Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion/archive20

Dustin diamond

Delete Is basically the reprinted Wikipedia article, word for word, with a few gay jokes added in. --Jlove1982 16:08, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• I just reinstated the above comment, after it was vandalized by the page's author. I also banninated the jerk for attempted ballot tampering. That probably warrants a Delete in and of itself. Plus, the page name is miscapitalized. I hate that. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 17:09, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE!!!!! Substantial edits have been made. This is an evolving article. What gives you the right to unilaterally delete posts? And what makes you assume that this alleged "ballot stuffing" was perpetrated by the original author of the article? Check the IP addresses in the history, and you'll see that the author did no such "ballot stuffing." BobBobBob, you should double-check your facts before you make false accusations, moron!-- Lance McBeefwell 01:54, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Do not Delete-has potential for expanding into something beyond a carbon copy of a Wikipedia article (which, by the way, was severely edited as well). There's a whole mess of things that can be added to this article to expand upon it and make it funnier. Furthermore, if the IP addresses of whoever allegedly vandalized the comment here and the article's author match, fine, but that shouldn't have any bearing on the article itself, as other people are going to edit it and turn it into something else. If you're bullshitting us, Bob, and coming to some groundless conclusion on your own, then you're a retard. And quit being such a pissy cunt about the capitalization... it's not like that can't be fixed. Happy goLucky 22-12-05 5:14 (UTC)

Comment. What do you mean it's an "evolving" article. If you are still writing it you should add a {{WIP|~~~~~}} tag. Simply being able to be expanded isn't necessarily a reason not to delete an article, almost all articles could be expanded. The question is if someone is going to expand it. I haven't really read the article, so I won't vote, I just wanted to clarify a few things. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Keep Has potential. Dasphoebus 09:03, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

DO NOT Delete!! Will be hilarious if allowed the right amount of time!!!

• Wow... I opened a can of worms here... the author seems to be really committed to whatever he's doing. I put it on this page rather than the quick deletion because I felt that someone could do something more creative and original with it. Anyways, my concerns are still relevant. Yes, it has potential. That being said, so much of it is still just the Wikipedia article copied and pasted onto the page... there is potential with the subject to make great things out of it. I won't change my vote for now, but I'm going to leave myself open to change that. Jlove1982 22:56, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Jlove, if you'll look at the rest of the comments in VFD, you'll see that the so-called votes above are highly unlikely to be counted. Well, that's not entirely true. The IP addresses that made them are highly likely to be counted in the Roll Call of the Damned. I don't have time to research them at the moment, but we admins don't generally like it when someone calls one of our bretheren and sisteren "moron", "retard", and "pissy cunt" (although that last one at least shows some creativity, or at least anatomical accuracy, if I happened to be of the female persuasion). Also, if anonymous folks want to fake a signature, they should at least *try* to do it right. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 18:00, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Hey Bob. I just checked those out. I think that I was simply responding to the backlash my reaction to the work caused. That being said, their responses to your correct actions are incredibly childish, and the article itself (which is supposedly evolving) seems to be turning into a mess of tasteless gay and AIDS jokes. Sorry to keep this going, but there's humor, and then there's tastelessness, and they seem to have drifted into the latter. Jlove1982 20:55, 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Do not delete-This is hilarious! Anon. 19:15, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Hilarious indeed. Baleeted, along with the stupid category Category:Actors with jew-fros whose only member (heh) is this article. Comments welcome, and please be sure to vandalize my user page, too, so we'll know who to ban. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 17:58, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Chris King

Smells like vanity/non-notable. Lots of google hits because it is a common name. No en.wp. --Splaka 03:09, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I think it's fine. -YodaManB

I don't think I know its awsome.....

Keep it here, it is my first attempt at heavily satirical writing and you cannot delete this or else I will kill your fucking dog. --Thanatosys 02:27, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)Thanatosys

Kuwaiti Midget Ninjas, Kuwaiti Migit Ninjas and Pineapple Ninja

Delete. Lame, stubby ninja pages unworthy of being eaten by Types of Ninjas. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Delete, however, I will defer to anyone with more extensive knowledge of the Ninja culture. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 21:19, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete the article, but keep the image, tis hilarious and can be put into very good use. --80.227.58.13 01:17, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC) huffed --Sir gwax (talk) 00:50, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Luminos

Delete. Ha, I feel like I'm spamming the vfd page. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Damn right you are.--Unissakävelijä 03:20, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Hoogeveen

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Newfie Missile Crisis

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Rude Words

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Flashbang

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Bambi Smith

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Hubris

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Delete That's not what hubris means at all. The wit sucks, and the person who created it sucks. Please die. Dasphoebus 1:07, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

KillNot as funny as it would like to be, and it could be very funny in the hands of the person...can someone call PJ O'Rourke? Prettiestpretty 21:53, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

NRVed I want to see if it has potential for saving. --Sir gwax (talk) 01:22, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Freak foxhunting accident

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Delete, although the page's author has a lot of decent edits under his gut belt. Maybe he'll hear the article's dying cry and come to us to ask for its salvation. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 21:21, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Meh. I clicked a red link in the Simpsons article and this is the best I could come up with. I thought it was mildly funny but it's quite possible it's just stupid. I wouldn't care to much if it gets huffed (jokes can be recycled). Doug 23:06, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC) (and thanks for the compliment)

Lord Voldemort

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Delete, or risk suffering guilt-induced erectile dysfunction for the next year and a half. Trust me when I tell you that that's not nice. --BigFoot 23:46, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete Except for giving me an epileptic seizure from all of the blue links, this article does nothing for me. Dasphoebus 09:05, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite Yes, it's not funny. But why delete it? Just make it funnier.--71.111.55.175 18:07, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite This made me laugh out loud, but it could be funnier. And delete a few of the blue links.--PinkDeoxys 18:22, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC) NRVed to see if someone can make something of it. --Sir gwax (talk) 00:54, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Magic cards

Put this page out of its misery I started this page a while ago, and have just come to the realization that it's complete and utter irredeemable crap. Please nuke it so I can stop being ashamed of its existense. ... Like some creepy little brother who no one likes and who turns out to be a druggie. Yeah, that's pretty much my relationship with this article. --Oracleoftruth 05:34, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Waleet, either that or help merge Magic: the Gathering and Magic: The Gathering and insert the redemable stuff from this article into the new MEGA MTG ARTICLE! --The Zombiebaron 22:17, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

No, just delete it. One day, someone will recreate it, and then we can consider restarting this deletion request, but let's give the opportunity for somebody to write something that didn't get out of hand. "If at first you don't succeed, give up, cry, cry again, fail again, fail better." --biggy 00:19, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

IGame Online Advanced

Delete and nuke all subpages: not only do we have enough games like this, but this one really sucks. --Sir gwax (talk) 00:32, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Concurrrrr --Splaka 01:00, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Shred the whole lot. Things like this make hitting the "Random Page" a complete let-down.--King In Yellow 15:30, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Not IT!!! Someone else hasta do the dirty deed. I'll clap. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:44, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

You know what I think about this? Honestly?

I think WikiIF needs it's own wiki.

Maybe I should start some big argument about it on wikicities, trying to get a wiki started for collaboratively written interactive fiction, some satirical, but also some serious. That would be a totally awesome project to get involved in. --Nerd42 02:40, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Shut the whole thing down. --Unissakävelijä 11:49, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Just kill it - It just sucks. --Oracleoftruth 20:26, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Make the bad article go away mommy. --KATIE!! 20:43, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

NO! Why? someone here hasn't even explained why this is so bad yet. Oh for crying out loud. Fine then, if you people are so annoyed at my HORRIBLE writing skills, i'll just go and delete it myself. Since i'm pretty much the person who made it. Me, myself, I don't see much wrong with it. Could someone explain my horrible taste in artice choices please? **mutter** All I try to do is make a decent article that would be something nice to add on to, and this happens. Explain? I agree with Nerd42, there should be a wiki like that. --Captain Radio Willy 23:44, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

on it --Sir gwax (talk) 00:58, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Inversion Universe

Delete. I thought this article had promise, but it's been incredibly stubby for the longest time and I don't know what to do next with it. So unless someone else wants to adopt it, just burn the thing. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Delete. It's far too useful to be on Uncyclopedia.--King In Yellow 17:27, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Deletzor --Sir gwax (talk) 16:51, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Telepathy / Telepathetic

It's just dumb. --FlyingFool 20:30, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Huff this dreck. This topic deserves much better.--King In Yellow 20:58, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Not that bad. Leave it until something better comes along.

Q-NUKE --Sir gwax (talk) 20:41, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

In case I didn't make my vote obvious enough earlier, stab it, shoot it, leave it on the floor bleeding for a while just to watch it writhe in pain, then run it through a meat grinder, dehydrate, and serve as a topping on salad. --FlyingFool 14:56, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I made it go away --Sir gwax (talk) 01:05, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Special:Randompage

Delete

Utter rubbish. --Carlb 08:34, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep and Feature lol --Nerd42 22:07, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Attention Deficit Disorder

Sample highlight:

Attention Deficit Disorder Jokes
  Joker: "How many kids with ADD does it take to screw in a lightbulb?"
  Jokee: "I dunno, how many?"
  Joker: ".. wanna ride bikes?"
  ADD Child: "I want to kill myself"

Kill. -- T. (talk) 08:06, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete Thankyouthankyouthankyou. Is it too much to ask for someone to make up an ADD joke that hasn't been done to death, buried, resurrected through dark arts, skewered on a pike and left in the sun to rot? Again I say Delete. --—rc (t) 08:27, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Redirect to existing ADHD entry. We really do not need two of this page. *yawn* --Carlb 08:34, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Redirected Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:00, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Merge The article that this page was redirected to was worse than this article. Instead, just to make people happy, they are now merged and already it's looking better. I did some heavy edits to the page to make it less idiotic and only mildly idiotic. 66.30.230.86 20:39, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Uh... voting after the fact? Nice one.  :) -- T. (talk) 15:33, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Mexican

Kill - I started this page a long while back, but it's since become nothing but a long string of dreary, incredibly repetative and unfunny racist humour. Since my original joke wasn't all that hilarious, there's really no point rolling back the edits, so I say huff it. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 03:04, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I was going to add {{eat|Mexico}} but it sucks too much to bother; huff da bitch. --Sir gwax (talk) 21:00, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep. I don't care how much an article sucks, adding "beaner" to it will make it funny. Now keep the page, beaner. See what I mean?

Condoleezza Bice

Huff: iz crap! --Sir gwax (talk) 23:16, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Seconded, it offends my eyes! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 23:21, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

OK, not a great article but it made me smile at one point. It's not poorly written or extremely short either. Therefore I say keep, even though I doubt there is any room for improvement. --Unissakävelijä 21:30, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Merge to Uncyclopedia Idol if that ever gets created. --Carlb 15:12, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Liza Minelli

This wasn't crappy enough for QVFD, so I'm posting this here. --Infobacker 17:45, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Destroy Liza Minelli is crappy, this page is just shitty --Damaged Too 03:08, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Kill - this page is fecal droolings.--King In Yellow 21:17, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Torch it. - the subject has potential but it ain't realized here --Doctors Mob 01:41, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Calc 2 answers

An admin told me over in QVFD that this might have been funny. WTF? --Infobacker 17:45, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete: iz teh not funny. --Sir gwax (talk) 23:28, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Kill More than mildly pointless --Damaged Too 03:06, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)

weak keep it has potential... maybe. It's not funny now, but I can see it being funny, if a good author added some actual text. --Oracleoftruth 03:29, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto: Lego Island

Huff: Poorly written and not as good as the original. --Sir gwax (talk) 05:51, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep! This is so random it's hilarious. Plus, it kinda has a legacy. You can't just get rid of this. --Kyle1 04:48, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep --- Dude, I still have my Legos. --Nerd42 03:22, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite - not bad, but it could do with a polish (and an external link to www.brickflick.com for those who are really interested in the concept) --Careax 15:21, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. Someone changed it around 9 December, making it unfunny and less grammatically correct. However, I reverted it back to the funny version. This change was most likely why this page is here in the first place. --Kyle1 01:02, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Don't you people read comments; it's unoriginal and that is the primary reason why I think it should be huffed. --Sir gwax (talk) 21:04, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Vanity rules anyone? Where/how would this fit in? --Nerd42 21:06, 16 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep This is very well written.--PinkDeoxys 18:29, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Mpemba effect

I encountered this unfunny piece of crap when its creator linked to it on Wikipedia. It's written like Mad Libs. Sorry if I'm screwing up this nomination - I'm not from around here. Have fun. 18.19.0.41 15:46, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I laughed, I cried, itsa keeper,...besides the whiner is a wikipedian just trying to kill it, whah!

김 진우

Huff: Looks like a vanity page to me. --Sir gwax (talk) 23:30, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Bomb this page. It needs must be levelled.--King In Yellow 21:19, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Stab his heart while you're at it. KTHX. --Unissakävelijä 21:26, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

It seems to have some sort of humor too it. Personally, it isn't sheer vanity. Keep--Kafeithekeaton 19:30, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with you, but as hard as I try, I'm drawing a total blank in my attempt to come up with a witty rejoinder. Delete -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 21:32, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Template:DYK

Partially delete

{{DYK}} is the random Did You Know template, which pulls one DYK entry from the archives. Unfortunately, many of the individual entries are rubbish and could use some cleaning up. --Carlb 21:14, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Nerd42 briefly considers voting for a holocaust of Template:DYK, Template:DidYouKnow, Did You Know and even Random humor just for good measure, then decides to just abstain. Forget it, I'm not voting. --Nerd42 00:32, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Alien Swarm

Huff: It's sitting there and nothing links to it; it should be improved or huffed. --Sir gwax (talk) 14:28, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete: It's pointless. Even the mod itself was more fun than this article.--King In Yellow 21:20, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

NRA

Delete: Not witty, funny or anything else it should be, it's just spitting weak ass chicken poison all over my new furniture. It has to go.--AirGunRunner 11:12, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite Not great, but there's a couple of decent gags that could be built on. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 13:04, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite - I agree with Cap'n Ben, give it a polish. --Toilet24 20:47, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite - Maybe I'm bias as I wrote much of this article's nonsense, but I don't think it deserves deletion. Plus, if deleted it will just re-emerge, to "become more offensive than you can possibly imagine", via someone else. Definitely does need an overhaul though. To be honest I was expecting the content to be reworked sooner than this, by someone funnier than I. --Careax 07:00, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Purely objective question here... What is the purpose of the 'VFD' page? If an article that appears here and gets 2 'rewrite' votes to one 'delete' (excluding my own vote) can still get deleted by an admin, why not just dump all contentious articles in 'QuickVFD'? That would at least save everyone time and hassle. --Careax 01:27, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Gambit

P-Nuke: poorly written, unfunny, poor spelling, poor grammar --Sir gwax (talk) 00:47, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete It's every bit as pointless and incoherent as actual X-Men comics. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 13:08, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete, if for no other reason than the fact that the author can't even spell "porn". That's probable cause to revoke his Intarweb License, too. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 20:52, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

KILL AND GRIND AND KILL AND CRUSH AND KILL AND KILL!--King In Yellow 21:24, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Fix spelling errors, turn all the images on the page upside down (literally) and then Keep --Nerd42 22:16, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite and keep -- Spaceghost

Lima beans

Almost auto-huffed it, but it's just strange enough to be worth asking here. Note that if we keep it, it's got to move to Lima bean, or else the foundations of the universe will be shaken. -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 00:04, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Huff and puff and blow the article down. --Sir gwax (talk) 00:49, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

As much as I hate random humor, keep and protect. That's classic work there. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 01:09, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep I can't see any reason to like it, yet strangely I don't dislike it. Unlike much random humour it has an odd sort of charm. --Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 13:16, 6 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep, I giggled. That deserves something --63.224.132.236 02:49, 11 Dec 2005 (UTC)Damaged Too

Electronic Farts

Okay, what the heck is this article trying to say? I don't see funny! --Infobacker 14:14, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• I think it's suppoused to be a spoof of Electronic Arts... but a lame attempt. But than again, I shouldn't be talking, because my [Operation iraqi freedom] is up for deletion also --Getukrainian 17:49, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

'Keep, but Rewrite & Expand the opening line is so so funny ... just wish there was an actual article to go along with it. --Nerd42 23:29, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I'm the original author, and yes, it's a spoof on Electronic Arts. It's a stub, and one I think that has potential to be great. If you don't like it or don't find it funny, you know, Be Italic and improve it. Rewrite & Expand. --Morgaelin 15:51, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The Twelve Best Universities in the Universe

Huffed because category templates are best implemented as categories. --Sir gwax (talk) 15:19, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Template:University is a mediocre in-universe template that is used by 12 short, mostly unfunny stubs. It is a piece of crap that is redundant with Category: Universities and should be huffed. --Sir gwax (talk) 23:32, 19 Nov 2005 (UTC)

The Twelve Unfunny stubs.

I also think that Oxford University, Northwestern University, University of Pittsburgh, Webster University, University of Mars, University of Atlantis, Antarctic University, Judea University, Dadumm University, University of Egypt, University of Tatooine and Nayru University should be expanded or nuked. --Sir gwax (talk) 23:32, 19 Nov 2005 (UTC)

I think some of those names have potential, all though the articles stink like briefs. Delete all or Rewrite most promising ones. Acid Ammo 23:45, 19 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Pushed up for attention. Acid Ammo 02:09, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Blackpool Tower

It's sat there for about half a year. What do you all think? --Ianweller 14:41, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep. Needs a picture though. ComaVN 15:06, 2 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Delete.--47Monkey MUN HMRFRA s7fc | Talk 05:31, 4 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Huff: it's a meh at best in my book. --Sir gwax (talk) 06:08, 9 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Preserve--Unissakävelijä 09:41, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Muci

Not funny. Could be rewritten but Just looks to be lost to me. --Illogicalbeats

Delete. It's just random and doesn't go anywhere. --neoEva88 22:43, 1 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. I kinda liked it. The biggest problem was that it wouldn't ever get linked from anywhere... so I moved it to Mucus. Can't believe there wasn't already an article there! -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 22:59, 3 Nov 2005 (UTC

Fighting Insomnia

Contains ACTUAL tips that REALLY help combat insomnia. --MoneySign 16:53, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

And instead of deleting this here paragraph, Chris the chav, you should argue your case for keeping it... --MoneySign 17:31, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep

Surely it doesn't hurt to have one serious article here and there on Uncyclopedia? I don't think I've breached any rules in my article, and it could help a few desparate people. Of course, you could just one of these people who likes discrimmating against chavs.

--Chris the chav 17:38, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Weak Keep - Delete template should be switched to too many facts here template, then have some fun with it. You know, like say that, uh, Terrell Owens singing Prince songs to you while you try to fall asleep does not fix insomnia. Jlove1982 18:14, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Muwah ha ha. Added dysfactuation.--140.211.82.4 22:17, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep as it has been funnified and now only needs wikification. --MoneySign 22:40, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep: it's not the best article out there, but I think it's got potential. --Sir gwax (talk) 14:44, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep --Chronarion 19:27, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Nintendan

Unamusing stub which apparently exists only to be linked to by another VFD'd article (Samus Arab). --Andrusi 16:49, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Hufff: /me agrees. --Sir gwax (talk) 14:58, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Pet Heaven

Delete I thought it might be funny at first, but I couldn't even complete the article. Maybe all it needs is some TLC, but whatever. --Dr. Stupid 18:44, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. With a little love, we can work it out this could be a VFH. Besides, haven't we had enough cat-on-cat violence already? -- Sir BobBobBob ! S ? [rox!|sux!] 21:06, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep I think this article needs a lot of work, but there are some funny bits. If someone wanted to put some work into it and expand it, it could be a good article. -Ryan

Keep But unlike Ryan, I know this article needs LOTS of work. I'd also like to see an expansion of pet hell concept. Prettiestpretty 21:46, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep: I think it has potential. --Sir gwax (talk) 14:59, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Karan Mehta

Vanity? Huff. --KATIE!! 02:40, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete Is that supposed to be racist slur, or vanity? Dasphoebus 09:06, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Snorre Valen

Comment Vanity/deletion template placed on article. --129.241.119.169 16:45, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Daniel Halvorsen

Comment Vanity/deletion template placed on article. MadMax 05:31, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete Just stupid. Nobody gives a crapping crap crap about this crap. Dasphoebus 01:55, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Ramen

Delete LOLMOLE 23:38, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Keep. User:NewGuy 23:09, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete. --KATIE!! 20:39, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Flush it. --Doctors Mob 03:55, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Flush it again. And keep drowning it with toilet water every time it tries to poke a head out of the water. --BigFoot 23:48, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete, just for being a fat block of text. --IMBJR 23:05, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep I'm going to edit it, because it sucks, but it's still salvageable. Dr. Stupid 01:04 24 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Flush crap portions, keep funny picture --Chronarion 19:30, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

University at Buffalo

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Samus Arab

I have no clue what the author is talking about. If anyone can spot humour please tell me where. --Unissakävelijä 12:10, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Lame Nintendo fanboyism. Not a shred or originality, and possibly damaging to view. Blow it up.--King In Yellow 14:57, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

The idea may have a tiny drop of potential but the article sucks: huff. --Sir gwax (talk) 20:34, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Not funny and just stupid - pop a cap in its ass!--Oracleoftruth 05:52, 17 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Not a shred of humor here: Delete --Doctors Mob 01:37, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete It seems that the user played on a Nintendo character (Samus Aran) and then tried to insert as much Nintendo intertextuality as they could until the article was shitting it out. Dasphoebus 1:05, 21 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete lame...--71.111.55.175 18:28, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Me Grimlock not like stupid articles. Grimlock want smash! --Andrusi 16:45, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bawls0uw.jpg

Dude, ... no offense ... that's just nasty. What's it doing on one of my favorite pages? --Nerd42 18:36, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I putit there. I think it's funny. But by all means, take it off the Russian Reversal page if you want, I don't mind. Or if removal is agreed upon by a commiserating majority of intercontinental users with more than 1.55547 posts-per-decaliter....however the voting thing is calibrated! ;) ----OEJ 19:45, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

OK I just took it off teh page.--Nerd42 19:46, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep , The expression of the woman = win.Just needs a funnier caption. --80.227.58.13 01:29, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I think her funny look makes the shot. I suppose I'm not offended because I'm kind of a farmboy at heart -- it's just livestock, not porn. But the image is already in use on Something completely different so its presence on Russian reversal isn't really necessary. IMHO.----OEJ 01:38, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep, what the hell and besides it could be used on a page for Rocky Mountain Oysters. Prettiestpretty 00:37, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Rocky Mountain Oysters are up and look lovely. This image now has purpose. Prettiestpretty 02:57, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Google Toolbar

Not funny, there really isn't anything there, and it's not really an article. --The Zombiebaron 17:29, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Delete. -- neoEva88 MUN F@H PS CM NS (talk.to-do)

Keep, has potential. - Guest 18:52, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 18:55, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep, could be improved. --IMBJR 12:41, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Keep. Hi mom. 209.2.28.236 21:21, 19 Dec 2005 (UTC)

What the hell, Keep unless it starts eating other articles, Herostratus 07:58, 20 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Shall we...change it around a bit? hmmmmm.----OEJ 03:17, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

OK, changed it to a narratave of existential suffering and tragicomedy on the scale of King Lear. Er, perhaps not. Actually, I'm not sure it works more effectively than sour owl sh*t. Still up for deletion.----OEJ 18:11, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

KoЯn

kill: not up to snuff, in my opinion. --Sir gwax (talk) 19:37, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, um, delete. --KATIE!! 01:55, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Buffalo, New York

neutral modified since NRV tagging, is it any good? --Sir gwax (talk) 19:25, 26 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Random and stupid. Delete! --KATIE!! 01:54, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I see nothing that would be a great loss were it removed. --Isra1337 02:07, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)