Uncyclopedia:Pages for deletion/archive29

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.

Jump to: navigation, search

This page is an archive. The contents have been moved from another page for reference purposes only, and should be preserved in their current form. Discussion or voting on this page is not current. Any additions you make will probably not be read. The current version of this page can be found at Uncyclopedia:VFD.


Contents

Southampton

Template

REDIRECTED --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Stoner

Neurotypical syndrome

Either should be deleted or rewritten, since most of it is taken from here. -- jsonitsac talk to me crimes against humanity23:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep - Hmm... Creatable--Jtaylor1Image:Small Egg.png 01:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

KEPT: 0 net votes is no delete. --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:33, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

American Commitment to the Rights of Man

Bullshit. You bunch of pussies. Real satire is just too...oh *fear and trembling* it's too biased for Uncyclopedia. Jesus. I thought a few people here had the moral equivalent of testicles but apparently not. The only problem with the article was that it had a fair amount of factual material. Chickenshit candyasses. If you ever get a hair I got a copy of the article and I can repost it. If you ever get enough grit to stand up for anything other than "AAAAAA" and gamerboi crap, that is. ;) ----OEJ 18:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm convinced; I've restored the article and unless Flam deletes it again, we'll deal with this using the standard method of voting on the matter. --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 18:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I dunno, it just seems bitter. 
But to sum up: the Bush administration views the US Declaration as asswipe. 
The only human rights it respects are...uh. It respects the right...to...um.
Well, actually, there are no human rights that the Bush administration honors. 
None. Sorry about that. Thomas Jefferson really has turned into Joe Stalin.
The question I ask myself with these sorts of pages is, if someone managed to write something similar on the right-wing side, would I vote to keep it? Is the language itself suitable as satire, or is it, in fact, angry/bitter. Maybe i'm not reading close enough, but I still get that feeling.--Image:shrooms.jpgImage:Shroom!.gifImage:Gay2.gifSir Flammable KUN Prince%21.gif (Na Naaaaa...)Image:Gay2.gifImage:shroom!.gifImage:shroomirror.jpg 18:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Personally, I would have voted to keep it, but I only have the candy equivalent of testicles. --Some user 18:11, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
OK, the "its unfunny" critique is justified. The article is also less than 24 hours old and my single brain cell does not work quickly. I'll go for less bitter and more funny in future revisions. Thanks for relenting, incidentally; I really didn't expect that (nor did I expect the Spanish Inquisition...yet here I am in the Comfy Chair.) If the vote goes against it after some revision, so be it. (heh, just noticed on rereading comments -- "too biased" and "not biased enough" -- ain't that the way it goes with everything? People want the opposite things from an article...)----OEJ 20:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Thoughts as the piece evolves: Certain kinds of satire confront comfortable conventional "wisdom" with uncomfortable contradicting observations. Any fundamentalist Christian would find Twain's Letters from the Earth uncomfortable: "[The Bible] is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies." To a fundamentalist the Bible has no obscenity and does not lie.
The point of the article to hand should be similar: it should confront the comfortable conventional wisdom ("America is acting reasonably and with just cause") with uncomfortable observations (the moral philosophy of the rights of man is being systematically trashed). Now, I only wish I could write like Twain. But to my mind every particle of this piece should work to one end: to contrast the egalitarian vision of the American and European Age of Reason with what is really happening in Guantanamo Bay, in the Afghanistan camps, in Abu Ghraib, and in the extra-judicial measures taken against people inside and outside America.
No, it is not straight comedy. It's a different animal from You have two cows and the magnificent Going to California. It works by different means to a different end. But I believe the only place it really belongs IS on a satire site. Personally, I don't think Uncyc is limited to only one kind of article, but that's just my opinion.
Yeah, the piccie of the Constitution with a brown smear on it is a shocker. I dunno if it's justified. I think that in Twain's day writers didn't use obvious stuff like that, but today...I dunno, in the era of Beavis and Butthead is the Constitution picture really out of line? Maybe it is too explicit. I dunno, give a holler if you have an opinion on it.----OEJ 19:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
The problem that I see here is that you obviously have very strong feelings on the matter because of a deep, moral sense that what the Bush Administration is doing by screwing with the Constitution (or, more specifically, the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights) is motivated by pure evil, and it is very difficult to seperate yourself from that. Thus, some things come out really furious, like the "Thomas Jefferson is morphing into JOSEF STALIN!" bit, instead of a witty zing, like having Bush honest to God confusing the two in college, then refusing to listen to anyone but his closest advisors about it once he's President, and they're all too ashamed to tell him any differently. THAT'S more satirical and less, "God, I hate Bush so much."--<<Bradmonogram.png>> 20:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

VOTE BELOW THE LINE

  • Neutral (for now): I like it but I'm not sure if that's because I'm a damned dirty liberal or because it's actually good. --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 18:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. And I'm glad this came up, actually - apparently my testicles make a good bon-bon substitute. --Some user 18:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Unlike most of you people, I have no balls, and my weinersnitzel is the size of a blue cartoon frog. I am therefore immune to the mockage of my genatalia, as I've already heard all the good ones. However, I must disagree with the previous posts and declare that this article IS biased. It's sin is that it is not biased enough. It's too close to the truth, so many will stop after it begins criticizing the Bush Administration and not read the juicy parts about how Uncyclopedia's reporters have learned that every Gitmo detainee has been fed into a combine (or some equivalent, I forget what). Anyways, it's a keep, though I still think it needs some TLC to either be more or less biased throughout.--<<Bradmonogram.png>> 18:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • BALEET! LameBlogopedia strykez again!! --Nerd42eMailTalkUnMetaWPediah2g2 20:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Contains too much of a personal perspective. Walk the Plank. --Cap'n SimzorzAr, Matey!21:16, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Bias can be funny, but this reads more like a long, drawn-out editorial than a humor piece. --Naughtius Maximus F@H Woof! MeowMUN 22:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Where's the satire? Donald Rumsfeld using the Declaration of Independence (or Constitution, I can't remember) as toilet paper? HAW haw HAW God that's good, I never thought of that. This is a clear statement of personal belief, fueled by bitterness, and leaving the funny lost in the lurch. Maybe insecure liberals (I consider myself a secure liberal, by the by) need something like this to let them sleep at night, but this is playing down to a Karl Rovish level in terms of mindless attack politics. Also, I'm just not sure how this article will help us win the War on Tourism. We need to be unificators - not disassemblers. — Cornet Sir Wilde Weas'l KUN VFH FP (Witty Remarkes) 13:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. What Weasel said. This type of rant doesn't belong here. --Zyrac 14:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP. Give him a chance to keep working on it, at least. I'd rather slap it with the {{funny?}} template and monitor it for awhile, before killing off a potentially very good piece. ~ T. (talk) 18:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Gwax needs an attitude change. I am really hurt. However, I agree with Todd Lyons.--Jtaylor1Image:Small Egg.png 19:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Could I just interject here to point out that the aforementioned testicles also make a delicious pie topping, when put through a cheese grater? --Some user 01:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Liquify - I have to agree with those saying that this stuff belongs to blogs. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 13:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep it is different in style to much of Uncyclopedia, but I'd like to see it evolve. Perhaps in its own related subsection though? -- Sir Mhaille Image:Icons-flag-gb.png (talk to me) 14:02, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Flush it. I totally agree w/ Weasel. -- The Larrikin, 2 March 2006
  • Keep. Just allow articles like Holy Bible: Revised Liberal Edition to not be deleted or rewritten as well. It seems the liberals had issues with that one being biased and rewrote quite a bit of it. As long as articles on the left and right are just as biased as each other, I really do not see a problem. I mean we got the mother of biased articles at George W. Bush if you delete this one, you got to delete the rest of them that it ties into as well as many others. --Lt. Sir Orion Blastar (talk) 22:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
KEPT: Ok, we all agree that it's very biased, but some people find it funny and those that think that it's unnecessarily biased and don't like it, can fix it (we are a wiki after all). If a revert war develops, someone talk to an admin, that's how things work. We at Uncyclopedia are not in the business of censorship; we're not in the business of saying what's ok; we're in the business of being funny, that's all. --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:30, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

{{WIP}}

KEPT --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Family Guy

Horridly, dreadfully unfunny. Oh, HAHA! I GET IT! Everybody's from The Simpsons, and not Family Guy! OH MAN THAT'S CLEVER except not. --Consuelos 03:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Ninja Wars

  • Delete. I wrote this page originally. But I've since decided it's crap. I just don't care to expand into all the links and it really doesn't make much sense. ~~Kerakazz

IPod chair

KEPT --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

IHolla

  • Murder. I completely, utterly cannot get it, and the formatting and image don't please me. - 04:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. --Giant Hogweed 06:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - I am well-pleased. Cornet Sir Wilde Weas'l KUN VFH FP (Witty Remarkes) 16:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep The bottom section on Problems is good enough for me... the rest could be rewritten/expanded. User:TD User Talk:TD
  • Keep and perhaps slap Template:Black humor on it (at the risk of being lynched) --Bloodrage 21:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep It could definitely be improved though. --—rc (t) 05:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
KEPT --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Adams Grammar School

Deleted anyway. Someone wiped the article and replaced it with:
"This site has caused offense to some members of staff and/or pupils at Adams' Grammar School, which has caused unnecessary problems. If this page is to remain here, it should do so without any content which could be misunderstood as offensive towards any member of staff or pupil of the school. The staff are aware of who I am, and I also added content to this site which was inappropriate. I am writing this as a "peace offering" if you will. Any offensive material will be removed immediately by either myself, or an Uncyclopedia admin. Thank You."
The contents prior to the blanking were a (really) crappy, (barely) allowable vanity page with no real value at all. Huffing seemed like the appropriate response. --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 17:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
If he were a registered user, I would have said something about the first ammendment to him, but oh well, so be it. --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 17:26, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Sounds like something that happened to me.--UtarEmpire 04:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Middlesex

Co.Durham

  • Ouch. This article makes me want to scoop my now contaminated brains from my skull. TD Complain here MUN (Insert Funny Quote Here)
  • Destroy in a rain of fire. --Giant Hogweed 02:20, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

99 Problems but the Papacy ain't one

  • Stab it with a clotheshanger -- TD Complain here MUN (Insert Funny Quote Here)
  • Or two... -- The Larrikin
  • Delete or List Tag. This is a list-related article.--Jtaylor1Image:Small Egg.png 21:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

December 21st, 2012

  • The Grand Inquisitor Torquemada wants this Nth unfunny end of the world article burninated for heresy. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 17:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I shall add wood to the pile and watch from a safe distance. --Giant Hogweed 17:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Throw on a coupla peasants for me. -- The Larrikin 2 March 2006
  • Merge it with 2012. Timeline-related article.--Jtaylor1Image:Small Egg.png 19:48, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Throw out and burn the dumpster. --Cap'n SimzorzAr, Matey!21:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
EAT/NRVed --Sir gwax (talk) Image:Signuke.gif » Image:Icons-flag-us.png Major KUN UotM FH++ F@H CM GD NS Bur. +S 30px-Sucrose_b.gif 04:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Send this badboy back to Japan Dzugavili 04:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Why dont polar bears shit in the woods?

QVFD'd by someone else, but Splaka seems to think this is not QVFD material. So I'm proposing normal, vote-driven deletion. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 14:47, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

  • My Eyes! Okay, it doesn't burn my eyes, but this article should be shot, drawn, quartered, boiled in Margarine, ground up, fed to rabid starving dingos with halitosis, and then the dingoes should be shot, shot twice more, burned in a pyre, and whatever remains should be launched into the sun so as to not contaiminate the Earth. --Me
  • Delete & CVP. This question related article is really dumb.--Jtaylor1Image:Small Egg.png 15:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Might have a chance as UnNews if it were expanded. --Trevie 16:01, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Clean this shit--Rataube 16:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Bury this shit. --Giant Hogweed 17:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I second all these guys --The Larrikin 2 March 2006
  • Strand on a desert island alone with naught but a gun and a single bullet. --Cap'n SimzorzAr, Matey!21:21, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

War of the Talk Show Hosts

Hyrule Temple

  • Delete. --Giant Hogweed 06:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I played "Majora's Mask" and "The Adventures of Link". I would need more info. But this time, make it hilarious.--Jtaylor1Image:Small Egg.png 07:09, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Maul - A colorful, incoherent mess. — 2ND LT. Sir David, Grizzly of Wild KUN VFH FP (Oh my God! Grizzly Bear! Nooooo!) 14:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, clean, and expand - Has a chance, but is too short to really convey a good joke. --Trevie 16:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Never mind, delete - Too random to be coherent. --Trevie 16:29, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • It could use a complete make-over. I agree with Jtaylor1 that it has to be hilarious, or I'll change my vote. -- The Larrikin 2 March 2006
  • Crush it. --Sir Velair Wight 03:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)