From Pee Review
Good idea. However:
- "In the late 80's, the suspected breakfast mob family known as Kelloggs, was a point of interest in the media after the Pop-Tarts rebelled against them, thus hiring Yuff the Puff to eliminate Corn Pops." Being a "point of interest in the media" ain't nothing (Jenny Aniston is a point of interest in the media and she ain't murdered nobody). "Was subpoenaed by the Federal prosecutors" is would be stronger. However, either way, "...thus hiring Yuff etc" doesn't fit. It implies that "being involved in the media" caused Kelloggs to do the dirty deeds. In fact, it would be logical if the media or Federal prosecutors became interested because Kelloggs did dirty deeds.
You see what I mean? The sentence doesn't make sense.
- "This next section deals with that term, "cereal killer(s)", in the aspect of human being killing cereal or a cereal mascot, as oppose to the above definition of "cereal killer", the definition of a cereal on cereal murder or a cereal mascot on cereal mascot murder. Got it?" No, I ain't got it. In the aspect of? Don't you mean in the sense of? And as opposed to.
Then after that put a semicolon (:) instead of a comma and continue, using dashes to indicate compound terms: "as opposed to the definition given above: a cereal-on-cereal or cereal-mascot-on-cereal-mascot murder."
The sentence is still unecessarily confusing, but it would be better.----OEJ 21:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
I dont understand why the song, by the band Green Jello, of the same name isn't mentioned here. Take a look guys, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERej3-N1p-4
What's actually a cereal killer? --220.127.116.11 04:06, September 19, 2010 (UTC)