From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Vote
|
Score: 12.5 scientifically impossible hairstyles 
|
| Nominated by:
|
Black flamingo
|
For: 12.5
|
- One of the best articles I've read for a while, had me giggling all the way through. --Black Flamingo 15:33, June 13, 2010 (UTC)
- Weak for. I laughed only some, but that's probably because I don't know much about X Japan.--Sir HELPME Talk (more? --> CUN ROTM NOTM Pleb USS Pees SK ) On Sunday, 03:35, June 13 2010 UTC
- Self-for. Naturally. ~
     15:40, Jun 13, 2010
 For Article of the month, and that guy TOAST could learn a lesson from Hiatus about editing, editing, editing a page until it shines. Aleister in Chains 20:37 13 6 MMX- I was all "I gotta go update my Marty Friedman article" but apparely the links were there already. -- monika 20:40, June 13, 2010 (UTC)
 For. —Sir Socky   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 21:48, 13 June 2010- Toast. --Matfen 20:36, June 14, 2010 (UTC)
- For. SURE! But a bit less drab boring factual content could be well served with more of the absurd. Funnybony
   23:02, Jun 14 23:02, June 14, 2010 (UTC)
- For. InMooseWeTrust 09:39, June 15, 2010 (UTC)
 For. Per Romartus -- the humor level could be bumped up a bit for the non-visual kei inclined. ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π ~  ~ 20 Jun 2010 ~ 18:52 (UTC)- For.. Only half-funny when you've never heard of the band, but the same goes for my article and I'm no hypocrit.--thehallway 08:07, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
For. Horace Donald Westenchester 22:54, June 24, 2010 (UTC) invalid vote, banned user  Rev. Zim (Talk) Get saved! 03:25, June 25, 2010 (UTC)- For. I giggled. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 19:37, Jun 26 2010
- For. What makes this so funny is that half of this stuff is actually true. You probably won't get much out of it if you're not a fan, but I wouldn't change a thing. 82.130.26.9 18:12, July 7, 2010 (UTC)
|
Against: 0
|
|
| Comments:
|
- 'Abstain. A worthy effort and well written. It just didn't make me laugh which is a shame. Sorry.
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 23:01, June 13, 2010 (UTC)
- That's a question I've had since I've got here, the laugh factor. Lots of satire is not "funny" satire, but presents a twist or a comment on an existing reality or an important "issue of the day". That type of non-laugh satire appeals to me, as well as the unexpected bellylaugh (which I've gotten from some of the stupidest things here). Aleister 23:50 13 6 MMX
- If I couldn't can't even raise one small inner laugh then I can't see how I can honestly vote for a yes. It has all the right ingredients - except that one for me. It's not unlike Guildy's Red Sea which also is very well put together but that again I couldn't laugh with. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 06:12, June 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Ouch... I didn't write it to be "not funny satire", though. It's supposed to be funny. I mean, I laughed when I wrote it. I'm thinking even though you don't need to know X Japan, some fundamental knowledge of J-rock and visual kei is required. ~ 06:24, Jun 14, 2010
- Ok I will sign up for an on-line course. I know you were writing to be funny here - just that It wasn't to my taste. That's why I have otherwise praised it but at the same time couldn't vote for it. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate) 06:31, June 14, 2010 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
20:02, July 8, 2010 (UTC)