Talk:Subliminal Messages

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Subliminal Messages. This is also a forum for spreading libelous rumors about the article's subject. This is not a forum for general discussion about what you did last night. We have the Village Dump for things like that.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Uncyclopedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be Civil Assume Bad Faith Don't Be A Dick No Cyberbullying	Article policies How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid Satirical point of view Verifiability vs. Complete Bollocks

---

The contents of Subliminal message were merged into Subliminal Messages and they now redirect here. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history.

---

From Pee Review

I wrote the page...picture by someone else. Let me know what you think.

Humour:	8	I was amused. Good job.
Concept:	10	Great topic for mockage, and pulled off well.
Prose and formatting:	5	This is a weak point. It needs some links, definitely, and you need to think of ways to make some of the sentences make sense as written. I also recommend using the <small> wiki formatting for the subliminal messages, as they're a little too easy to see at the moment. They're like... superliminal right now...
Images:	7	Effective use of the joke. Could use more images to drive the point home. If necessary, utilize Image Request.
Miscellaneous:	8	It made me laugh, and that always gets you a good review.
Final Score:	38	I liked this article. I think just a little cleanup, and you're ready for VFH.
Reviewer:	--<<>> 02:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I've made some of the messages more subliminal, but I bet someone can do an even better job. --General Insineratehymn 04:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Humour:	6	Not quite LOL, but amusing.
Concept:	9	Good topic.
Prose and formatting:	6	Too hard to read at the moment - not sure what to do about this. Good getting the variation per section.
Images:	7	Nice, could do with one or two more good ones.
Miscellaneous:	7
Final Score:	35	Good idea, needs another concept or two and up to twice the length.
Reviewer:	David Gerard 11:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)