. Coronium 16:14, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Rewritten. Original author had the perverse tendency to get text to wrap to the next line by typing a sufficient number of spaces. Spıke ¬ 18:26 30-Jan-11
Delete (0)	This really didn't get very far, despite TKF's ICU. 1234 ~ 18:37, 29 January 2011
Comments	The concept is keepable: Explain barnstars by asserting that Wikipedia is the copycat of Uncyclopedia. The execution is horrible: The article is stubby, the preachy, self-referential first person and the question-and-answer format breaks the encyclopedia canon without adding anything special, and it never invents an explanation for barnstars at all. Spıke ¬ 16:57 30-Jan-11 Meh, 'sa reasonable stub now. 1234 ~ 19:22, 30 January 2011 Redumpled. -- 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 23:13, January 30, 2011 (UTC)

Abe

Score: 0
Keep (5)	Its random, but I honestly find it as funny as some feature articles. It has some strange underlying humour (buzzwords for I cant explain why I like it) and definately does not deserve deletion. --Shabidoo 00:08, January 27, 2011 (UTC)  For. Keep it, but add some info, eh? It can't all be facts. Or can it? --      Go Crazy Awards ~ Contribs ~ Gallery ~ Piglet 03:22, January 27, 2011 (UTC) No Maniac, every article has to be perfectly 2011, completely non-facts and full of maniacism ;) wanna collaborate on this? I cant do it myself, but I REALLY REALLY REALLY don't think this article should be deleted. But like, really --Shabidoo 09:44, January 27, 2011 (UTC) Sure, we'll collaborate. I really like your username. Shabadee Shabadoo Shabadoo Shabadoo Shabadum. --      Go Crazy Awards ~ Contribs ~ Gallery ~ Piglet 21:41, January 27, 2011 (UTC) I like your username even more. Im super jelouse. I wish I had thought of maniac mcpoop first! Lets finish the month of January. We can "live our lives", "have a life", "finish our meager poo lit attempts", "try to save a few more articles from huff monsters" and "have a life". 1st of feb we can start colabing??? --Shabidoo 01:56, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Sure. Feb. 1st, it's on. --      Go Crazy Awards ~ Contribs ~ Gallery ~ Piglet 22:26, January 28, 2011 (UTC) Keep, since Shabiwhatever and that maniac guy are working on it. No reason to bother sending it back and forth between spaces if they are actually trying to fix it. → I am greatSoup? 22:40 27-Jan-11 ← Per Bevanz. They've now committed (I'm sure both of them have been committed), and so a great page will emerge as if from a fog. Maybe th old man user can write some of it (seriously, the character was a good one, maybe keep it even outside of the sock) Aleister 00:24 28-1-'11 HAHAHAHA --Roman Dog Bird 04:10, January 28, 2011 (UTC)
Delete (5)	Delete. Completely random. Coronium 20:52, January 26, 2011 (UTC) What article is there is poorly written, and some other stuff I forgot when I neglected to put in a vote after reading it. Now I hardly even remember the thing... memory is so fickle. 1234 ~ 02:39, 27 January 2011 Christ... I mean... Shit... What the what? -- 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 06:52, January 27, 2011 (UTC) Delete. Awful in pretty much every way. --UU - natter 09:55, Jan 27 Kerkill But send a copy to Shabidoo's userspace to work on improving it. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 11:12, January 27, 2011 (UTC)
Comments	Snarpt -- 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 16:04, January 30, 2011 (UTC)