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

I made the article slightly longer per what I thought would work for it. How's it feel?   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 3 @ 15:25)

Great!!--Æ 23:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

An accidental collaboration! Awesome! I'll be looking at it now and again, trying to think of new stuff...   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 3 @ 23:53)

Do you think it's feature worthy?... or to short? Despite it's shortness, it's really funny, and we've featured shorter. What d'ya think? --Æ 00:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Waaaay too short for vfh! Let's just go crazy and add all sortsa stuff. I give you permission to delete anything of mine you find stupid if you'll give me the same.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 4 @ 00:07)

I'll be honest, I'm not a judge of what's VFHable. You seem to put lots of pages up there. I think it's better just because it's longer, but it's just totally insane now. ...Make it more insane.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 4 @ 01:11)
I'm not the VFH judge either... so I'm thinking about nomming and letting the mass decide--Æ 02:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Right now I say it's a bit short. --Littleboyonly.jpg TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly.jpg 02:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
TKF, invalid nom?   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 4 @ 02:38)
If both authors agree to rescind the nom, then I'll remove it. However, it did get a pee review prior to rewriting, and most (if not all) of the original content has been kept, so I'd say it's still valid, persay. --Littleboyonly.jpg TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK Oldmanonly.jpg 02:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
FUCK   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 4 @ 02:44)
I'll agree that I was a bit impatient when I initially nommed. I'll let it blossum. Also, I did have a lot of fun contributing and I'll try to add more--Æ 23:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

whatever else[edit]

I want to relax, so I'm gonna do some random writing on this article, too.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 4 @ 23:36)

I think another picture could be added? Don't you? Additionally, I'd like to congratulate you on your WotM lead, you deserve it--Æ 23:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Why thank you for nominating me! NotM looks bad because Garfield got a feature, but you know what? Things could change. I would just go on a writing frenzy if I were you. Let's get some more pictures in here, yeah! Maybe test them out HERE first.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 7 / 23:28)
He also whored his friends, which is why he is doing so well, and I didn't (I don't trust my friends with this kind of stuff). I don't have ideas for a picture, but I might do a google image search. I'm (re)writing Alberto Gonzales and it will be funny soon. The only thing is, I need to do research, but I'm in a lazy mood right now, but maybe this weekend? It's a coming soon though. --Æ 23:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Cool! I'm gonna stick with this article, though, and see if I can help. I think it's actually too vague right now.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 7 / 23:40)
Too vague??? Dude, it should be as vague as possible, that will make it even more funny--Æ 23:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, no, I think people will want to know who "he" is for two reasons: first, they want to have some character they can relate to. Second, it looks funny to use "he" when it doesn't refer to anything (bad grammar?)   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 7 / 23:51)
We could use several replacements: She; This Guy; That Guy; Them; They; That One Guy Over Here; This One Guy hanging out over there, no a litte left; etc. etc., you know what I mean--Æ 23:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, well it's your article. I can just butt out if you want. I'll cry a little but I'm a man, I can take it.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 7 / 23:55)
It's also yours. I don't want you to butt out unless you want to butt out. I hope you stay--Æ 00:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Awesome! Then I'll stay! I'm working on my own article right now so gimme a bit   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 8 / 00:39)
No prob --Æ 01:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to add a section about Highways, (or go into the streets section in more detail) thanks to your picture--Æ 15:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
That sounds like a good idea, actually.   Le Cejak <-> (Dec 19 / 15:58)
How goes the new section? Also, I had to remove your "There Is Not As Interesting As This Article Indicates" section as it wasn't consistent with the article as well as the fact that it wasn't funny. Hope you don't mind, and if you'd like to re-add it, tell me why on this page, thanks--Æ 16:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

You know what I'm going to do Tommorow[edit]

...write Here. This will be bat-fuck insane and will parody There and yah, to make this work, I'm going to have to do some editing on There--Æ 02:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)