What do you think of Uncyclopedia?

What do you think of Uncyclopedia

  • Total voters
    20
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GrayDragonEmily

Strange Woman
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
332
Reaction score
0
I don't really care for it. I know it's just a joke, but when I read their articles for Pokemon, I was a little sad, but, I'm fine now. I have some sort of disorder, so I may think much differently about it than the rest of you. I'm just happy they mean no offense. I might even make a fanfiction about my Pokemon's reactions (how I think they would react, anyway) to Uncyclopedia's articles about Pokemon. Well, I wonder what you guys think of it.
 
It depends on the article, to be honest. Some I don't care for, but others I love...Captain Obvious and the Apostrophe are two notable favorites of mine.
 
The trouble is the articles, for the most part, fail the golden rule of comedy: be funny. They tend to be horribly disorganized, deviate from the source material into nonsensical, well, nonsense a lot of the time, and often are overly repetitive. I prefer more witty observations of said topic staying on topic, which Internet humour fails to deliver.
 
All of these "lolpedias" are garbage. Though this one isn't as bad as another infamous one which shall remain nameless for now...
 
I prefer Tv Tropes over Uncyclopedia. Although Tv Tropes isn't trying to be funny, some articles make me laugh.
 
The difference is that TVTropes is actually clever and surprisingly informative when it comes to viewing or producing media (minus the massive Fan Dumb). Uncyclopedia is just trash.
 
Last edited:
The only way I'd find these funny is if someone grew the nutz0rs to edit Wikipedia with them.

No, I don't support that. But if they are really going to try to solicit lols at people's expense, why not go all the way?

Anyone can make a clone site with lolhilarious content.
 
I love Uncyclopedia. Even the article on Ash Ketchum made me laugh.
 
VelvetEspeon said:
I don't really care for it. I know it's just a joke, but when I read their articles for Pokemon, I was a little sad, but, I'm fine now. I have some sort of disorder, so I may think much differently about it than the rest of you. I'm just happy they mean no offense. I might even make a fanfiction about my Pokemon's reactions (how I think they would react, anyway) to Uncyclopedia's articles about Pokemon. Well, I wonder what you guys think of it.
Click to expand...

I just looked at Uncyclopedia's article on it; it was terrible. For the actual Pokemon one itself, the funniest part came within the first quote in which a mere "LOL!" was Oscar Wilde's response to Pokemon. The actual description itself was awful, and wasn't clever or insightful in any way. I mean I understand it's meant as a joke, but it failed at even that. And I was highly disappointed when I saw that it was the same description, recolored, for every game. And it's not even like they just put it on there, because the given person even had the time to redo some of the minor things in it, and yet within all that time editing crap, couldn't come up with anything funnier to add than something about Greek methods with Pokemon.

I thought the one on "Pokemon Battle's" would be a lot funnier, but once again, the laughter came within the first quote about a Vietnam soldier and his squad sending out Pokemon to no avail. Then I started to read the rest, and honestly, I've concluded what it could best be compared to. It's like a really shitty ad lib (am I allowed to say that here?). Throwing in names like Dora The Explorer and speaking of her Pokemon discovery was bad.

The site I enjoy is Encyclopedia Dramatica. Their article on Pokemon is, well, the sex. It's funny because you could tell it was made by (a) fan(s) based on their knowledge of the little inside jokes and such, and yet it was completely and perfectly satrical of everything that's Pokemon. I mean, there's sad truth to some of it. How the new installment of every generation is the same thing with added paint, "Pikablu", and some new little kinks. They even referenced the whole "Mudkip" thing, and the VAs "putting a nail in the coffin of Pokemon".

Anyway, I'd recommend that one. It brought me to tears my first time reading it all.
 
Different strokes...

Although I'm rather surprised you didn't get WHY the descriptions for each game were the same except for the colour.
 
John Howard said:
Different strokes...

Although I'm rather surprised you didn't get WHY the descriptions for each game were the same except for the colour.
Click to expand...

I understand the purpose. Yes they're "all the same with a color change" and such. But they could've tried to make it a little funnier and maybe add something humurous that's relavent to each. Unfortunately for me however...
 
All I remember was that their Saw article had me on the floor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom