Uncyclopedia:Pages for deletion/archive47

• Yet another ancient stub that managed to slip through FFW. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 12:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. ----OEJ 15:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Yup Burninate the deadwood. -- di Mario 19:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete it! I'm a government man! --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 01:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• meh --Sir Modusoperandi 02:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This is <insert name here>'s style of work. -- [SIR] e|m|c ^[talk] 02:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Sucks. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 07:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. The actual article, which was very underdeveloped, was damaged by Andreus' addition of the idiotic and cruftilaceous paragraph of GNAA repetitions. ----OEJ 15:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Dilithium and normal matter, confined in the same space at the same time. <-- This is what should happen to it. No redeeming value whateverseau. -- di Mario 19:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet! --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 01:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Um, yeh.--Sir Modusoperandi 02:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete immediately --General Insineratehymn 02:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Weak for At least it has been researched somewhat. Plus I like the graphic. -- di Mario 19:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but expand: The article has a good concept. It's somewhat consistent, it has a few chemistry/decoration crossover jokes, it just isn't very well-expanded. I think it's possible to put more in it, somehow. Knocking out the last bit with the rifles would be a good start. --CaptainSpam MUN PUTPBAA 22:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Actually kind of funny, just needs help. --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 01:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep it does need help, and the joke is there, if not obvious on first sight of the title, you get it as you read the rest of the page.--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 02:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• It's not crap. That opening paragraph is pretty good, actually. Plant humour...who'da thought?--Sir Modusoperandi 02:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ja. I always follow the crowd. -- [SIR] e|m|c ^[talk] 02:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak for. Hardly strong, but it's likely you'll find worse hitting "random page" 10 times.

• Delete - I just plain don't like it. --AAA! (AAAA) 02:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Lacks non-random humor, though the idea is technically feasible.----OEJ 15:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - I'm on a vfd roll today!! --AAA! (AAAA) 02:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. ----OEJ 15:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Um, yeh. --Sir Modusoperandi 20:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet! --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 01:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. -- Mitch 13:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• This triple-A person surely does not behave like one. Where is your saintly-hood ? -- di Mario 19:15, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't know, don't care, never will... --AAA! (AAAA) 00:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Huff - Err... --AAA! (AAAA) 02:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet! --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 01:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• If this is one of your so-called Wikian in-jokes, I don't get it. Thuh! -- di Mario 19:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Um...no. --AAA! (AAAA) 00:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Needs more about being a warrior and fad, less the other stuff. Mr. Briggs Inc. 22:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Eh?
• Give the author a fair chance. The article has been there for less than 48 hrs and is constantly being worked on by the author and others. Vide as per edit history. I think this is a promising n00b and you lot should not shy him away. User:Guest, I require of you to make an apology to the author and aid him into become Uncycs next Noob-of-the-month. -- di Mario 19:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Not overly repulsive. Needs a lot of work, granted, but worth keeping, methinks. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 19:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep for now. If you want to be mean, add NRV instead. herr doktor needsAgear  [scream!] 19:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Mr. Briggs is right--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 02:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Sucks, I don't know how I could possibly miss it during FFW never mind, it was created yesterday. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 17:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• In all fairness, it is on Pee Review. Not sure about intent, though.----OEJ 18:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Merge into Geek. Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

*Merge into Geek.--Winston 11:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• keep Not seeing anything wrong with it, there's way worse stuff around here.--Count of Monkey Crisco 18:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge Although basically this article is a list of lists (LoL), there are some funny parts. And by the way, is there some such thing as a serial geek ? -- di Mario 18:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• An example of how repeating a joke that was funny when SNL did over and over and over again ad nausiem is not freaking funny. --Sir Zombiebaron 03:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

it's just not funny...and way too cliche (con acento!) --Cjagahatshi 04:29, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I like it. And silly ministers have good comedic precedent; my local paper referred to the Ministry of Silly Walks just recently. Not to mention the Shadow Minister for Not Listening to People. Needs pictures, though.----OEJ 16:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep It's funny, but needs some work. Send it over to Pee Review.--Imp88 09:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep--Winston 11:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• As a the Canadian Minister in Charge of Picking Up After Yourself, I say, "Hip hip hurrah!" --Sir Modusoperandi 04:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Huff -- 12:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not funny. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Applied the VFD template tag macro expansion wotsit. I personally have no opinion either way. -- di Mario 18:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep.- I'm no fan of the topic, but I dont think it is deletable. --GOSHZILLaDISGUSTING UNFUNNY NONSENSE 18:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Not great, but not crap. Also, no pics. Which is nice.--Sir Modusoperandi 04:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I'm one of these--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 05:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Stupid, not funny, and people were littering this with goatse and tubgirl links (which I've removed [1]). --AAA! (AAAA) 04:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Unfunny. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Kill it --General Insineratehymn 16:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• --~

  Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.

  22:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleetish Mildly funny, but not funny enough to warrant the topic. --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 02:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Funny, but shitty. -- [SIR] e|m|c ^[talk] 02:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep Parts are mildly amusing.... Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. As much as I revere things Pythonic, this article is short and uncreative.----OEJ 03:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Crap. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--Winston 11:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet! --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 02:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Parodying Python is like trying to pin Julia Childs in a wrestling match.--Sir Modusoperandi 04:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Oh! Python as in Monty! At first I thought Python as that Perl wannabe marvelous scripting language created by some fellow Dutchman. Talk about gawky. Aaawrk! Polly want a cracker. -- di Mario 18:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Yes, not as in Pirate the Python compiler for Parrot...what? The "real" world just went all surrealistic on me. Ouch, that smarts.----OEJ 02:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, that's Dutchiness for you. All my days are like that... -- di Mario 21:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Vanity? If not, it's still crap... --AAA! (AAAA) 02:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable subject, non-funny article.----OEJ 15:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete: Either plain nonsense or vanitycruft. --CaptainSpam MUN PUTPBAA 01:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--Winston 11:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete That's the definition of deletable.--Count of Monkey Crisco 18:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet! No love Pipkin. --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 02:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Begone It is old and smelly and noone likes it. --Sir Zombiebaron 22:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Vomit It's painful to read. --fish 06:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, then write 00000000 over the drive. Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. It's nonsensical and not funny, and the layout is horrible.--Imp88 09:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--Winston 11:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Huff -- 12:19, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Undeveloped, unfunny.----OEJ 02:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Too short for too long. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--Winston 11:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet!--Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 02:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ruins two of my favourite things, "the" and "of". Sigh...--Sir Modusoperandi 04:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Weak conditional keep on converting it to a news article Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Weird. --AAA! (AAAA) 23:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. A possible idea, but in the real Uncyc nobody ever develops these things. ----OEJ 02:45, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Consists of unfunny quotes. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--Winston 11:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet! --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 02:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• This was never funny, and now resembls Wikipedia:Ronaldinho. --Sir Zombiebaron 19:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Lame, so many red links that you'd think it was written in blood. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Reads like a drunk sportscaster. Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete--Winston 11:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Should be QFVDed instead. It was never funny indeed, but it was severely vandalized with CTRL+V by some moron that turned it into a serious piece. I hope the trend does not catch on. herr doktor needsAV2  [scream!] 22:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Now listing on QVFD. Pentium5dot1 01:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Now huffed. Pentium5dot1 01:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Homoginize, So short and unfunny. --Sir Zombiebaron 19:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Crap. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Baleet --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 02:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• It's tough going against the author...but this isn't crap. Granted, I'm not a SpaceTrek geek, but this isn't awful.--Sir Modusoperandi 06:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• keep It is in fact very funny. -- di Mario 11:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Few get help in pee review, so being ignored there is not a reflection on your article.--Winston 11:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I don't see why you think this sucks. Mr. Briggs Inc. 12:04, 5 December 2006 (UTC) Eh?

• Delete. It didn't seem to work at all. I tried to get a Peer Review, but nothing came of it. Perhaps someone else can make something better out of it. --Lenin & McCarthy 23:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. It's not really in the style of Gul Dukat. And even if it were, you wouldn't be able to tell (I think). Alksub 08:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• This is merely an inside joke (if you could call it that) about Dota. While I play Dota, it's a) kinda/no it's actually very retarded and b) it makes really no uncyclopedic sense whatsoever. It also has too many facts. Railcgun (timestamp AWOL)
• Burninate it. —Hinoa KUN (talk) 17:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• frituurstaaf I hate inside jokes. I'm allways the butt of them. - di Mario 19:42, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I am not insider enough to get the joke, but with regards to technique the article is very very bad.----OEJ 02:50, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Nobody cares. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep this is a work of art, you great unwashed :) -- di Mario 19:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. What's next? The cabal dictates how many userboxes one can link to their page? Or how many images? Unless a user has subpages teeming with porn or hate literature, give them some room to enjoy themselves.--Winston 11:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Let him do what he wants with his subpages. • Spang • UotF | talk • 09:32, 5 Dec 2006

• Per a cabal discussion on IRC. This is getting out of hand. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 14:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Hold up. If he wants to create an UnPoetia project (like UnBooks), then why don't we punt that into the open? —Hinoa KUN (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The problem is quality control. I suggest he or she be given a deadline to have it worthy of the main space or becoming an actual sub project, and if it isn't, then wipe. While I think subpages should generally be respected, I think this has too much of a potential for abuse as it exists now.

The purpose of subpages should be the development of material for Uncyclopedia, not for some other purpose, as this appears to be. The simple fact of it is that Uncyclopedia is a humor site, not a webhost, and an extensive network of subpages that is intended to stand alone, rather than be a scratch area for the purpose of drafting material for the main space, creates a balkanized website within Uncyclopedia that is not part of Uncyclopedia, and would not have the same quality or rationale as Uncyclopedia.

As the Benson supporters would say, this should probably be removed from our holy lands, but in the practice of believing in the user's good faith, he or she should be given time to improve the content so as to perhaps make it an actual subproject or namespace here instead of just a network of userpage subpages. At the very least, time to backup the code should be permitted before huffing. --Hrodulf 19:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Weird...I parodied people filling their userpage with non-Uncyc stuff as a bit in a recent UnNews article. No, I'm not going to name the article, that would be whoring. It's an odd coincidence, that's all.--Sir Modusoperandi 06:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• For some reason, I would accept comments 1 and 3, which is obvious. Actually, UnLyrics (renamed UnPoetia for no reason) was started by Anidnmeno, altough I don't think that you'll find anything from his original User Page --General Minister G5 UPotM UGotM [Y] F@H

• Keep - I like it. Why would you VFD this in the first place? "Wee" is a funny word. Makes me laugh. -- [SIR] e|m|c ^[talk] 23:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. (1) It's definitely made up, and I know because, well, I'm the one who made it up, and (2) The joke is that the whole article has a double-meaning (and it's not "Wee" replaced with "Wii"). On the one hand (pun intended), it can be: an innuendo-filled warning against masturbation, and on the other hand (pun still intended) it can be just what it says on the tin: a literal warning against "playing with your Wii" (ie. the game) too much... which is why all of the "warnings" are worded so carefully (so that both meanings are preserved). --  cScott (talk • log) KUN PIE NS FP 08:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, I agree, it's not the usual pun with this console name, I have even wrote one with this kind of pun. This is a lot cleverer than mine. --—Braydie 09:16, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It's funny, I like it. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 09:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --AAA! (AAAA) 22:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep: Obvious and well-expected pun mixed with a parody of a real-world news article warning about overplaying the Wii due to the fact that it actually requires you to move more than your thumbs. It's hard to come up with something better suited for UnNews. --CaptainSpam MUN PUTPBAA 01:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It's a fine article.--Winston 11:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

This is an article that isn't made up, Just a true article with "Wee" replaced with "Wii" --NXWave 06:48, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Randumb - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 05:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• It's either a terrible parody of clans, or it's vanity.--Sir Modusoperandi 06:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. ----OEJ 02:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Crap. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete.--Winston 11:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

• Abstain! There is no Cabal! Or is there ? Nahh! -- tinc 19:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Obviously, the author has put a lot of effort in it and some parts are actually satirical. Man. look at the artwork! Perhaps if others started to mess with this one, it might one day even make VFH! -- di Mario 19:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep It's not hilarious, but it's still pretty good. Prolix 06:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This article has a lot of potential for redeeming value. The images were time consuming and a lot of hard work was put into this to let people enjoy it. Please do not delete this article. We can edit it some if needed. Keener 11:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I spent quite a bit of time on the article and it isn't just pointless drivel. Sure it doesn't have the polish that an VFH article could but it's not pointless. If anyone wants to put suggestions on the talk page then they can help to improve the article than just try and delete it. Master Fuzz 1:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - But add {{Rewrite}} to it. --AAA! (AAAA) 23:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• I rarely submit articles, but I figured I'd better check to see if anyone knew wtf was up with this article. I see no point nor value to this article. Anyone have a counter to this opinion? Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 12/1 03:06
• Holy Vanity page! The creator's image contributions indicate either a predisposition for 'chopping himself into pics, or he really loves that guy.--Sir Modusoperandi 06:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Move to user subpage.--Winston 11:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment That won't work, because the creator of the page is 216.70.249.98 (an IP). Should we have a vote to see who gets to keep it? --AAA! (AAAA) 01:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Huff Worthless vanity shit. --General Insineratehymn 21:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• dealaite indeed. Ah agree with aboveses. -- di Mario 19:15, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Kill - Even though I don't know what "vanity" means, it looks stupid. --AAA! (AAAA) 23:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Randumb. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
• What Mitch said -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 19:03, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• tentative according to one of the authors on the articles talk page, This is an okay concept, I'm going to "fix" it Prolix 04:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC) I think this is an OK concept too. -- di Mario 19:06, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Tentative I'll do what I can with it, for a guy who sucks at writing articles. Prolix 07:04, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
• GLEE!. For one, it's short, but it's good. And there are pipe-links!--Witt, of UNion Entertain me* 07:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• Declare genocide. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 14:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. It's Mhaille's, and I'm sure he can fix it to your satisfaction. :) ~ Sir Todd GUN WotM MI UotM NotM MDA VFH AotM Bur. AlBur. CM NS PC (talk) 06:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. This has great potential.   Sir Tooltroll, Esq. CUN • Eh? • Oh! • UnTunes! • I my cat! 07:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - I agree completely with the above comments. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me) 19:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep-Hilarious Prolix 04:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --—Braydie 17:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Ah pity the foo who tries to wipe this-un out! -- di Mario 19:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Eww! - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 06:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Take it down I'm not even going to defend it. My article sucked and I'll admit it. --^{{Talk to me}}Lovebones_{{Contributions}}

19:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• Confused or not, it's a Userpage...and there are much worse--Sir Modusoperandi 14:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. A userpage should not be judged as an article, for the plain and alimentary and simple reason that it isn't an article. Mind you, as Mowgli notes this user has not contributed anything except his user page...er, so does just any old riff-raff who registers get a userpage? ----OEJ 03:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• -- don't know what to make of this page? the user has zero contributions to "main" -- mowgli 11:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• Undecided I've looked around a bit on the authors website and my impression is that he created this user page while under the impression that Uncyclopaedia is a serious yet maybe not mainstream blog. I'll leave a message on his talk page. -- di Mario 19:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• tentative. Somewhere in the edit history there is a User:LeeHarveyKennedy, who as you may not be aware has four (coun't 'm) VFH's on his CV. Apparently, he didn't feel it necessary to VFD this article. Although I must concur that presently, 't aint much. -- di Mario 18:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• -- either a vanity page or else nonsense. -- mowgli 07:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. I can't find a reference to a notable person named Aparna Kher, so I suspect a vanity article. LeeHarveyKennedy notwithstanding this does not appear to be a solid subject.----OEJ 03:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• --~

  Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.

  01:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Kick its ass. --UNKNOWNFILE 01:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete -- mowgli 10:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Crap. -- Mitch 16:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

• Undecided Seems like a rather run-of-the-mill article, quality-wise. I've read worse. If it turns out this was made by a 10-year old, I might even give some praise to the author just for encouragement. -- di Mario 18:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• Sucks pigdick. It lacks a Wikipedia article, and hasn't been edited into anything. --UNKNOWNFILE 01:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• Abstain. I cannot decide. The idea is funny in itself, and the execution ... a bit short but doesn't deserve expletive swearwords in describing it. -- di Mario 18:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• 1) Lists. 2) Suck. 3) Pigdick. --UNKNOWNFILE 03:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Dilithium Indeed, just a list of lists. No added value or fit for any purpose. -- di Mario 20:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• A list that does not deserve to be spared --~

  Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.

  23:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• This page is here as a subpage of Ninja because that page keeps getting filled with an unfunny list of people. This is the garbage-can of the Ninja article. I designed it that way, and it needs to stay. If you don't like it, don't click on the link. I have no remorse for banning users who add unfunny lists of people to the Ninja article when a specific page for it exits. It's like a honey-pot for asinine users. Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 11/27 23:41

• Hold it right there! I realise it's a bit meagre, but I see some potential. Also, the work was originally started in april, 2005, and has been revisited by several parties on a regular schedule. Obvously, this is not a one-off abandoned piece of crap. Someone ask the original author(s) to expand a bit, add some images, and hey presto, a star is bourne. -- di Mario 20:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

• What can I say? It sucks as much as its subject rocks. - Sir Sikon [formerly known as Guest] 19:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
• Clap in irons. --UNKNOWNFILE 03:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Clap in irons and throw in Hudson River. --Hhamdy283 03:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• DEL --~

  Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.

  23:43, 27 Novemb