Talk:Mossy coconut
Discussion From Pee Review[edit source]
Mossy coconut[edit source]
Before you reply with "wtf is this crap," let me point out that I did not make up the concept of the mossy coconut. Those are real pictures. With that in mind, tell me why it is too dumb to be VFH'd. --The Acceptable 
Cainad 
(Fnord) 10:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Dammit, I need some feedback. Did I piss away 5 hours of my weekend for nothing? --The Acceptable Cainad (Fnord) 09:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- We are sorry. The Duke of Bloatfester was on the phone all week about the National Loo, and we were engaged. Our Royal Highnesses will review your article now.
- Nice article. A little too sane for my warped tastes, perhaps, but intelligent and well-written. If we were doing it we would get a little more madcap, a little zanier, and we would photoshop the pics. But this is a matter of taste -- so many articles are randumb, misisplelled, and has ungrammars in they that it's refreshing to read a well-written one. ----OEJ 21:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent, so it's a matter of allowing the weirdness to grow, rather than trimming it down. Creating lunacy is so much more fun than eliminating it from an otherwise decent article, since the lunacy usually tends to work its way into the cracks of an article, like moss on a coconut. When that happens, the only way to get rid of it is to scrub the whole thing with bleach, which tends to leave one's computer in a shoddy state. I purposefully minimized the brain-warp factor of the article so it would not become an onion: lots of layers that make you cry, with nothing substantial at its center. I left the images unphotoshopped because I figured the idea of a mossy coconut was bizarre enough, not to mention I'd already spent the same amount of effort deleting the backgrounds as it takes to train a weasel to write the US Tax Code in Braille, in a dimly lit room, using only one's teeth (I am not the most expedient potatochopper). Still, the Mediocrity Subcommittee will start discussing the possibility of planning a discussion concerning the making of plans to improve the article. Then it will break for lunch. --The Acceptable
Cainad 
(Fnord) 23:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- Excellent, so it's a matter of allowing the weirdness to grow, rather than trimming it down. Creating lunacy is so much more fun than eliminating it from an otherwise decent article, since the lunacy usually tends to work its way into the cracks of an article, like moss on a coconut. When that happens, the only way to get rid of it is to scrub the whole thing with bleach, which tends to leave one's computer in a shoddy state. I purposefully minimized the brain-warp factor of the article so it would not become an onion: lots of layers that make you cry, with nothing substantial at its center. I left the images unphotoshopped because I figured the idea of a mossy coconut was bizarre enough, not to mention I'd already spent the same amount of effort deleting the backgrounds as it takes to train a weasel to write the US Tax Code in Braille, in a dimly lit room, using only one's teeth (I am not the most expedient potatochopper). Still, the Mediocrity Subcommittee will start discussing the possibility of planning a discussion concerning the making of plans to improve the article. Then it will break for lunch. --The Acceptable
Second time around[edit source]
Right, this is my second go at this. I thought the shiny new table would make it easier for me to understand why the article is mediocre (other than the fact that I wrote it). --The Acceptable Cainad (Fnord) 17:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
| Humour: | 6 | Very funny, liked the concept more. Have you worked as a florist before? |
| Concept: | 9 | This is seriously the next chia-pet. Takes an interesting commercial angle on the product itself including marketing strategies. Though that was very interesting, and informative! |
| Prose and formatting: | 6 | Good formatting, didn't really enjoy the colloquial prose, but that's just me. Some randomness towards the end of the article, but whatever. |
| Images: | 7 | Good images, python-esk. Pertinant to the topic. |
| Miscellaneous: | 0 | |
| Final Score: | 28 | I'll nominate this for VHF, just drop me a line and tell me what you thought of my comments. |
| Reviewer: | --AmericanBastard 21:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC) | |
I stink think I made some comments on the first Pee of this one. It's a good article, better than I remember it. I think you added some funny. I'd like to see why it is an example of "convergent evolution" -- did it and the Chia Pet evolve from separate lineages to converge on the same ecological niche -- ie, the end-tables of trendy suburban gits, for instance? One of the great hazards of mossy coconuts is that they can serve as ammunition for angry spouses. Laugh? Not when she lobs one at your head and it connects. Mind you, you will look funny with moss embedded in the skin of your forehead and a fern up your nose. Also, if one accidentally places a crate of trinitrotoluene under a mossy coconut it can explode! So be careful out there.----OEJ 18:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
A further think, a little later, on your question "why the article is mediocre". It would seem to me that the subject does not lend itself to epic, heroic satire. The piece ain't A Modest Proposal but the subject ain't not Irishmen dying by the bushel for want of potatoes. It ain't Tartuffe but the subject ain't so grand as religious hyprocrisy, either.
To me it seems that an Uncyc article on Mossy Coconuts is fine and valuable and should be written. It may, with much work, give us a good laugh. (I have writted manny highly mediocre articles on unglamorous subjects myself.)(Well, maybe some did not make it up from "lousy" to "mediocre"...)
Anyway, a mild and pleasant subject like Mossy Coconuts may just not inspire flights of trenchant Swiftian satirical wit. Maybe. Just some rambling thoughts. ----OEJ 23:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)