Welp. Another Colonization in the can. How'd it turn out? Colonizers are (in order of importance):
Mooshy
Socky
Silicson
Colin
Saberwolf
Simslover
Joe
Led
OurTimeIsUp
Concernedresident
Gerry
TitTagger
Zheliel
And some guy we can't seem to get rid of.
PEEING member only please. -OptyC Sucks! 
CUN17:54, 30 May
- Opty! Hey, hey Opty! Hey! Opty, hey! Thanks for the kind words! Oh wow, lots of people worked on this... /me cracks knuckles let's get down to business. Le Cejak • <18:58 May 30, 2009>
| Humour:
|
6.6
|
avg of each section, and remember I use 7 as a baseline, not 5... Wait, this has already been featured? I'm confused... oh well, one of my featured articles is still up for review.
- Introduction (5/10): They're a parody of Uncyc, good. Wiki is a Hawaiian word meaning thief and Encyclopedia is... what? A Prussian word for pressed cheese? Tell me! It was founded by thieving bots, her her... All languages in history, meaning english and spanish her her... Clearly, there are some jokes that just smack of "HEY LOOK, THEY'S AT WIKIPEDIA IS STUPID!" :\ Okay, so what could you do? You know how I would write this? I would only parody their crazy rules. That's the part of Wikipedia that's easiest to make fun of. Spend a little time on this history stuff, but really, that's tough.
- 1 History and Creation (7/10): Graffiti on bathroom walls, meh. That stuff about Nu->Wiki and who was paying attention to wikipedia (all 2nd para) was pretty good. I like the little things you guys did on the stupid crap in wikipedia, but you should link to weirder pages like buffalo buffalo buffalo. I'm curious what you guys will come up with.
- 2 Content (5/10): good opening line. The rest, I guess, is informative but not hilarious.
- 2.1 Articles (4/10): mmm, meh. I don't think anybody cares about their articles. You can make a reference to how sucky they are in the opening of this section ("content") and then forget it.
- 2.2 Review Process (8/10): yup, pretty good. Making fun of specific groups of people is always > than making fun of some kind of website as a whole.
- 3.1 Vandalism (8/10): I'm always up for random references to PENIS and LOLFAG.
- 3.2 Reliability (9/10): In the summer of 2007 Wikipedia was criticized for accurately displaying the location and planned movements of all US troops stationed in Iraq in their article on asparagus. is going in User:Cajek/faves. The rest is pretty good too, but one liners that catch me off guard are teh awesome.
- 4 Future Plans (5/10): The mention of the Wikipedia Movie sounds really awesome, IMO. Everything else were jokes I've heard before. "God kills a kitten" jokes? Come on, guys.
- 4.1 Advertising (8/10): "Friends call him Jimmy" "me and jimmy" that's really pretty good. But this is a really weird end to the article, and the last sentence doesn't really end the article for me. I think "Future Plans" sounds more like an ending than "Advertising" don't you?
|
| Concept:
|
7
|
Yeah, this is a necessary article. However, there are two sections you're missing: something about all the god damned rules they have, and something about "Wikipedia: The Movie". That's just my opinion, of course, in order to make your article slightly longer... penis.
|
| Prose and formatting:
|
9
|
Excellent.
|
| Images:
|
5
|
The only picture I found entertaining was that one about the content, and even that one is too small for the average reader to see. The other ones, especially that one with the MS Paint dog, were forgettable.
|
| Miscellaneous:
|
6.9
|
{{Pee}}
|
| Final Score:
|
34.5
|
As far as reviews go, I think you could go in and look at the sections that scored, in Cajek's humble opinion, below the average in funniness, and then expand and add some more sections. Really, I don't know how I could change this. In fact, I think it gave me an idea for an unscript... maybe... Oh who am I kidding, I'm too lazy. Hope I helped, guys!
Lots of people worked on this colonization, so thank you from Uncyc to you.
|
| Reviewer:
|
Le Cejak • <19:36 May 30, 2009>
|
CUN17:54, 30 May