About: Uncyclopedia:No Reading Articles

Description
Metadata
Settings
- owl:sameAs
- Inference Rule:

About: Uncyclopedia:No Reading Articles Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : 134.155.108.49:8890 associated with source dataset(s)

Much like the popular program If you loved THAT, you’ll love THIS, the articles suffer from droll monotony perpetuated by a marked lack of originality. This makes most articles start with a bold restatement of the title, followed by several general sentences which outline the sections to come. What makes this particularly boring is that they attempt to sound all "intelligent" and whatnot. Often applying comma separated lists to cut down on sentence fragments (that is, several dependent clauses punctuated as independent of one another) and employing misused English to make its points seem more valid, when in fact they are not.

Attributes	Values
rdfs:label	Uncyclopedia:No Reading Articles
rdfs:comment	Much like the popular program If you loved THAT, you’ll love THIS, the articles suffer from droll monotony perpetuated by a marked lack of originality. This makes most articles start with a bold restatement of the title, followed by several general sentences which outline the sections to come. What makes this particularly boring is that they attempt to sound all "intelligent" and whatnot. Often applying comma separated lists to cut down on sentence fragments (that is, several dependent clauses punctuated as independent of one another) and employing misused English to make its points seem more valid, when in fact they are not.
dcterms:subject	Self-contradictory articles Long articles that ramble on about nothing Uncyclopedia Further proof that Uncyclopedia is the worst Uncyclopedia essays
dbkwik:uncyclopedi...iPageUsesTemplate	dbkwik:resource/qwYq2UzEkg_vHmJXr63gjg== dbkwik:resource/-p1WJwBKpIZ6kc-pxCk3rQ== dbkwik:resource/C8np36kMpOroXMxAxvk4pw== dbkwik:resource/IeumAjHmMm8wc5tW0YtNlA==
Revision	2914016(xsd:integer)
Date	2008-04-03(xsd:date)
abstract	Much like the popular program If you loved THAT, you’ll love THIS, the articles suffer from droll monotony perpetuated by a marked lack of originality. This makes most articles start with a bold restatement of the title, followed by several general sentences which outline the sections to come. What makes this particularly boring is that they attempt to sound all "intelligent" and whatnot. Often applying comma separated lists to cut down on sentence fragments (that is, several dependent clauses punctuated as independent of one another) and employing misused English to make its points seem more valid, when in fact they are not. Furthermore, images are used to detract from the complete and utter uselessness of the articles. No, seriously, I can see your eye wandering to the image on the right. Don't. Hey! I can see you, buster! Yes, that's right, looking to the red stamp to the right of this paragraph as if it were one of those websites you and your brother look at on Friday nights. Separately. Not together. That would be just weird. Yes, articles are crap. Of course, some are more crappy than others. Just read some of the articles posted at Uncyclopedia:VFH. Actually, don't. Just take my word for it. They're crap. Ditto for the ones to be found at Uncyclopedia:VFD. Hell, even This page does not exist is crap, and that page doesn't even exist! Granted, if some are worse, that means some are better. But they're still gargantuan piles of monkey-feces-laced suck. That's the bottom line.

OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software