Talk:Godwin's law
I wrote this.[edit source]
But forgot to log in at the time. That is all. Feebas factor 19:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, David A. - please frickin add something! This article is going nowhere at the speed of... anonymity?
- MAJOR WINNAGE!!! Feebas factor 22:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Pee Review[edit source]
My first (half-decent) article. I know it's rather short, but I ran out of material and was hoping other uncyclopedians might continue to embiggen it. Evidently that didn't work out too well, seeing as I'm still the sole contributor. Ah well... suggestions for additional content (or ways to get other people to do it for me) are welcome. Also: images! - I don't really know what to do there.
| Humour: | 7 | Good jokes. |
| Concept: | 9 | Excellent idea, but see endnotes. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | Well-written. I see you employ semicolons, the champagne of punctuation. |
| Images: | 7 | Nice Hitlerpic. Good that you don't use one of the two or three super-cliché ones. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8 | I liked this. I'd like to see this expanded and succeed. |
| Final Score: | 39 | |
| Reviewer: | ----OEJ 13:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC) | |
Personally, I would like to see a more explicit demonstration of how Hitler manifests himself spontaneously on Internet forums.
- ForumGuy: So if you leave the dishes in the sink every night it just means that there's something wrong with you.
- ModeratorGuy: NO! Stop! Moral generalizations like that summon up --
- Hitler: Bildeten Sie meinen Telefonring, baby?
- ModeratorGuy: No, no one rang you up on the telephone! Go away!
- Hitler: Too late! It's Blitzkrieg time!
Or you could just add a detailed description of how the Hitler-manifestation works. Also, I would tend to put the sly reference to the real Godwin's Law right up front and then the more detailed bit on how Hitler and the Nazis manifest themselves can be justified as part of a disproof of the more tame version of the Law.
I recommend you continue to work on this piece. It's a good idea. Don't expect all the ramifications of the article to be obvious right away -- re-read and polish the piece for awhile, and as you do that your subconscious will be nudged to provide new ideas for expanding the article. At least that's my guess.
But all this is just silly, silly advice from a silly silly man. ----OEJ 13:51, 11 August 2007 (UTC)