Talk:Scat

I'd like to add "H to the izz-O...V to the izz-A" in the form of a formula, can anyone help? Spikebrennan 01:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Look! Magic! – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 05:02 Apr 22, 2008

Thanks! Spikebrennan 13:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Eet skiddly oaten doaten

Boe doe ba deepem bopem, wah dahpen chew. -OptyC Sucks! CUN21:32, 24 Apr

How to add to this article

Before you go adding useless crap, please be aware that the content of this article consists of real song lyrics, consisting of chronologically-arranged sections from earliest music to latest.

<3

I really like this article. I keep laughing when I read it aloud. Kudos! Mightydandylion (talk) Fk 00:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Pee Review

Humour:	8.5	Note 1. “Scat dwee-oo dwee oo’n doo wa dwee-oo dwee oo’n doowa skittle dee dee ‘n dee. Ba bee ba da doo’n dee da’n doo da, zoo za zoo zee zee zoo zee zee zee za. Skittle n’diddle n’fiddle dee dee’n’dee. Baaaa bwee doo’n doo-wa ooby dooby doo-wa be-doo wa wa shooby dooby doo: mee mee ma may moo moo.” Jive man. Very cool. I kept smiling throughout this passage. Kudos! Note 2. “Mairzy Doats” I don’t know why but I keep laughing at that heading. Note 3. “Bah bah doo da boo, boop boop de boop. Boop. A kiddley divey too. [1] Chibaba, chibaba, chiwawa. Enjalawa cookala goomba. Zippety doo dah shoorah shoorah.” Let me disclose my secret. I’m reading this whole article aloud. And I’ve got to say: it’s fun! Note 4. The Hi-de-hi-de-hi-de-hi/Hi-de-hi-de-hi-de-hi dichotomy. WHY DO I KEEP SMILING?!? CEASE TORMENTOR! :) Note 5. Shoobee doo wop wop section. Very good section. Still smiling. I was reading the discussion page of this article and you mentioned how these scats are actually gleaned from real-life popular scats. I was wondering if you would be so kind to put up a sort of guide in the discussion page that could aid the reader in identifying such scats and which songs/artists they allude to. It’d be really cool treat for the reader. Also, the footnotes are fun. Also, The mow mow-Mao redirect made me laugh. Note 6. Ooh wee chirpy chirpy cheep cheepwee chirpy chirpy cheep cheep section. Still smiling; but I realized something: I was really apprehensive of reading this section because of it’s imposing size compared to the other sections. The section’s daunting-ness caused my smiling hitherto to falter. For an idea like this, may one suggest breaking up large blocks of scat into more manageable piles. That would allay the reader’s initial apprehension of being lost in what appears to be a mass of inscrutable text. Note 7. "Tom bo li de say de moi ya, Yeah, Jambo Jumbo. Menememenenemeee, deduuduuduu dedaadaadaa, mammasay mammasah mama-koosah. Chicka chickaa, oh yeah." I’ve no idea why but this passage did not elicit any smirks, smiles, or lols. Note 8. Bum stiggedy bum stiggedy bum section. Great heading. Elicited a snicker. The section largely was difficult to read. Coupled with the aforementioned concerns of point 6, this part also did not flow particularly well. Still, “My, my, my, my” and “A mulatto, an albino a mosquito, my libido.” were absolutely great. I laughed. Note 9. “"Bawitaba da bang da dang diggy diggy" said the boogie. Said up jump the boogie” Excellent. Elicited a laugh. However, the rest of the section elicited no smirks, smiles, or lols. “Izzle kizzle, fo' schizzle my nizzle, what you sizzle? Fo' schizzle bizzle, ha ha.” is uninspired. Note 10. “Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey[4].” Almost missed this one! Good job! Elicited much appreciation and a smile. Once again, good footnotes! Note 11. While not loling throughout, the effect upon the reader of this article may be likened to the refreshing and restorative properties of a Sunday morning’s walk down a gentrified neighborhood-—with a flower in hand. Dig?
Concept:	9	Excellent concept. Scat, baby.
Prose and formatting:	7	The prose? Well, please look at note 6. and note 8.. Other than that, the prose was fully within expectant Uncyclopedia standards on scat. The formatting could use a touchup. It's lacking a certain ooh e ooh ah ah wing wang wallla walla bing bang. Can one make scat prettier?
Images:	8	The first and fourth pictures were fine. The second and third were brilliant and clever. I am especially appreciative of the rama lama ding dong captioning. Excellent.
Miscellaneous:	8.1	Averaged.
Final Score:	40.6	The article’s execution of this very difficult concept evidences a thoughtful and jiving mind. Good job! Just work on the aforementioned elements that need be worked upon and surely, this article will be a-hoppin’ and a-skippin’ in the VFH spotlight. Good luck and Godspeed.
Reviewer:	Mightydandylion (talk) Fk 18:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Another Pee

This was on Pee Review's to-do list and I didn't know it had already been done so here's another pee for you, you lucky devil.

Humour:	7	Humor? How can a nonsense article be humorous? Well, I actually did laugh when I saw the table. Maybe if you added some more devices to make the scat look like important data, like a bar graph or a poll, you could capitalize even better on being serious about something silly as described in HTBFANJS. But the problem I had with this article is that since I lack any musical aptitude, I didn't recognize a lot of the songs and I didn't know how to parse what I was reading. You could add text decoration or change the font size so musical fools like me could better understand what kind of tune or emphasis is supposed to be there.
Concept:	8	This article's certainly a novelty, but I think you've pulled it off well. Congratulations. I like how it's pretty much in chronological order, too. But this article seems to have sort of a niche appeal, like Geologist. Not everyone's going to appreciate it. But what can you do, eh? (aside from replacing all the images with pictures of tits.) But yeah, I think the direction you've taken this article is about as good as an article called "scat" could hope for.
Prose and formatting:	8	I've got to give you credit for formatting this article well. If my vision were blurry and I couldn't read what was on the screen, I'd think it was just another Wikipedia article. It could stand to be longer, though, as the sections are only a couple of lines long. I know that's a really tough thing to ask on an article like this, but at least consider ways you could add text to it. I can't expect it to be as verbose as Lorem Ipsum, but it's pretty skinny as it is. Also, play around with the placement of images. Make it so they're not all right-justified in a column, and try to make it so that last image isn't sticking out at the bottom (preferably by adding more text), because it's a little jarring to the harmony of the page.
Images:	7	I don't want to give you too high of a score for the images when you didn't actually make them (or even upload them), but I have to admit that they work. A couple of them take a second to figure out, which is good because it makes you seem all pretentious and elite (which is a good thing, right?). It seems that you shrunk the image of Armstrong so we can't see the red eyes. Here's another image to consider using so you don't have to do that. If I had to suggest one thing to change about the images, I'd say to have more images about the applications of scat rather than the people who said it (like the image of Krishna you used).
Miscellaneous:	9	The average is 7.5 but I'm bumping up your miscellaneous score to 9 because I appreciate the effort and research you put in to this. That's how Uncyclopedia articles should be written.
Final Score:	39	This is a fine article, but what it needs most (and what is probably the hardest thing to give it) is more. It has a good soul, so work on its body. Consider letting it join the ranks of other nonsense articles (at least two of which have been featured) by adding {{nonsense|stuff=Diddly-bop}} or something. But hey, you seem to have the right idea about it.
Reviewer:	Met him on a Sunday and his name was --Pleb SYNDROME CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!) 07:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

English, please

Should the songs be listed, or not? I really don't know what most of them are, and I think that part of Roadhouse Blues by the Doors should be in there, but I don't know where to add it. Otherwise, though: AWESOME article! -- Spillin DylanTALKEDITS03:46, April 29 2008

• Don't list 'em: figuring out what the songs are is part of the fun. (Here's a hint: the intro paragraph and "Mairzy Doats" are songs before the 1950s; "Shoobee doo wop wop" is the 1950s; "Ooh wee chirpy chirpy cheep cheep" is the 1960s and 1970s; "Karamu fiesta" is from the 1980s; and "Bum stiggedy bum stiggedy bum" is 1990s, and "Doll dagga buzz buzz ziggety zag" is everything more recent than that.) Based on what I just said, Roadhouse Blues would presumably go in the "Ooh wee chirpy chirpy cheep cheep" section. Spikebrennan 19:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

• • There's an (out of date) guide, on my userpage, to the songs quoted here-- but more have been added since I prepared the guide. Spikebrennan 16:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

IT NEEDS...

A DIAGRAM!!!! --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 12:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

What did you have in mind? Spikebrennan 14:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It needs a link to someone reading it aloud!--Xuanji 14:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Debugging nonsense template

I'd like to add the nonsense template, with each entry be shown as randomly selected snippets of scat. But my code doesn't work. Can it be debugged? Spikebrennan 16:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice

This is the funniest damn wiki page I have ever seen on any site.

What's that?

I’ll add this to the article, I think… Boom ba-cha-cha-la-da Boom boom-bah! MafiaMaxAint95 (talk) 02:04, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Boom bacha chalada boom boom bah! MafiaMaxAint95 (talk) 02:08, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Can I add this?

"Ska-badabadabadoo-belidabbelydabbladabbladabblabab-belibabbelibabbelibabbelabbelo-doobelidoo"

I don't see why not. MrX blow me 00:22, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Scat the article

Scat the article and save it as an audio recording 112.203.41.167 (talk) 02:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)