Uncyclopedia:Votes for deletion/archive2

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Pope John Paul 3.0

Rewrite This is barely funny and needs to be made consistent with Pope John Paul 2.0. --iMacThere4iAm 17:40, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

This is not the place to call attention to pages that need rewriting.
Addendum: Should we have a place to call attention to pages that need rewriting, or is Requested rewrites enough? --Algorithm 17:52, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Using the template links isn't as useful as a Requested Rewrites page could be, but I don't think we have enough people that would be willing to handle all the rewrites. Some of the things with the {{rewrite}} should be deleted rather than rewritten. I vote Delete for Pope John Paul 3.0. --Paulgb Talk 19:13, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Format C: By the grace of BoB and the fury of Darth Dufus... oh hell, just delete it as it is not funny. --bdanials 22:48, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Delete It doesn't need a rewrite. It's just unfunny and stupid. --Uvula Donor 23:05, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Delete --Rcmurphy 23:08, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Delete --Goomball 07:16, 4 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Burninate yawn --Pnorf 14:27, 4 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Deleted --Uvula Donor 14:28, 4 Apr 2005 (EDT)

19th century

Delete You know you want to. --Rcmurphy 00:35, 3 Apr 2005 (EST)
Delete Horrible & unredeemable. --Lomedae 04:04, 3 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Weekly Week


Delete It's just a poorly written ad for some other sap's website --Goomball 13:53, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Read the stuff ;) pretty funi-- 14:01, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)
I read it. It's okay. But the place for links like that is in people's profiles, I think. --Goomball 15:48, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete Although the author is putting effort into it, the bottom line is that it appears to be spam. --Paulgb Talk 14:06, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete Spam. Contains blashemy. Remove with vengance. --Chronarion 14:08, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete Spam. Contains dishumor. Remove with vengance. --Famine 16:50, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Keep _OR_ Delete. Both with a vengance -- 16:54, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete Spam. --Darkdan 21:41, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete by all means link to it by user profile, yes, but don't create a page for it - otherwise the whole 'pedia will degenerate into a gigantic billboard for everyones brother's aunt's cat's hairdresser's college newsletter.--Machinecurse 05:35, 2 Apr 2005 (EST)

April Fools Day

Delete This page belongs in the Wikipedia. Uncyclopedia pages are supposed to be funny, but April Fool's Day is supposed to be funny in the first place, therefore it follows that the Uncyclopedia page should be factual and not at all funny. Ipso fatso --Fazookus

Keep You're speaking nonsense. Uncyclopedia pages are NOT supposed to be funny, and in fact follow NPOV guidelines. I am offended that you consider our pages non cladistine. --Chronarion 10:49, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Keep I would think VFDing this page was an april fools joke, except that you actually put the vfd template on the page. Just because the page is about a funny topic doesn't mean it shouldn't be funny, I don't get this logic. --Paulgb Talk 13:08, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Retain ?!? --Machinecurse 13:46, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Keep But I think it needs to be even more extreme, i.e. deploying small nuclear devices 'just for a laff' --Goomball 13:51, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

I took off the VFD template, I hope it wasn't too soon. --Paulgb Talk 14:02, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Fix It's got promise, but just isn't all that great. Armed robbery is about as subtle as a brick. Humm, come to think of it, shouldn't it be anti-trick? "People take April Fools as a day to express their true feelings for other human beings. If your otherwise loving, caring, significnat other does something horribly mean to you on this day, you now know how he feels inside, every day." Someone funnier than I am can fix it up. ;) --Famine 17:00, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Keep I dont know why this should be in VFD --Nytrospawn 20:28, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Keep I stand corrected, but only because of my orthotic insoles. Also April Fool!!. OK, so it wasn't all that funny, seemed like a good idea at the time. Foolzookus 07:14, 2 Apr 2005 (EST)

Keep probalby don't need a new vote, but wth --Pnorf 14:30, 4 Apr 2005 (EDT)

Main Page

Deleted --Paulgb Talk 14:32, 2 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete/Rewrite I can kinda see where he's trying to go with this page, but it never really has that 'punchy' supidity or a decent punchline. The concept of the Main page is a good starting point though... --Gadgeophile 18:33, 31 Mar 2005 (EST) (we're actually a good 17 hours ahead of that time where I am...)

Take to dinner and a movie I think it's rather...attractive. Almost sensual. --Rcmurphy 19:46, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Yeah That little blonde Sauron chick gives me a stiffy. --Uvula Donor 20:05, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete and ban everyone who contributed to this page. --EvilZak 00:00, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Sterilize contributors and immediate family --Chronarion 00:47, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete is it some kind of blog? Hideous amount of in-jokery. --Machinecurse 13:49, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Philip J. Kaplan

Go Go Gadget deletion.

Delete This just appears to be a stupid personal rant against the FuckedCompany dude. Or am I missing something? --Gadgeophile 20:46, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete I agree --Nytrospawn 21:29, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete. And delete Fucked Company while we're at it. --EvilZak 00:00, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete. Although at some point i'd encourage rants, this is.. not funny. --Chronarion 01:00, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Delete It gives me a headache. And a heartache. --Rcmurphy 01:06, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

Red Green

It is no more. -Bonalaw 02:45, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Don't get it.-- 12:08, 30 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete - it has only one link to it, but when read in the context of the link it still doesnt make any sense.

Delete Not funny. --Uvula Donor 15:25, 30 Mar 2005 (EST)

Uwe Boll

delete If there's a joke here that I'm not getting, please feel free to explain. --Uvula Donor 14:59, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Stub There's no real reason to delete this. Just needs expanding. --Algorithm 16:32, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Expand I like the picture. That guy looks so excited. --Rcmurphy 16:33, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/keep picture Unless someone wants to rewrite it, because nothing links to it. Why not just move the picture to somewhere irrelivent? --Paulgb Talk 17:20, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Abort, Rewrite, Fail Rewrite or nuke. Save the pic. --bdanials 21:05, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete --Pnorf 11:16, 30 Mar 2005 (EST)

deleted Uwe Boll is gone, but the image is still on file, if anyone can think of a use for it. --Uvula Donor 14:20, 31 Mar 2005 (EST)

Carmem Elektra

p4wn3d --Chronarion 14:09, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Erm, did I miss some elaborate joke about Carmen Electra and HTML? I doubt it. --MitchO 13:53, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete it's not even mildly amusing. --Clanger 13:59, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete It's not even spelled right. --RadicalX 14:03, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

The White Album

The White Album and while at it, ban the idiot who made the page. (Look at the history of that page for the reason...) --MZL 07:58, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)
Sorry, I messed up. The user should be banned, but the article is good. A little short perhaps. --MZL 08:28, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)
I agree with your recent edit - restoring visible text. But I question banning someone who blanks their own creation. That user created the page and up until you reverted it, he was the only one who had done any editing on it at all. --Uvula Donor 08:42, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)
To be fair, blanking it was probably the joke. Is it possible to turn it into white text, the type that would become visible on highlighting? -- 11:20, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)
Looks like you can.
The White Album is the 3rd album by 'The Culinary Ants' and also some other band.
The Album features 70 mins of pure white noise and it is recommended that you stare directly into a light bulb of at least 60W while listening to it.
::::What do people here think of changing the font on the article to white?
-- 12:18, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)
Font color changed to white as suggested. I don't think this page merits deletion. It could be added to, or revised, though. --Uvula Donor 12:22, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

My apologies. I thinked too hasty. I assumed he had filled the whole page with just blank lines. I'm very sorry. :|

--MZL 15:33, 29 Mar 2005 (EST)

I can't believe you wanted me banned for creating a page, whets your problem? I didn’t make and changes to someone’s existing page (and even if I had, we're able to do that). Yeah so I edited it a few time to get it the way I wanted so what, were not all as perfect as you. Humor comes in all forms and to those with some basic cultural awareness will know what the real white album is, sorry for liking more subtle humor

--B4zm4lti 04:39, 30 Mar 2005 (EST)

First: I already apologized. Second: As I already explained, it was a misunderstanding. I assumed you filled the whole page with blank lines. End of discussion.

--MZL 05:42, 30 Mar 2005 (EST)

The point and its pals

Delete just another loop of pages --Paulgb 19:05, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete (I fixed the link.) --Rcmurphy 19:19, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete Loop monkeys. They're everywhere. --Uvula Donor 20:42, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete I made a category, but this isn't funny! --Chronarion 22:21, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Deleted All gone --Paulgb Talk 13:42, 28 Mar 2005 (EST)


Removed from VFD. Congrats, it's actually funny. --Chronarion 23:05, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

I'm slipping... --Fazookus

I like it, and it didn't belong in VFD. I would have said so sooner, but I've been offline all weekend. --Uvula Donor 20:56, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)


Page redeemed! - I actually like the rewrite. Congrats! I laughed. Just in time for the 100,000 hit celebration too :) --Chronarion 22:13, 28 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep - Okay. Look, most of us here are.. pretty left slanted. The thing is, I recommend you check out Ambrose Bierce, "The devil's dictionary" for a good example of satire that is funny. You're much too bitter when commencing satire. You are not required to be silly, but you should not be so bitter. I welcome political satire. Really. But this is a little bit nasty. It is not, funny to say "Bush did this, therefore proving his inability to govern." That's not satire, it's an essay with a little sarcasm thrown in. Again, I do not really require alot of silly. Coherency is fine. It's just that you're missing the funny and making up with it with bitter. As sad as I am to say it, Michael Moore actually did a good job with satire in his propoganda. Maybe you should *shiver* learn from him. --Chronarion 23:10, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Ex: A "NeoCon" is a "New Conservative", someone who combines traditional Conservative values in all the important fields, exempting minor things like financial restraint with regard to public spending, respect for personal liberties, and respect for the US Constitution. In short, they're kind of like whiny little children, only they get to lick tax money instead of candy, despite all the germs. --Chronarion 23:14, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite Uvula Donor changed a (funny, at least a little) satirical jab into something just silly and not funny. I understand he doesn't like my politics, fine, but are we censoring for politics or funniness here? I don't want to continue a reversion war but I changed my original entry to remove some nastiness, I hope it's more acceptable. Actually I'm ashamed of the 'sociopath' crack and would have removed that too but UD left it in so I did too. --Fazookus 09:17, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Negative, Fazookus, I have no problem with your politics. I have a problem with the tone of some of your articles, not the politics behind them. It's like Acousvnt says, the angrier it comes out, the less funny it is. And the constant Nazi shit just borders on tinfoil hat territory. --Uvula Donor 21:05, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Work on a little? I don't think it's about censoring viewpoints so much as overall tone; personally I think the angrier something sounds, the less convincing it actually is, to say nothing of its impact on the humor. Pretend you're a magician. If you do want to make a political point, do it with the hand people aren't looking at. --Acousvnt 09:54, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite Fakoous: Satire is fine from either side of the aisle. It just has to be funny, which is something that you don't seem to grasp. --Savethemooses 09:55, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Actually, Satire doesn't have to be funny. The satire here is the contrast between the beliefs of traditional conservatives (individual freedom, fiscal responsibility) and the NeoCon (the 'Patriot Act', the deficit). '...louder ties and drinking buddies...' is silly, not funny, and yes, I'm aware of the distinction. Acousvnt, thanks, you make a good point, my prefered version (and I won't change the page, no reversion wars here) would be un-nasty:

A "NeoCon" is a "New Conservative", someone who combines traditional Conservative values (except for financial restraint with regard to public spending, respect for personal liberties, and respect for the US Constitution).

But if y'all want silly, it's up to you.

BTW I've stated my intent to (try to) avoid political satire, this is a plea for a previous offense 8P --Fazookus 10:23, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

BAW I do hereby claim both Satire and Humor (C) Mr. Fazookus, 2005. I may not be funny but I type really fast. --Fazookus 10:23, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Okay, let me rephrase that. Satire has to be funny on this site. Okay? You might as well give up because pretty much nobody agrees with you on this. --Savethemooses 11:10, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

I agree. Satire SHOULD be funny on THIS site. --Chronarion 22:19, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

I'm on the case and will rewrite this after my ode to my hero, Karl "Elmer" Rove. I think my problem is that when I say these kinds of things out loud to people they actually are funny, i.e., people laugh and/or throw things, because of non-verbal queues, such as my expressions of pain, smirking, or whatever... and when I write it I can visualize that and hear my tone of voice. But, um, you all can't, obviously. When I reread it with this in mind yeah, it's not funny, it's bitter.

1st rewrite I just have to go back and add some nastiness (it's in my nature) but I think this is reasonably funny without being too offensive. Can't have that!

Looking good so far. --Uvula Donor 22:35, 28 Mar 2005 (EST)

Britney spears (with a small "s")

Always comes up on a search instead of the real one, unless you explicitly type an upper case "S". --Acousvnt 16:03, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewritten. --Algorithm 16:15, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

That approach did occur to me, actually. Works for me.  :) --Acousvnt 16:26, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep it, it is worth a chuckle. Charles B

I like the rewrite. --Uvula Donor 21:09, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Power Rangers

Unfunny-- 13:37, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/ Complete And Total Rewrite That is quite possibly one of the worst entries of all time. --Savethemooses 14:27, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete I don't think it's redeemable. --Rcmurphy 14:30, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete "Unfunny" doesn't even scratch the surface. --Uvula Donor 14:34, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rape, Pillage and Destroy MY EYES!!!1! --JHarr 14:38, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite - nothing is impossible. Except the impossible. Which might or might not be possible. Let me rub my magic buns together and see what can be made of it. --Pieclone 15:52, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewritten I've left the vfd tag on, though; you may want to go ahead and nuke it anyway. It's just a stub (and a formatting nightmare), but there could be a seed of a joke there. --UnholySauce 01:30, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep the Rewrite much better. I added some <br> tags which seems to have fixed the formatting problems in firefox.

Keep the Rewrite Yes, much better now. --Uvula Donor 21:12, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Penis mutilation



delete/rewrite Was on the most wanted list earlier, and it looks like someone just threw up something for the hell of it. Not funny in the least... could possibly be rewritten but isn't it easier to deleter it and have it go back to the top of the Most Wanted list, waiting for someone to put some effort into it? --JHarr 21:11, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

deleted absolutly nothing there to be rewritten or expanded on. --Paulgb 10:40, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

stubbed Something else is there, but at least it doesn't totally suck, it's just stubby. --Uvula Donor 21:15, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Fiscal responsibility

delete Again, factual, not funny, just more political aze-grinding. Don't people have blogs anymore? --Uvula Donor 09:05, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep/rewrite I kind of like the idea of Fiscal irresponsibility being a weapon. It's one of those things that's funny because it's almost true. It'd be great if it could be made funnier, but I like the idea behind it.-- 09:20, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete I reckon all these goddamn hacks are refugees from Wikipedia, thrown out for POV offences --Machinecurse 11:16, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I don't mind this much, since it doesnt' appear to be written by a five year old. --Chronarion 12:52, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/rewrite It needs to be spiced up a bit if we're going to keep it. Otherwise it's boring. --UnholySauce 13:14, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep See "How to be funny", below. Political satire is always going to piss people off and you can't see the humor in something when you're pissed off... that's just life. And it's not factual, either, if that matters. --Fazookus

Requires more funny. I wrote how to be funny. Trust me in how to apply it. You need more funny. Your satire requires somewhat more satire, somewhat less bitter. --Chronarion 23:04, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

'Keep, but Modify I think its ok, but it needs a boat load of humor dumped upon it. --bdanials 03:21, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Karl Rove

Page redeemed. --Chronarion 22:12, 28 Mar 2005 (EST)

Video gaming

Redeemed --Uvula Donor 13:31, 28 Mar 2005 (EST) delete articles like this make me suspect I've missed some really clever joke. But I don't think I have, I think it is just random crap --TheTris 06:18, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

rewrited the whole article, as always, you are very welcome to check, and do whatever you think you should do about it.

Add --~~~~ at the end of what you are saying to add your name, otherwise no one can tell who you are without using history --Paulgb 13:26, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

rewrite again please... The joke, if any, just doesn't seem to work. Please try again, -- Anon

keep ... I think I get it. -- 13:49, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

keep It made me chuckle. --Morlark 23:06, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete/rewrite For those who think they get it: would you mind doing a bit of editing so the rest of us can?-- 01:05, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

done. (that 195... was me, I forgot to log in again) --Machinecurse 01:48, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)


Killed --PantsMacKenzie 15:58, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Unless I'm missing something, unfunny.-- 05:44, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete - not only is it unfunny, it is also orphined and a dead end. --Paulgb 07:43, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete --Rcmurphy 15:44, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)


Baleeted --PantsMacKenzie 15:57, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Factual.-- 03:41, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete - yup --Paulgb 07:41, 27 Mar 2005 (EST)


rewrite Uhh... links to some shop, totally incoherent, not funny in the least? Or am I just stupid? Maybe I don't see the inner beauty of the crap that is this entry? Maybe I should stop freebasing Plumber's caulk... --JHarr 14:13, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Please delete; this and several other pages were mass-spammed by a few days ago. --DWIII 14:20, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Deleted - The page history showed a persistent pattern of spamming, as did the IP (which has been given a little vacation from Uncyclopedia access.) --Uvula Donor 14:30, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Recursivity and Recursive

Okay, these are like the retarded less funny cousins of infinite loop and recursion. --Chronarion 12:51, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

edited the sentence to remove irrelevant content Izwalito 14:11, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)
Changed back. Opinions are not irrelevant. --Algorithm 18:29, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete We have plenty of infinite loop pages already. --UnholySauce 13:14, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete is fine. --Chronarion 18:42, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete is done. --Uvula Donor 12:38, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Russel targ


Seems factual.

I suppose I should elaborate here. This is an amazon search for Russel targ-- 11:44, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete Listing his books and adding one line about "a thing for Uri Gellar" doesn't save it. He's a whacko, but a catalog of whackos isn't what we're trying for. --Uvula Donor 14:38, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

buhleet I concur. --JHarr 14:41, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

Imaginary numbers

Article redeemed, thanks to Algorithm --Uvula Donor 07:01, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete Silly premise and even sillier entry.-- 23:30, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite / Delete Imaginary numbers are funny, unlike this article. --bdanials 01:09, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite venomous anti-math tirade --Machinecurse 04:11, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Attempted a rewrite. Feel free to change/add/remove. --Algorithm 05:34, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)


Content clipped, article redirected to bukkake. --Uvula Donor 06:59, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete now remarkably unfunny and possibly libellous --Goomball 19:19, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

What's the correct spelling: bukakkae or bukkake? Google is no help. --Uvula Donor 19:24, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)
Bukkake. [1] --Algorithm 20:53, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)
Now that is a cool site, thankyouverymuch. So, I say we delete the poorly spelled and rather unfunny bukakkae and go with the funnier and more disgusting bukkake --Uvula Donor 22:04, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete and Redirect to bukkake-- 22:20, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Spay or Neuter before Deletion --bdanials 01:19, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Uncyclopedia:Pages for deletion

Please stop recommending Pages for deletion to be deleted. It's not going to happen. Quoting Chrono: "I shall make it clear that, no, we are absolutely not replacing VfD. --Chronarion 12:36, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)" 'K? --Uvula Donor 12:36, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

should be replaced by "need to be rewrited/improved/renamed pages list". Everything can be funny if you work enough on it. Izwalito 11:01, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

That really depends on what you have to work with. For some pages, it just gets to a point where it's easier to delete it and start over. -- 11:21, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

to do that it is easier not to delete the page, but to blank it and start writing a new content. The best seems to list it. Many people voted here for rewrite or deletion, and in the meantime content has changed making the votes obsolete. It is only a matter of time. IMHO people asking for rewrite/deletion should act to improve content instead of removing content.

I don't think it's bad for people to put up clear indicators to the effect of "hey, we're shooting for higher standards than this, sorry, go on to the next one", which is what they're basicallly doing. Especially when a page gives the impression that someone is farting pages out without really caring if they're any good. Enough of that, and readers would just tire of the site. And it takes some time and thought to write a good one, so we can't just jump in and make improvements in every one we read. -- 13:06, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Perhaps, but the problem is, people visiting a public site expect to see funny things, and not a GIGANTIC smattering of articles that are trying to be funny. Further, when writing a page, alot of people will try to follow the existing joke on the page. However, this is not always the best idea. Often times, a blank page is much better, since people visiting will not feel restrained by the existing content. It is also not true that everything can be funny. There are certain things that will never be funny. These things include hate speech, like the fellow going around doing jew bashing. That will be deleted. One thing that you really have to remember is that we don't have the resources to keep every article. If we had a billion editors, we could keep everything and try to make it funnier. But we can't. The best we can do is remove the cruft and try to keep the whole of uncyclopedia funny. --Chronarion 13:06, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Right, my main point is we can't make these choices based on pity for the people who happen to not be as funny as they think they are, or wish they were. Crap is crap. -- 14:16, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Also, some pages are simply nigh-unrewritable. For a case in point, look down a couple centimeters - "Farper Pee"? There's not much you could put there that wouldn't be funnier somewhere else. If it's simply a case of bad writing, a rewrite is called for, but sometimes the concept of the article itself is a bad one, and deserves to be trashed. -- 18:28, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Sure guys, but what about the idea of replacing VfD by that list ?

Farper Pee



Redirected to Comedy.

Government inc.

Scratched. Other pages will be judged individually on their merits (or lack therof.) --Uvula Donor

And other pages by User:Izwalito Sigh. --Chronarion 22:55, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

give it a chance to live, this is only the beginning, it could become better. let's say is in a week, it has not got any better you'll add it for deletion k? I plan to make a running joke on corporations and governments, but if you don't give me enough time to do it...

Delete Mostly too factual plus no one would ever think to enter that title in the search engine. -- 23:35, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

will be linked to other articles in a few days

Someone pull grammar patrol with Izwalito, english is not his first language. Thanks. --Chronarion 00:25, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Grammar patrol?? Some of his entries need coherency patrol. --Uvula Donor 12:05, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Lula, Delilah

Delete Dull. --Goomball 19:25, 18 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite Lula Delilah was dumped. But Lula has the germ of a good idea. --Uvula Donor 20:30, 18 Mar 2005 (EST)


Vote unecessary, page redeemed. --Chronarion 13:07, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Collateral Damage

Article redeemed.

Again, an obvious agenda and radical political statement. Not funny either. Let's not all be like Janene Garaflogo. Well, come to think of it, Janene Garaflogo shouldn't be like Janene Garaflogo. --Savethemooses 18:51, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete -- adding lame silliness to a political diatribe doesn't make it funny --Pnorf 18:58, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

I just removed the references to the USA and made it less of a rant. It if you still want to delete it go ahead, but I think we should not just automatically get rid of all articles that have an agenda, if there is any hope of them being funny. Remember, flamewars are encouraged, and we are not trying to create an unbiased information source. --Paulgb 19:23, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Politically charged humor can be funny (whether from the left or right), but this article was an unfunny indictment of America, just as Bill of Wrongs was on the Republican Party. I still say Delete, primarily because it's unfunny but also because it is a microcosm of what much of comedy has become today: incessant bashing of America and the Republican Party, with the only punchline being "George Bush suckz0rz!!! ROFL" --Savethemooses (rare political edit, read it while it lasts!) 19:28, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I don't mind this now, since it's much less rant like. This looks flamewar worthy, which is why I vote keep. Agendas are okay, but VFD is not for agendas. Yaknow, it's fine to have an agenda when writing articles, but it's got to be amusing. As of now, it's at least slightly amusing, which is okay by me.--Chronarion 19:47, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete Still looks pretty ranty to me. I don't mind funny rants, but this one seems more over-the-top than funny. However, I'm willing to keep it around if it will incite a flamewar. Then I'll pull up a lawnchair and a beer, watch the sparks fly, and have a laugh or two. --Uvula Donor 21:03, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I took the liberty of removing the references to large right wing countries entirely, and replacing instances of that phrase with 'Denzel Washington'. It should be way better now. --Amos T. Frohawk 16:37, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I like the new version with some of the rabid foam wiped off. "Pissed off" isn't always funny, but it's OK now. --Uvula Donor 19:27, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I've considerably expanded it so the Michael Mooreisms are kind of hidden amidst some other stuff.--Machinecurse 04:09, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)


No, GONE. --Uvula Donor 06:56, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

DeleteTotal waste of space that could be used for something funny -- 20:51, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete I agree. --Uvula Donor 20:54, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)
Delete --Rcmurphy 21:22, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)
Delete --MZL 08:00, 23 Mar 2005 (EST)

A loop of pages

Deleted --Paulgb 19:10, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

I was considering dropping these pages without VFD, because they are just an loop of (See:) pages and its not even part of the joke. But, since they are the creation of a registered user (who appears to have had some quality edits), I'm putting them up here: --Paulgb 15:40, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete --Paulgb 15:40, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete yawn --Pnorf 18:43, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Good Pages... FOR ME TO POOP ON!!! --Savethemooses 18:51, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete Not every edit is going to be a quality edit. I've considered these same pages for deletion, also. (Uh-oh!)--Uvula Donor 21:07, 22 Mar 2005 (EST)

Burger King

Delete/Rewrite What was that Chrono was saying about "agendas"? --Uvula Donor 07:53, 18 Mar 2005 (EST)
Rewrite I dunno what agenda is being pushed, but it sure makes me hungry --Nytrospawn 23:41, 18 Mar 2005 (EST)

The original version of the page was an anti-fastfood, anti-meat-eating rant (hence the "agenda"). We've had at least one more of those since then. The fast-food articles seem to attract whackos. --Uvula Donor 23:48, 18 Mar 2005 (EST)


Doesn't make sense to me.

Rewrite It's a riff on "Church's Fried Chicken," a greasy-capon chain. The article could be better, though. --Uvula Donor 08:06, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)


Delete. What the heck is this? --stillwaters 23:24, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/Rewrite Man, not even a picture --Nytrospawn 23:25, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite. I actually like the nonsense about hats, but it looks like the guy spent about 4 minutes on this. --Kakapoet 24:54, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite I agree with Kakapoet. Just needs adding to--TheTris 05:00, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite Just needs a few additions. Like the hat pic I just provided (heh.) --Uvula Donor 08:17, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I like the bit at the end. --Chronarion 13:55, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep Man, it's almost really good. The picture helps a lot. --PantsMacKenzie 23:24, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I agree with Uvula --Paulgb 20:48, 17 Mar 2005 (EST)

Conclusion: Keep

Sticky end

Kept The idea of a plant disease with a naughty-sounding name being applied to humans has some potential, so I changed the tag to Rewrite and we'll leave it pending future review. Also, I have a couple ideas kicking around to expand it and make it funnier. --Uvula Donor 06:48, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/Rewrite --Nytrospawn 19:53, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/Rewrite --Uvula Donor 21:22, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep I don't understand why this is in vfd.--TheTris 05:00, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

I put it in VFD becuase I dont think its very funny. --Nytrospawn 09:40, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite/Stub I don't get it. --Chronarion 13:57, 16 Mar 2005 (EST)


Kept vfd tag changed to rewrite tag. --Uvula Donor 06:45, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/Rewrite Kinda weak the way it is. --Uvula Donor 13:56, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)

Delete/Rewrite Seems a bit soul-less without at least a passing reference to Al Gore ;-) --Gadgeophile 13:58, 15 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep It's just fine now. You should first try to expand it before outright deleting it. --MasterofAeons 16:13, 17 Mar 2005 (EST)

Rewrite Interweb is a good term but the write up is weak. -- The Badmash 11:25, 20 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Keep/rewrite Not that bad. --Chronarion 22:22, 21 Mar 2005 (EST)


Stub, could use a rewrite, but mostly redeemed. --Uvula Donor 06:42, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)


Ouch, now I'm to be forked, too. I'll attempt to be funny funny in the future, at least until a can't stand it anymore and revert to my ham-handed attempts at satire. I do need to say that "United Spades of Amerika" is very painful for me to read (and I have a feeling that our host wrote that, and I'm not helping my cause, oops).--Fazookus 08:50, 26 Mar 2005 (EST)

   In that event, do not read it. --Chronarion 23:03, 26 Mar 2005 (EST) 

Keep It's not TOO factual, although not all that hilarious. Personally I think this is worthy of forking. i.e. two entries rather than revert war. I am forking. --Chronarion 23:28, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete Factual and not at all funny. --Uvula Donor 08:58, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

delete-- 09:26, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

revert to when it was an amusing pun about imps --Machinecurse 11:14, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Reverted. --Uvula Donor 11:58, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Keep --Fazookus "Factual!?!?!" Also, dude, I don't think 2 hours is long enough for voting, especially when 1/3 of the total votes is from the person who didn't like it in the first place. "Political Satire". Protected under the 1st Amendment (a real amendment, not one I made up) also from our Founding Fathers re: "Truth" and "imps":

Uncyclopedia:How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid

The truth is often funnier than flat out nonsense. The funniest pages are those closest to the truth.

Keep that in mind when you write an article, and Things Will Be Good.

Often, a longer, but clever article is better than spamming the index full of thousands of small one liners about giraffes and bathtubs. It forces us to clean up the bad stuff. Please write good stuff. We are aware that from time to time, patent nonsense is hilarious, but we need to keep the signal to noise ratio a bit higher than it currently is.

       Sorry to break your heart, but that article was not funny. --Uvula Donor 14:08, 24 Mar 2005 

Technically, it was funny. Really really funny. I still can't think of it without giggling. I think the problem is you don't get it, the fact that you found it factual (in keeping with article 1 of "how to be funny") tends to support that --Fazookus

       If it has to be qualified as "technically funny", it ain't funny. And pedantry isn't satire. --Uvula Donor 21:24, 24 Mar 2005 (EST) 

Glad that it was reverted and a tip to Fazookus: try being funny before declaring that you are as such. If you need help on being funny, click here. 0_- --Savethemooses 18:23, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Look, guys, it's satire, the premise is that Newt and his pals realized that they had the votes to impeach Clinton and they funded someone willing to do that, even though the final report had nothing to do with what what they started out to prove. A very successful strategy, got them more seats in the next election (please take note of the timing...) so joke is that now both parties are going to have to do follow that strategy or they'll be buried.

       Bet you're a riot at parties. --Uvula Donor 

Read the [flamewar manual (http://mrpalmguru.com/uncyclopedia/index.php?title=Flamewar_Guidelines%7C)], please, be constructive, a Wiki is big enough to hold more than one type of humor and there's room for satire and puns about imps and whatever else.--Fazookus 20:35, 24 Mar 2005 (EST)

Sure we takes all kinds of humor. Just not the unfunny kind. --Savethemooses 14:47, 25 Mar 2005 (EST)