Forum:Get Pissing you artists!
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Forums: Index > Village Dump > Get Pissing you artists!
Note: This topic has been unedited for 3874 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.
 |
We need your PEE! Good day loyal PEEING member.The management was wondering if you had noticed the state of the toilet recently. We appear to have developed something of a blockage, and wondered if you might have a plunger handy. Possibly you are one of the rare PEEING members who does actually do regular reviews, in which case please flush this message immediately, otherwise... It's time you reviewed something you lazy bum! |
If you are new to Pee Review, check out UN:PEE, if you are not we currently don't have an active "Captain Catheter". So, we need one... You know you want to. MrN 
04:44. Mar 16. 2013
- I will criticiserate articles in a more informal way if someone wants me to. -- Style
Guide 19:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- YES. If you want to. While the crapper is as full of crap as it is let's concentrate on getting it all quickly flushed. Normally we whine at people if they only write one line per section, but considering how things are currently, don't worry about writing lots at the moment. Even if you just do a few lines and give some good scores that would be great as we could get the queue down to size quickly. When we get the toilet flushed again, we can start concentrating on quality again. Right now, several "quick" reviews is what we need rather than 1 "normal" review. Let em know if it's up to VFH, and some kinda direction in which to go if not... You all know the routine! Get peeing! MrN
00:23. Mar 17. 2013
- I meant I'm not interested in Pee for a couple of reasons: a writer should know his language, so the language point point is pointless. Humour? No? I will not grade it. But if a writer wants to ask me general questions - if anyone in the world wants advice from the dude who wrote UnBooks:The approximate adventures of RandomMan and Essay in the Jones of text - I will help out. -- Style Guide 17:09, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- So what you are saying is that we need a place to advertise articles like UnBooks:The approximate adventures of RandomMan and Essay in the Jones of text which have an active editor who wants feedback and advice so they can improve the article? Hea! We have one. It's called Pee Review. If you submit your article there then people will know that you are interested in feedback, and will act on it. The way to get someone to do a Pee Review for you is... To do some reviews for other people... It's a great system, and it works. MrN 17:16. Mar 17. 2013
- No... I'll not do Pees, nor do I need any. I rather offer help in form of collaboration and general ideas to consider. I'm not for grading individual articles at all. I think the whatsit that thing... language thing... is the only thing worth giving advice on, and not even that in many cases. I also meant to advertise those two articles only as negative examples in case someone feels the need to ask me for any advice. -- Style Guide 17:24, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's Unyclopeida. Everyone can do what they like. Mostly. :) Personally I think it's worth giving advice and feedback not just on language, but also on Humour, Concept, Prose & formatting, Images as well as a general overview. Everyone knows that the "scores" really don't really count for much as they are just one persons view. However they can give a general guideline of if the article is VFH worthy or not. New editors genuinely do not know. What really matters is if you actually give any advice to help improve the article or perhaps the skills of the writer themselves, which "box" you put that in does not really matter one bit. Yep... That bit about improving the writer (and the reviewer) themselves is what Pee Review is really about. Personally I think I learnt more about writing articles by trying to review them than I did by actually trying to write them. You don't even have to fill out the actual review box. You can just leave a short comment, and leave the review open for someone else to actually give the scores and "close" the review. It's all explained at UN:PEE.
- Pee Review is THE central place on Uncyclopeda for editors to advertise articles for collaboration and improvement, and if you choose to ignore it... That's up to you. ;) MrN 17:55. Mar 17. 2013
- Yeah, I choose to. Too forced for me. Also, we can strike this whole discussion or move it somewhere since it's totally useless to your purpose. -- Style Guide 18:11, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- You don't even have to fill out the actual review box. You can just leave a short comment, and leave the review open for someone else to actually give the scores and "close" the review. So, it's actually like a place to collaborate and edit also... ;) It's all explained at UN:PEE. Move this discussion? Nope. That would be silly . I think it's fine here. MrN 18:19. Mar 17. 2013
- You don't even have to fill out the actual review box. You can just leave a short comment, and leave the review open for someone else to actually give the scores and "close" the review. So, it's actually like a place to collaborate and edit also... ;) It's all explained at UN:PEE. Move this discussion? Nope. That would be silly . I think it's fine here. MrN
- Yeah, I choose to. Too forced for me. Also, we can strike this whole discussion or move it somewhere since it's totally useless to your purpose. -- Style
- No... I'll not do Pees, nor do I need any. I rather offer help in form of collaboration and general ideas to consider. I'm not for grading individual articles at all. I think the whatsit that thing... language thing... is the only thing worth giving advice on, and not even that in many cases. I also meant to advertise those two articles only as negative examples in case someone feels the need to ask me for any advice. -- Style
- So what you are saying is that we need a place to advertise articles like UnBooks:The approximate adventures of RandomMan and Essay in the Jones of text which have an active editor who wants feedback and advice so they can improve the article? Hea! We have one. It's called Pee Review. If you submit your article there then people will know that you are interested in feedback, and will act on it. The way to get someone to do a Pee Review for you is... To do some reviews for other people... It's a great system, and it works. MrN
- I meant I'm not interested in Pee for a couple of reasons: a writer should know his language, so the language point point is pointless. Humour? No? I will not grade it. But if a writer wants to ask me general questions - if anyone in the world wants advice from the dude who wrote UnBooks:The approximate adventures of RandomMan and Essay in the Jones of text - I will help out. -- Style
- YES. If you want to. While the crapper is as full of crap as it is let's concentrate on getting it all quickly flushed. Normally we whine at people if they only write one line per section, but considering how things are currently, don't worry about writing lots at the moment. Even if you just do a few lines and give some good scores that would be great as we could get the queue down to size quickly. When we get the toilet flushed again, we can start concentrating on quality again. Right now, several "quick" reviews is what we need rather than 1 "normal" review. Let em know if it's up to VFH, and some kinda direction in which to go if not... You all know the routine! Get peeing! MrN
Let's continue then
My idea of useful collaboration is as follows:
- spit out ideas somewhere
- see if the ideas can be fitted together at all
- figure out a form, angle etc. for the article
- decide on who's to be the chief editor of it
- write it until it's good
Another way is explained at some length here, but that one is more for interconnected media hysteria campaigns than for single-article collaborations. You remember the idea, I think. Welcome everyone who gets the idea. Results are being made. -- Style 
Guide 18:31, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- You can do all that at: Pee Review! Remember all those other things we tried to create like the collabro watsit? No? Neither do I. That's why we have... Pee Review! MrN 18:36. Mar 17. 2013
- No you can't because on Pee you review articles that are more or less finished as far as the original writer is concerned. It's about picking something that has been decided once, and so it's far more cumbersome. Also, Pee Review doesn't mention linky collaborations at all. Remember - I suggested moving this discussion. Also, I do remember the collaborations. Neighborhood watch got featured. I would have gone for more but the rest of you lost interest. -- Style Guide 18:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- I have nothing against what you are doing with your project. Nothing at all... I agree it's kinda different. I'm not attacking it. Don't think I am silly. It's me silly. Remember? Anyway, "linky collaborations" ??? ... However... Where does it say that Pee review can only be for articles that are more or less finished as far as the original writer is concerned? I'm not sure it does anywhere, maybe I'm wrong. :| Also... You can request whatever you like when you submit your article for review. You can ask for it to be reviewed or edited in whatever way you like. If you don't like the review you can (if you choose) decide to submit it again. It's all up to you... Then, depending on how appealing what you are asking for is, that decides how quickly someone comes along to answer your request. Right now... Pee Review is less active than Boomer was when he ran the place. Also, we still don't have a Captain Catheter, and I'm not doing it. I'm an Asshole. MrN 19:30. Mar 17. 2013
- It doesn't say that, it's just sort of implied. I didn't think you were attacking what I'm doing at all - I just went along with you not wanting to move this elsewhere and now we both got good advertising for the different methods we're trying to push. Just for the sake of pointing out how hard-headed I am, I still maintain Pee Review is far more cumbersome as a writing process than the ideas I'm promoting. Free flow of ideas first, writing second. Not everyone can collaborate like that, but it works well when it does. Style Guide 19:47, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- It doesn't say that, it's just sort of implied. I didn't think you were attacking what I'm doing at all - I just went along with you not wanting to move this elsewhere and now we both got good advertising for the different methods we're trying to push. Just for the sake of pointing out how hard-headed I am, I still maintain Pee Review is far more cumbersome as a writing process than the ideas I'm promoting. Free flow of ideas first, writing second. Not everyone can collaborate like that, but it works well when it does. Style
- I have nothing against what you are doing with your project. Nothing at all... I agree it's kinda different. I'm not attacking it. Don't think I am silly. It's me silly. Remember? Anyway, "linky collaborations" ??? ... However... Where does it say that Pee review can only be for articles that are more or less finished as far as the original writer is concerned? I'm not sure it does anywhere, maybe I'm wrong. :| Also... You can request whatever you like when you submit your article for review. You can ask for it to be reviewed or edited in whatever way you like. If you don't like the review you can (if you choose) decide to submit it again. It's all up to you... Then, depending on how appealing what you are asking for is, that decides how quickly someone comes along to answer your request. Right now... Pee Review is less active than Boomer was when he ran the place. Also, we still don't have a Captain Catheter, and I'm not doing it. I'm an Asshole. MrN
- No you can't because on Pee you review articles that are more or less finished as far as the original writer is concerned. It's about picking something that has been decided once, and so it's far more cumbersome. Also, Pee Review doesn't mention linky collaborations at all. Remember - I suggested moving this discussion. Also, I do remember the collaborations. Neighborhood watch got featured. I would have gone for more but the rest of you lost interest. -- Style
Linky collaborations
This is what Uncyclopedia apparently was when it was established. Random links mostly suck. I think articles should be linked through more than just a buzzword. That's why I'm trying to get people to collaborate on ideas that link well together, i.e. media campaigns much in the same way as in real life. Do it for the reader - and do it now! Yes we can! -- Style Guide 19:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- ...and from previous experience I know that when I start fucking around with an idea I mostly go right ahead with it myself. This time, though, RAHB and Kippy have mobilised themselves enough for me to get a kick out of it. Pope things are well underway and will stay that way until we have milked it dry. So, I'm not "tying to do something", I'm doing it, and so are they. In conclusion: welcome if you have ideas you want expanded on or if you for some reason want to expand on others' ideas. -- Style Guide 20:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Awesome. When you have some good articles together... Put them on Pee Review. :) MrN 20:05. Mar 17. 2013
- Won't - mainly because I'm not interested in seeing how someone who has a different sense of humour from mine would like to improve my article. If someone has a say about my article, why not write another that makes fun of mine - and link to it, thereby making both articles more valid? That way the time is used far better than setting up reviews that are, after all, just reviews. -- Style Guide 20:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Won't - mainly because I'm not interested in seeing how someone who has a different sense of humour from mine would like to improve my article. If someone has a say about my article, why not write another that makes fun of mine - and link to it, thereby making both articles more valid? That way the time is used far better than setting up reviews that are, after all, just reviews. -- Style
- Awesome. When you have some good articles together... Put them on Pee Review. :) MrN
ALL RIGHT THEN I'LL DO a COUPLE OF STUB REVIEWS
I don't think the full review is a good idea, in general - because how the hell do you teach comedy? I'll spit out pointers wherever I get them quick, though. -- Style Guide 21:07, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's almost like someone tried to write some guidelines or something about it all... MrN 21:12. Mar 17. 2013
- It is. I don't think it's possible, though. All I can help with is whether the article kept my interest and if not, why. -- Style Guide 21:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Oh you mean about the Pee? Fat chance I'll read those. Now I know how to do it the next time, thanks. -- Style Guide 21:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Edit conflict!: Neither did we when we wrote it. Still, it's better than nothing. All you actually really need to have done is actually to have read the instructions on UN:PEE. Have you ever read both? The guide is not bad actually. I hope you noticed my editing your reviews to move them out of the boxes. That way the "review" stays open until someone wants to give scores and fill in the rest of the boxes. Till then, obviously anyone can comment, or join in the discussion/editing the article... MrN 21:20. Mar 17. 2013
- Edit conflict!: Neither did we when we wrote it. Still, it's better than nothing. All you actually really need to have done is actually to have read the instructions on UN:PEE. Have you ever read both? The guide is not bad actually. I hope you noticed my editing your reviews to move them out of the boxes. That way the "review" stays open until someone wants to give scores and fill in the rest of the boxes. Till then, obviously anyone can comment, or join in the discussion/editing the article... MrN
- Oh you mean about the Pee? Fat chance I'll read those. Now I know how to do it the next time, thanks. -- Style
- It is. I don't think it's possible, though. All I can help with is whether the article kept my interest and if not, why. -- Style