User:Tompkins/Nintendorulez whining
 WARNING!  |
And now a page completely devoted to Nintendorulez whining about Euroipods. (see: Euroipods)
Against. It's like a fraction of a stub. A stub of a stub of a stub. --Nintendorulez 20:46, 31 Oct
That's what I've been trying to say the whole time. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 16:53, 15 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I don't see any humor either. Explain the joke to me. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 16:55, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I think perhaps all the debate would be settled if somebody would explain the joke here, if any. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 01:40, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
I still don't find this article funny. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 18:10, 3 Dec 2005 (UTC)
No, it wasn't funny, it as shit. Nothing about this article is funny in any way, shape or form. It's just a one-liner about freeipods under a different name. Normally this stuff gets QVFD'd in an instant. And to make matters worse the article has been locked to prevent people from making it funny. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 01:27, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
That... doesn't make sense... --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 12:00, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Seriously, explain the joke here. It just looks like a crappy page that failed to get QVFD'd --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 12:45, 5 Dec 2005 (UTC)
So that's one "joke" in it's entirity, and it's a lame one. Not funny, not frontpage material. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 23:23, 7 Dec 2005 (UTC)
If there's a joke, than what is it? --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 01:40, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
It's not a joke if it's not funny. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 02:23, 10 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Dammit, I wanted to bring up the fact that it's not a joke. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 20:09, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)
Good. Once this becomes a decent article, we can put this whole thing behind us and pretend it was decent when it was first featured. Then it will no longer be a disgrace to Uncyclopedia. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 19:48, 13 Dec 2005 (UTC)
According to all my math knowledge, the overall vote was against. And other articles had much, much, much more "for" votes and much less "against" votes than this one did. So why the hell were the rules broken and this crap featured? --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]]
Suck up. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 11:50, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
See, it stayed because it\'s the truth. Apparently people agree with me that it isn\'t funny. --[[User:Nintendorulez|Nintendorulez | talk]] 11:50, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
Dammit, Flammable accused me of vandalizing the page and banned me for 24 days. --Nintendorulez