Uncyclopedia:Reviewer of the Month/archive

2007

December

Cajek (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +16 consultant urologists

• Nom & For. It's not just the volume of reviews, although he has cranked out many, it's the fact that he is helpful with all of them. Now that OEJ has the inaugural award as is fair and just, time to recognise the shift Cajek's put in this last month. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 18:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
• Strong For what a hard worker--Æ 18:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
• Fro. His broken-down system is quite intuitive and helpful. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK
• For He's really earned it.--Major'GUN' Ggarfield, Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 19:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
• Absolutely. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 20:27 Dec 03, 2007
• Does great reviews. Duh. I like to think it's completely thanks to my guidance. None of you better burst my bubble! Under User's next. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 22:49, Dec 3
• Obviously. Despite Cajek's attempts to get me to get off my ass and do a few more reviews myself, it's obvious that this man will win the reviewer of the month this month. Shall we close the vote now? MrN 16:29, Dec 5
• Fine I'll vote for myself because I dug through the archives and I want you to see my very first pee review and the results of that review :D   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 6 / 21:22)
• Well, duh. -- Thankful Kippy Share blessings Bountiful harvest 12:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
• for. at time of my vote, cajek has done exactly 50% of the reviews on the 'reviewed' page. and his reviews are in-depth and helpful, not just 'OMG, that wuz funnay lolz'. highest quantity times highest quality equals highest awesome. also, his humor break-down has forever revolutionized pee review. --SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 09:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
• Most Definite For. I may have had something to do with Cajek becoming a great reviewer. Exactly what, though, shall remain in the annals of history.... Sir Groovester | Contributions | Talk Page 06:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
• For He really works hard to do helpful reviews, and do a lot of them, unlike most users who only occasionally write reviews when they "feel" like it. He's helped make pee reviewing into an ART FORM!!!!111. --THE 14:03, 9 December 2007

(UTC)

• Por. I would have nominated him myself. @-}— 75.71.94.153 03:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
• He's mad! MAD! ~ 08:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
• Oh! definitely! Duh! ~Fag x FS
• ForD produces crappy American cars. Cajek doesn't. - UnIdiot | | Talk | Contribs - 02:23, Dec 20
• For. Very dedicated. --EMC ^[TALK] 00:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

November

One-eyed Jack (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +14 additional eyes donated to the cause

• Nom & For. And frankly I reckon we could close the noms for this month right here. He consistently and regularly pumps out the best, most helpful, in-depth reviews on the site. Bar none. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 09:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Aye. It is always a pleasure getting a review for old Jack. ~ 11:19, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong for, per UU. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 18:39, Oct 30
• For --Sir OCdt Jedravent CUN UmP VFH PLS ACS WH 19:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• A professional in the art of peeing. And of course, for. --EMC ^[TALK] 19:31, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• For Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 21:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• For--Sir Manforman 22:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• For. Sir Groovester | Contributions | Talk Page 01:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
• Stronger For than Led's For, per TheLedBalloon, but better in every way. - UnIdiot | | Talk | Contribs - 21:21, Nov 1
• Forsooth, there's not a reviewer of higher caliber to be found. --The Acceptable  Cainad  (Fnord) 02:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
• Nom and For. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 02:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
• Forrrr • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 23:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• For. I usually abstain from this vote, since I'm far too lazy to review stuff. However, OEJ is a sincere and genuinely helpful reviwer who deserves recognition. RabbiTechno 22:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
• For He inspired me to start reviewing more, which I hope is a good thing.   Le Cejak • <-> Nov 15, 22:42
• Yup after what everyone's said <3 .talk.work.?pedia.$A_{ward}^{waits}$

2008

January

Fag (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 0 gaybos

• Nomination Fag deserves a shot at this award. He does a good job.   Le Cejak • <-> Jan 15 (15:24)
  • Comment hey, thanks Cajek! However, I think there are people who deserve it more at the moment. *shifts eyes downward* ~Fag x FS

Under user (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 5 or under

• Nomination Where do the steel kidneys go to get their stuff reviewed? ...UNDER USER!   Le Cejak • <-> Jan 3 (20:34)
• For - UnIdiot | Talk? | Theme - 00:11, Jan 5
• For. --Sir Xiao Li CUN VFH NS (Talk) 03:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
• For The nuts muts. Also, UU has been helping out with Cajek's Pee list as Sir Random has (for a short time) pissed off... MrN 00:06, Jan 23
• For - tough call, as MrN9000 has helped me numerous times as well as others, but Under user has done more qwality reviews than MrN9000. It should be notes his review on Why?:Wear clothes 3 sizes too small was almost 8,000 characters long--Æ 01:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
• I see a triple tie in the making. ~ Mordillo where is my FUCKING JUMP!? 12:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

  Dammit, I was trying to avoid having to vote. grumble grumble tie grumble bastards grumble grumble conspiracy grumble Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

MrN9000 (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: N6000

• Nom + For -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 03:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
  • so tempted to vote for Because even though Finnius is a damn good reviewer, so is Mr. N and he half-wrote the UN:PRG. I will reserve my vote until the end of the month, though.   Le Cejak • <-> (Jan 1) 03:34
• For. Does good work, and his contributions to the PRG should be recognised. --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 11:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
• For because. Also, he's a brilliant reviewer. Also, he's really helpful. Also, also. Also, wut? Also,~Fag x FS
• For He really helped with one of my articles. --Nomoredonkeys 21:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
• For I see the girls walk by me in their summer clothes....I have to turn my head until the darkness goes. And that's how I feel about N.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 19:35, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

  That's scary. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

• For. I've been through the reviews bastards made me do work and out of everybody that I've seen, MrN9000 simply has the best ones. He not only gives honest reviews and many suggestions for improvement, he even looks into why it's funny. As well as Finnius and Under User have been doing in Pee Review, I think MrN separates himself. In a good way. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Finnius (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 5 weird sig fishes

• Nom - he did 19 Pee Reviews, 14 of which were in-depth--Æ 02:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment That's just according to me, though! (even though I love me)   Le Cejak • <-> (Jan 1) 03:12
• For - 'cause he does a really good job. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 05:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
• For I like fish--Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 22:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Yeah, I like the fin-man. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 22:47, Jan 14
• For --EMC ^[TALK] 14:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
• For - Finnius reminds me of a salmon. -- The Zombiebaron 22:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

February

Fag (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 1 smokers

• Nomination Has significantly improved the quality of his reviews, and is now a serious contender for this award. MrN 18:18, Feb 1
• VOTE FAG: What, are you some kind of homophobe? Ж Kalir, Awesome Author_{(alliteration affords additional awesome)} 19:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Under user (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 11 under achievers

• Nomination Took it all the way to the wire last month, and will be hard to beat this time around. MrN 18:18, Feb 1
• For--Æ 18:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• For -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 20:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
• For. He's had it coming, I think. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 00:20, Feb 6

  In the sexy way? Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

  Is there any other way? - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 21:42, Feb 13

• Hell. Yes. I check this stupid website from time to time, and UU is who I see reviewing. UU is who I see updating Pee. UU is who... I, uh... see.   Le Cejak • <-> Feb 6 (00:22)

  In the sexy way? Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:28, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

• For. What can I say? Mr. UU far exceeds me in pretty much anything even vaguely urinal. :P --_^(sir)Fag!chat|pee|fail|vote! 12:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

comment hey Fag, dont vote for the enemy, AND don't let your self-critic become more powerful than your self-worth...Finn has spoken.

comment nah, it's because he by far deserves it more :P It's not like he wasn't going to win anyway --_^(sir)Fag!chat|pee|fail|vote! 09:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment. B...but I'm not anyone's enemy. Honest! I'm nice, do you hear me Finnius? Niiice! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 09:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

comment you're right, i shouldn't have used the word 'enemy'.../me checks Santa's List

• Keep up the good work UU. -- Spillin DylanTALKEDITS19:27, Feb 7 2008
• Obviously... Good luck next month Fag. MrN 11:10, Feb 12
• UU has brought some sunshine into my dreary life. Try UU yourself kids, success is guaranteed. Brigadier Sir Mordillo GUN UotY WotM FP UotM AotM MI³ AnotM VFH +S 14:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
• Self-for. Although a quick look at the previous winners reveals a worrying statistic: OEJ, RotM Nov - hasn't been seen in ages; Cajek, RotM Dec - "missing in action" for the last month or so; MrN9000, RotM Jan - one review in Feb so far. Will I be the next to succumb to this curse of RotM? --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 15:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Feels humbled after UU's comments... It's true we have all been slacking, especially myself it's true. I will review if specifically asked though... In my defence, I have been reviewing, just a different sort of review. More at the poopy end of the market... It's going to be an interesting RotM next month... MrN 21:33, Feb 14

  Woah there buddy, that's not a dig at anyone in particular, it's just something that kinda amused me when I thought about it. You're doing a good job over there on VFD. I'm just wondering how the curse will strike me... I'm hoping for "being tempted away from Uncyclopedia by Katherine Heigl". --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 17:49, 14 February 2008 (EST)

  Lol. Dig, as in the garden? Dam UU is such a nice chap, I hardly know what to say. No offence taken AT ALL. I think your point is particularly valid, and perhaps actually proves that this award is working, kinda, if you think about it. I think. Maybe... love & hugs MrN 23:23, Feb 14

  If it's any consolation, it wasn't just the quality of their reviews that went down; with OEJ and Cajek, Real Life (that bastard) kicked them him the pants. Fun stuff. Oh wait, not for you!-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 23:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• For - Honest and to the point. --Uncognito 09:19, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
• F♥r. Dedicated reviewer, he certainly deserves this. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF (@ 23:04 Feb 21)

March

Mightydandylion (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 2 misspelled weeds

• NF He has an excellent knack for reviewing, and he gave me a 4,000+ character review for an UnNews. How he managed to do it, I don't know. But it's pretty impressive.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 16:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
• For I usually don't vote on this award, but fucking ay, man. -RAHB 05:33, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
• For   Le Cejak • <-> Mar 26 (15:58)

  Er, not that I want to negate you or anything, but you kinda voted for Fag already this month. So... yea... one vote per month and everything... Gosh, this is awkward. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 19:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

  Er, not that I want to correct you or anything, but he voted for SysRq this month, not Fag. So... yea... get it right and everything... Gosh, this is awkward. Also what the hell are you doing actually reviewing something Boomer? Do you want your reputation to suffer? --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 19:54, Mar 26

  Well, what am I supposed to do, actually pay attention to what's going on? As long as I do the occasional review I can keep the rabid dogs at bay. However, expect to see a lot more this week. I've finally got free time, baby. Also, I manage to maintain my reputation by making the occasional mistake here and there. It helps. ~ Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 20:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

  /me passes by.. Bites Boomer on the ankle, nods his cap to Under user trying not to mention anything about actually fixing Mightydandylion's score... Good luck next month Mightydandylion... MrN 20:39, Mar 26

  I can vote as many damn times as I want, right UU? Right MrN? right Boomer?!   Le Cejak • <-> Mar 26 (21:24)

  No. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

  Boomer, you at least agree that I'm not deeply disturbed for voting twice?   Le Cejak • <-> Mar 27 (00:11)

  No. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

  Well you at least agree that it was an innocent mistake, and that I'm not plotting the downfall of Uncyc by voting twice?   Le Cejak • <-> Mar 27 (02:35)

  Perhaps there should be a "Double Voter of the Month" where you get to vote twice for the best rulebreaker on voting pages. /me shuts up ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 02:41 Mar 27

I'm tempted to make that, but it would require effort. Also, Cajek: Nothing could be farther from the truth, eh? Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 02:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

SysRq (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 9 colo(u)rful sigs

• Nom & for. OK folks, here's how it works: I keep an eye on the pee queue almost every day. And almost every day for the last month, I've seen SysRq doing yet another quality review. He is by far the most helpful reviewer on the site right now, and in my eyes has no competition for this award this month. So place your vote below here and lets give him the award he deserves. Thanks for your time. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:46, Mar 1
• For. SysRq is a great reviewer and mentor. He's helping me (a total n00b) get used to this site. --Sk8R Grl 16:12, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
• F♥r. Thanks UU, just the nom in and of itself makes me feel appreciated. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 17:44 Mar 1
• For. He's a machine. A machine, I say! - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 17:53, Mar 1
• For. That is some brilliant reviewing. –—Hv (talk) 1/03 17:53
• Yes'm -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 22:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
• For UU=Good. UU likes SysRq. Therefore, SysRq=Good.   Le Cejak • <-> Mar 3 (02:31)
  • Cajek lives! He lives! ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 02:39 Mar 3
• For Fo sho for this hoe he be reviewin n shit, mang. --Orange Geuce Yum! 23:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
•  F☭R

Fag (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 2 user(s) who always get to the bottom of the joke.

• Nom & for. Although our friendly smoker has been a little absent of late, I know that he does great reviews, and I see no reason why he should not give SysRq a run for his money this month. MrN 14:51, Mar 1
• first rotm self-for and a vow that I'll get to reviewing more, I've just been on holiday :P as proof, I've made myself a template :D Also, nice score text. hehe --_^(sir)Fag!chat|pee|fail|vote! 22:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Oh yeah? Well I made THE template! Not to be a total asshat though. Good luck buddy. =D ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 06:13 Mar 2
    • Against. Sorry, but SysRq's gonna win this one!--XOXOXO, Love ya! Sk8R Grl Hell,yeah! I'm the motherfuckin' princess!!! Talk to Me   21:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
      • You already voted for SysRq, Sk8R Grl. You can't now vote against the opposition. Also, please sort your sig out... MrN 21:19, Mar 5
        • I'll do it for her, she's my noob. And sorry about this. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 21:54 Mar 5
• Comment/FutureF♥r. He has been doing a lot more reviewing as of late, and so I'll vote for him next month. (and nominate him if I have to) This guy works really hard for Pee Reviews and he deserves one of these just as much as I do. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 01:05 Mar 8

OOPS! I thought you got to vote for and against the nominees for this award, kinda like with VFH. Sorry about that!!! -XOXOXO, Love ya! Sk8R Grl UnSis Dude Slut! 01:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Boomer (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 0 voters who do pee reviews pee review

• Nom Just to spite him. MrN 12:54, Mar 7
• Against, just to be the first person in RotM history to finish with a negative score. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Observation But aren't you technically ineligible? This award is for people who have done Pee Reviews, not Pee Review. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 01:17 Mar 8
    • Indignant correction If you'll check the Pee table, you'll notice that I've done a few more than one review, Mr. Snifflegrumpy. And those aren't even all of my reviews! I've been reviewing since before Cajek even started tracking them, so there! Nyaa nyaaaaaaaaaaaa. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
      • Fine, Mr. Picking Out A New Carpet Is More Important Than Making It To My Son's Baseball Game. I hope you choke on that ice cream. Or get brain freeze. Whichever comes first. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 02:09 Mar 8
•  For. because the rest of you are all bastards ! :P (kidding, but i just HAD to vote opposite of Boomer, I HAD to)

  Ha! I have fooled you into voting for me! My ploy has worked! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

• mega-abstain.   Le Cejak • <-> Mar 26 (00:53)

April

Heerenveen (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 6 funny looking names

• For Nom Under user, who kept track of User:Cajek/Pee claims that Heerenveen should be up next for RotM. Out of 34 reviews, 33 were good, and that's better than... hell, it's better than I'm doing! P.S. This vote could change if someone or another dude overtakes him later in the month...   Le Cejak • <Apr 01, 2008 [4:01]>

• I went from For to Nom on this one. I just got an amazingly well done review from someone else, and I decided that I'm looking for quality over quantity on this one for now. ...unless I change my mind? I think Heerenveen is awesome, but every review I've gotten from this over person confirms it: I feel guilty not voting for MightyDandylion.   Le Cejak • <Apr 04, 2008 [13:27]>

• For. In about a month, he's gone from no reviews to overtaking MrN on the top 5 table, and he's done it while consistently delivering in-depth, helpful reviews. No-one's done more this month to get the queue down to its current levels, and he deserves this award. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:04, Apr 1
• For. HV's the bee's knees.Mightydandylion (talk) Fk 09:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
• Difficult choice here, but I think HV's the one. He's really impressed me with his recent reviews. Passing MrN is no small feat. (even though he's been busy poopsmithing and whatnot) We have some great nominees this month, and I was THIS close to voting for MDL. Like THIS effing close. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 22:50 Apr 1
  • Changing my vote. I'm sorry HV, I still think you're a great reviewer. Perhaps next month will be yours. sirsysrq @ 01:36 Apr 11
• Yar. He provided me with all of those pees that I needed, he did. -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 22:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
• For A tricky choice here, but HV just gets it with a great month month of reviewing. MrN 18:15, Apr 30
• For A gooooood reviewerer --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 09:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
• For This time, it'll STAY. Heerenveen has helped a lot with the list, and has the most in-depth reviews who isn't a RotM.   Le Cejak • <Apr 27, 2008 [13:49]>
  • You just tied it, you bastard. I don't wanna vote! Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 18:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
    • GASP Boomer might have to do something?! :D   Le Cejak • <Apr 27, 2008 [18:44]>
      • Not if I can help it! ...which I don't think I can. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 18:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
        • Bloody hell, I am going to have to vote. You did this on purpose, didn't you Cajek? DIDN'T YOU?? Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:02, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
          • Well, I am the official Cajek. Doing things on purpose is what I do. I do that on purpose.   Le Cejak • <Apr 30, 2008 [0:04]>
            • You know the worst part of it? Now I have to cross off my vote below, and put off my dream for another month. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
              • Just say that I won. Just say it.   Le Cejak • <Apr 30, 2008 [0:46]>
                • Not quite, because, though it has never been my intent to do so, for the second time I cast the deciding vote. This job isn't without its perks. Not that I have to deal with the responsibility, though. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 00:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Mightydandylion (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 5 esteemed aubergines

• Nom. I've been very impressed in the last month by the strength in depth we currently have in our reviewing talent. There are several I think deserve a tilt at this award this month, and MDL is certainly one. His reviews are simply the most in-depth on the site at present, and he's an intelligent and friendly guy to boot. He may not get my vote, but I won't complain if he wins! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:04, Apr 1
• For, partly to make it 1-1-1 in how the nominees have voted, but mainly because he is a prodigious peeing talent, more than making up for his lack of experience with countless 4000kb reviews. Great stuff. –—Hv (talk) 1/04 18:55
• Almost f♥r...gahh. The only reason you're not getting my vote is because HV has done some amazing things as of late. But I feel I have to at least put a good word in or two for my man here. This is by far the greatest noob reviewer I have ever witnessed. He jumped in here, a relatively new user, and went right to work putting out quality reviews. He quickly learned the ropes. And for that reason, I say we move this to Reviewer of the Fortnight, so that both MDL and HV can have a turn this month. But I can only vote once...WHY?? ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 22:50 Apr 1
  • Graah. Changed to f♥r. MDL is just a fantastic reviewer. Cajek, call me a douche for changing my vote just because he gave me an awesome review. I don't care. It was an awesome review. sirsysrq @ 01:36 Apr 11
• Absolutely suh Brilliant and nearly incomparable, what with his newness and stuff.-Sir Ljlego, GUN VFH FIYC WotM SG WHotM PWotM AotM EGAEDM ANotM + (Talk) 02:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
• For Mightydandylion knows what he's doing, and is a better reviewer than I am. I hope he works on UN:PRG for a little!   Le Cejak • <Apr 04, 2008 [13:28]>
  • Uh Forget it. Instead of switching my vote every time someone does an excellent review, I just won't vote. I like the candidates too much to vote.   Le Cejak • <Apr 06, 2008 [16:09]>
• Epic For Per whatever it was I said last time. -RAHB 06:46, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
• For Woo! - 07:46 23 AprilSir FSt. (QotF BFF NotM) YTTETalk!Read!Sign!Whore!CMC!Pee!

Javascap (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 3 animated template

• Nom. If there was a "most improved reviewer" award, Javascap would walk it this month. His first few were tentative, but he's grown to the point where he can have a "rejoice, Javascap has reviewed this article" template without it seeming ironic. Again, my vote lies elsewhere, but he deserves a nom and your consideration at least. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:04, Apr 1
• Thank you! I am rather excited that I am being considered for Reviewer of the Month, and at the same time, I cast one vote for myself. once again, Thanks Under User! Warm Regards, Javascap
• VOTE This guy understands humor and humour --TheGreenOne 13:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
• For all the reasons UU already stated. -OptyC Sucks! CUN19:48, 22 Apr

• comment I always enjoy a good Javascap review.   Le Cejak • <Apr 04, 2008 [13:57]>

Boomer (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: -1 almost serious votes

• Nom. Cos this month Boomer is serious (seriously???). MrN 22:55, Apr 1
• Super-mega abstain You know we love you, Boomer!   Le Cejak • <Apr 01, 2008 [23:04]>
• I CAN HAS ABSTAIN? Seriously though, he might actually deserve it this month if it weren't for those damn kids. I think that on a month-to-month basis, which is how I believe this should be, this would otherwise be his month if it did not already belong to one of these other fine young gentlemen. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 23:45 Apr 1

Now, Now... Give ol Boomsta a chance now... The month is but young, and there is much reviewing to be done upon the morrow... MrN 23:49, Apr 1

Oh, and I don't care what he says. I still refuse to call him that. Why don't you guys start calling me "Sys?" Oh wait, you IRC kids do that already. And it pisses me off. Actually I kinda like it. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 23:59 Apr 1

Eh, I have no preference between Boomer and Boomsta. It's actually been somewhat interesting for me to see how many people have begun calling me Boomsta, as I've noticed a few people outside of IRC use it. I also refer to myself differently to throw you off. Also, WHEN DID I EVER TELL YOU TO CALL ME BOOMSTA??? I DEMAND TO KNOW!!! Unless of course you've read my userpage, in which case I know exactly when I told you to, but none of you ever listen to me anyway. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

How come I don't have any cool nicknames?   Le Cejak • <Apr 02, 2008 [1:52]>

1. Your username wasn't already registered on freenode.
   
2. Your username is short enough to easily type out.
   
3. We now know you want one.
   

The three above reasons are enough to almost guarantee that you never get a nickname. However,

1. I just made that statement.
   
2. There are plenty of people out there that want to spite me.
   

Therefore, your odds of getting a nickname have just increased exponentially. You're welcome. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

How about Jekky? Or Cajun Blackened Tilapia? ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 18:50 Apr 4

• Against, as per last month. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:44, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

May

Mightydandylion (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +10 colossal reviews

• Nom & for. Again, there are several good candidates this month, in my opinion, but I think MDL deserves to come out on top. Quite simply the most in-depth reviewer on the site, bar none, and thoroughly decent with it. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:59, May 1
• Should have won last month. When a guy's shortest recorded review is 4,000 characters, that's a heck of a reviewer. For. –—Hv (talk) 1/05 15:27
• F♥r. as per HV. He's been a star around here for months. He deserves it this month. No question about it. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 18:26 May 1
• Fo' sho. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:09, May 2
• Absolutely – Preceding unsigned comment added by Ljlego (talk • contribs)
• For So good, he should have won this before he joined. Yeah. He's that good. -RAHB 04:23, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
• Yep --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 08:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
• For Can't really argue with a perfect track record. Have Fun! MuCal. Orian57|Chat|Chuckle|PEE List|Awarded|UnBlog| 16:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
• For Like TKF, I'm not quite sure about the notes thing, but Mightydandylion is a great reviewer. MrN 00:37, May 22
• For Seems the most worthy. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Javascap (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 3 animated templates

• Nom. Javascap continues to improve, and continues to produce plenty of good reviews. I like his work, and think he could give MDL a good run for his money this month. The only one in the current top 5 not to be RotM... --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:59, May 1
• For This guy's enthusiasm is compelling. -OptyC Sucks! CUN18:36, 1 May
• FOR. Heck, I am not embarrassed to vote for myself... Warm Regards, Javascap
• For. Sorry Dandy, it's just something about your "Notes" style I just don't like :\ -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 22:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

orian57 (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 1

• Nom. Another improving reviewer, and one who continues to provide a good volume of work, deserving of recognition. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 08:59, May 1
• For - He won't get it this month but I just wanted to vote for to show my support, cause he's a great reviewer and MightyDandelion doesn't need any more support, really. - 15:49 4 May Sir FSt. (QotF BFF NotM) YTTETalk!Read!Sign!Whore!CMC!Pee!

Boomer (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 1

• Nom. We have nominated him again and again, and he still hasn't won. Plus, he's the Cap'n! Warm Regards, Javascap
• For. Gave me two ery good and helpful reviews. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 22:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Hahaha, ineligable! He hasn't done a review in a month.   Le Cejak • <May 04, 2008 [15:37]>
    • You misspelled ineligible. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 22:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
      • I don't believe you. Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to do a REVIEW! ha!   Le Cejak • <May 05, 2008 [23:05]>
        • Have fun. If you need me you can find me on IRC. ;) Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 23:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment:For the love of Sophia! Ah well, we love ya BoomerWarm Regards, Javascap

June

Orian57 (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +3Provise

• Nom & For. Quite frankly the most active reviewer we have right now, by a fair bit too. Deserves it. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 1/06 09:17
  • Changing to just nom here. Orian: I think you're still an awesome reviewer, but I just can't not vote for Javascap at this point. I feel like Cajek two months ago... ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 14/06 21:18
• For He deserves it! /me looks mildly offended at the ZanyScore thing Hey, I helped with UnProvise too, I think... No but on a more serious note...he really does deserve this. And wait, I'm right in saying that if he wins he'll go straight to Steel Kidney, and skip AU? - [11:16 1 June] Sir FSt. Don Pleb Yettie (talk) QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM UGotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise Sorry Orian, I'm really really selfish. I'm going to burn in hell and stuff... - [15:40 11 June] Sir FSt. Don Pleb Yettie (talk) QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM UGotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise
• F♥r. I think overall, RotM is more about who is active that month, not about who gives longer reviews overall. If it were based on who I would want a review from, I'd say Javascap. But he hasn't been as active. Neither have I, but that's beside the point. Orian puts in the hours. He burns the midnight oil. He takes care of business. He does the clichéd turn of phrase for working hard. My man is Orian for this month. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 15:02 Jun 1
• Self-For Though I'd prefer a review from Javascap, Yettie or Sycamore I think I have been more active this month. Have Fun!MuCal. Orian57Talk!Read!PEE!UnProvise!CMC! 15:59 1 June 2008
• Abstain. This is my first abstain on Rotm, but I can't pick between Javascap and Orian. Can't do it. Don't make me. They both rock. And they've both done more reviews in the past couple of months than anyone else. Let the chips fall where they may, I can't decide. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:18, Jun 2
• For I hope I'm doing this right. Maybe one day my stuff can be reviewed and commented on by the Great Orian! Yay! I still don't know where the hell I am! — Mgr. Nacky (talk) 11:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
• Abstain exactly per UU... and Nacky.   Le Cejak • <1:37, 10 Jun 2008>
• For Tricky to choose, but Orian has just done loads and loads of great reviews... MrN 21:31, Jun 28

Javascap (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +4 centered talkpages

• Nom. I'd say he'd be the favourite here. Not quite as active as he was earlier on, but still an outstanding reviewer. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 1/06 09:17
• For -- T​K​F​​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​UU​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​U​CK 19:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
• Abstain. This is my first abstain on Rotm, but I can't pick between Javascap and Orian. Can't do it. Don't make me. They both rock. And they've both done more reviews in the past couple of months than anyone else. Let the chips fall where they may, I can't decide. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:18, Jun 2
• For -RAHB 07:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
• & For. Just awesome. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 14/06 21:20
• For. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 01:38, Jun 17
• For Mightydandylion (talk) Fk 05:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

  Sorry MDL and Javascap - vote cast in July so doesn't count. --UU - natter 08:11, Jul 1

Sycamore (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 0 bonnie Scotsmen

• Nom. This is as Orian's nom last month, he's progressing well as a reviewer, and he's still quite active. Also, he has the exact same review count as Orian did at the start of last month, let's see if the nom has the same impact here. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 1/06 09:17
• Comment. I like Sycamore, and his reviews are good. A good bet for this in the future, if he keeps it up. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:20, Jun 2

YesTimeToEdit (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: YesTimeTo5

• YesTimeToNom As much as I think this month belongs to Orian, I want the rest of PEEING to take another look at YTTE here. Our favorite editing enthusiast puts out some great reviews. Great kid, great reviewer, certainly worth considering. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 15:05 Jun 1
• Yay! Yay, I gott nommed, thanks SissyRq! I don't think I deserve it this month, I don't want to rob Orian of his deserved RotM and I don't think I could, even if I wanted to. But it pleases me to get nominated. Maybe next month or the month after... - [15:20 1 June] Sir FSt. Don Pleb Yettie (talk) QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM UGotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise
• For --¿Qua? es mi página de discusión, es lo que mi contribuiría 15:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
• Comment. Yeah, I like what I see from YTTE every time I check his stuff. Definitely a potential future winner. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:21, Jun 2
• For - YTTE is a bit like Mightydandylion; he may not review all that many articles, but the reviews he does do are just extremely helpful. --Hyperbole 00:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
• YesTimeToBeForYYTE - Well, his reveiws are in-depth and look helpful to the person and he won 2 golden shower awards.This is Slobodan Milošević's DJ Jasper's signature. ProfileTalkASA

Actually only one...much to my sadness (hint, hint). - [19:44 10 June] Sir FSt. Don Pleb Yettie (talk) QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM UGotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise

• Self-For Because I'm really selfish... Selfish me... I'm still gonna lose, but, meh... - [15:40 11 June] Sir FSt. Don Pleb Yettie (talk) QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM UGotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise
• Deal's a deal. Have Fun!MuCal. Orian57Talk!Read!PEE!UnProvise!CMC! 11:56 21 June 2008

Boomer (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: -4 bums

• Nom. 'Tis tradition... ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 1/06 09:17
•  Against. 'Tis tradition. - [12:24 1 June] Sir FSt. Don Pleb Yettie (talk) QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM UGotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise
• Against. traditions. ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUN • WotM • RotM • AotM • VFH • SK • PEEING • HP • BFF @ 15:38 Jun 1
• Against. Picky bastard! --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 11:22, Jun 2
• For! voting against. Caught you! HeHe. MrN 17:04, Jun 2

July

Orian57 (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +13 colourful sigs

• For Okay am I voting for the right person in here? The one who adopted me? That one, yes. He deserves it because he didn't just adopt me, he went on Safari and helped all the natives, animals and insects. Blood donations are always helpful. Where the hell am I? It's always so confusing in these labyrinths. — Mgr. Nacky (talk) 08:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
• Nom & for. OK, Orian gets my vote this month. Mainly because he took on the "Melty Blood" review that we were all avoiding because it was longer than Route 66. The article's been deleted, so you can't see what a task he took on, but trust me, that's one hell of a review! He reviewed the hell out of that epic, and still found time to do as many reviews in June as anyone else. He has earned this. --UU - natter 08:21, Jul 1
• For Much as the above. Also I'm not selling my vote this month and I'll be back to doing more reviews soon, just want to give some attention to my own writing.
  Have Fun! MuCal. BFF Sir Orian57!Talk!PEE!Read!UnProvise!Awards! 08:30 1 July 2008
• For because I haven't seen Javascap's reviews around, and because Sycamore never ever "gets" my articles.   Le Cejak • <12:54, 01 Jul 2008> changed to Hyperbole. Sorry Orian!   Le Cejak • <17:34, 05 Jul 2008>
• For Because Orian is my adopter and good reviewer and Sycamore hates my guts because I reviewed his article for my First Review. (One more step to coolness)Baseball^{1 6 Join Here} 17:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
• For - I think I kinda regret "buying" Orian's vote for last month, the sex wasn't even that good. If he doesn't get it this month, I may hang myself. - Sir FSt. Yettie (talk) (>>)
  QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise
  [09:15 3 July]
  • comment What do you mean the sex wasn't that good? It was my first time with a girl what did you expect? Have Fun! MuCal. BFF Sir Orian57!Talk!PEE!Read!UnProvise!Awards! 09:18 3 July 2008
• Yep. UU's right. I stared at the "Melty Blood" request many, many times, trying to summon up the will to do it. And I couldn't. But out of my failure arose Orian's success, like a great flaming PEEing phoenix. Cheers. --Hyperbole 18:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
• I cast my vote in favor of Orian A good reviewer, and he's constantly around reviewing the hell out of everything. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 17:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• For Nothing witty to say here. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 20:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• For a job well done, over and over and over again. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 01:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
• For He's a good kid really, if a little ins... Oh wait, it's me that's meant to be the kid in this relationship? Yeah, anyway, spot on. Rt Hon W E Gladstone MP GOM | Converse | 19:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
  • CommentIns... secure? Insensitive? Insular? Instantaneous? Insubordonate? Instagated? SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 19:36 15 July 2008
    • 'Ins'isting that MrN have sex with him. Look Orian. Stop going on about it. It's not going to happen. MrN 23:42, Jul 26
•  For. - I've had a look at the review historys - Orian deserves this--Sycamore (Talk) 16:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Good Luck, Orian - He welcomed me to Uncyclopedia, and sided with me when my page was huffed. Besides thAT, he really understands what this place is about,as evidenced by his work.
•  For. - He was shown to me as an example of quality in Pee Reviews, and he definitely has it. --mrmonkey72 00:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Javascap (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +5 randomly coloured sigs

• Nom. Javascap still rocks. He's been consistently reviewing for ages, and still keeps up both quality and quantity. Would also be a worthy winner. --UU - natter 08:21, Jul 1
• As per last month. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 1/07 10:27
• Aye. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 23:58, Jul 1
• For Tough choice. -RAHB 19:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
• Self-fer Why the heck not? Warm Regards, ▀ĴαVắśСąР▀03:18 July 5 2008 03:18, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
• For --Knucmo2 23:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
• For You know it's true. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 00:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sycamore (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 2 Sean Connery Impresshionsh

• Nom. Sycamore is a top bloke. He keeps his head down, and quietly and consistently produces thoughtful, quality reviews on a regular basis. --UU - natter 08:21, Jul 1

#Self for--Sycamore (Talk) 08:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

• NominationSycamore has helped out a lot of nOObs and his reviews are good enough to deserve this award more than everyone else.--Altair 19:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I geuss you mean For Syc has already been nominated by U.U. After that you just vote for. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 19:40 31 July 2008

Hyperbole (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +3 HyperReviewers

• Nom+For Did I miss something. Why is this chap not nominated yet? He does quality useful reviews, and could well be the top performer this month... MrN 02:06, Jul 4
• For Hyperbole is, IMHumbleOpinion, the funniest guy here, and therefore I would like a review from him the most.   Le Cejak • <17:33, 05 Jul 2008>
• Switch-for - He's now got more reviews than post-wikibreak Cajek. In almost no time, too. ~~Heeren ["Meh"] [tecħ] [kurk] [14/07 20:26]

Boomer (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: -5 persons highly active on IRC

• Nom+against - As per last month... and the one before that... and that other month, and that previous month... Warm Regards, ▀ĴαVắśСąР▀03:17 July 5 2008
• I dunno who this guy is but he seems a bit lazy, so against. :-) - Sir FSt. Yettie (talk) (>>)
  QotF BFF NotM RotM UNPotM CUN PEE SR UnProvise
  [14:03 5 July]
• abs I can't figure out if Boomer is trying to get the lowest score he can this month, so I'm abs, just in case... MrN 00:07, Jul 7
• Against --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 19:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Against I am following this tradition for no reason. You should make a "# Traditional Blams" to have a number for the Against. This is Slobodan Milošević's DJ Jasper's signature. ProfileTalkASA
• Is he even eligible? SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 06:11 30 July 2008
  • Nope. Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 01:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

August

Hyperbole (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +7 Serenading Piss Artists

• Nom+For! Awsome dude, though I think he should start singing his reviews. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 08:28 1 August 2008
• For - Bastard, I was totally coming here to nominate Hypepbole. - [09:40 1 August] Sir FSt Don Yettie
  • Could at least have corrected my formatting idiocies while you were here SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 09:43 1 August 2008
• for. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 17:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
• for. --Mr. Monkey Pant-hoot here. 16:20, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
• for. Gave me a harsh review, but it was a fair review. Excellent reviewer. LordWolf 12:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
• FOREVER! this tireless volunteer, who gives so graciously of their valuable time - if not for lesser knowns, Hyperbole should not only be bestowed with this, the most fitting tribute, but we should thrown roses - the most beautiful perfect roses at that - at thy feet for grand perfect gift bestowed upon us in each riveting review. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 14:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
• Self-for. Thanks, everyone! pillow talk 20:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Sycamore (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +6 Scottish Patriarchs

• nom Cos he's scottish and good reviewer. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 08:29 1 August 2008
• For. PEEING's Mr Reliable. No fuss, just quietly does a very good job. --UU - natter 08:34, Aug 1
• a cheeky self for--Sycamore (Talk) 10:29, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
• For Consistently honest, blunt, complimentary, and has some good suggestions. -RAHB 11:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
• For --Knucmo2 17:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
• For per RAHB. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 18/08 22:29
• For The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 20:43, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Gerrycheevers (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 2 Pissing goalkeepers

• Nom+4 I'm sure I'm not the only person who has noticed that Gerry has been banging out a lot of quality reviews lately. Gerry is well worth a mention, and is doing a great job of keeping the guys above honest. MrN 19:33, Aug 13
• 4 - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 19:46, Aug 26

Boomer (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: -4(or infinty) people with real hope

• Nom+Against no explaination needed. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 08:28 1 August 2008
•  No. Not now, not never. -- DotJasperDotNot! Mgt Nutella UnProvise Pee Review ASA NO! They might be iants, but NO! 03:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
• Against. Bastard ate my baby. sirsysrq @ 02:06 Aug 8
  • Maybe the dingo ate your baby. pillow talk 19:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• For? The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 18:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Stop flirting with him! SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 18:55 14 August 2008
    • Abstain? The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 19:00, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Still a bit suggestive for my liking. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 19:02 14 August 2008
        • .......For? The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 19:07, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
          • And now we're back at the sexual harassment lawsuite. Just be a sheep and vote against. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 19:08 14 August 2008
• Against per Orian. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 19:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I love you too, Woody. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 19:32 14 August 2008

September

Sycamore (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +5 men who wear kilts for ease of pissing

• Nom + for. The most reliable pisser in the pond at the moment, has been producing quality reviews for ages. No messing, just good advice. --UU - natter 08:12, Sep 1
•  Self For — Sir Sycamore (talk) 11:45, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
• for. syc's reviews are helpful and numerous, and he is one of the most consistent reviewers around. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:26, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
• Yes -RAHB 00:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
• For Hard to pick, but Sycamore's longer period of service just pips Gerry for me. Was REALLY close though... MrN 13:14, Sep 27

Gerrycheevers (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +6

• Nom. While my vote goes to Syc for his consistency over several months, Gerry has made a colossal impact since his return, and seems to be trying to make up for those missed months in a matter of weeks. Quality reviews and very helpful. --UU - natter 08:12, Sep 1
• For I know that Sycamore is the favorite right now, but I don't remember ever getting a useful review from him. Gerry, on the other hand, does all sorts of stuff review-related.   Le Cejak • <12:04, 02 Sep 2008>
• 4 - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 23:19, Sep 5
• For Sycamore and Gerry have each reviewed me one time. Both reviews were actually pretty helpful, but I think Gerry's was more so. pillow talk 23:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
• Big For. 'Cheevies is a very helpful reviewer. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 16:13, Sep 12
• For Precicley what U.U. said about being a collosal impact. SK Sir Orian57Talk RotM 23:11 12 September 2008
• For. GOOD REVIEWER!.....!!!! The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 19:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

October

Sycamore (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 5 men who STILL wear kilts for ease of pissing

• Nom Well, I will take care of the obvious nom... After blowing my load early over Sycamore in the UotM I better hang onto some juice for now... MrN 18:44, Oct 1
• for. no question syc has earned this one. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 18:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
• For -RAHB 19:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
• For. He still doesn't have this? That needs sorting. Pronto. --UU - natter 09:03, Oct 6
• For • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 15:44, Oct 9
•  F☭R 16:29, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

November

Nachlader (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +3 n00bs doing a good job

• Nom & for. Hello there, me here. In a rather slow month for reviews, young Nachlader here has come in and quietly done a decent job. He's been helpful, got to grips with the place quickly, and done more than most of us recently. He is therefore the best choice for this award. So give it to him. --UU - natter 22:30, Nov 3
• For The man of the moment. MrN 20:53, Nov 19
• For He reviewed my article. Some good advice in there, and a good and helpful attitude. --Sakrotac 20:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

BlueYonder (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +4 blues yonderers

• Nom & tentative for. This is a tough call. Nachlader did more specifically in October, but BlueYonder's done more total reviews. What swings it for me right now is that Yonder writes some of the most in-depth reviews I've seen. We'll see how the month goes. pillow talk 22:43, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
• For. While Nachlader is a fine reviewer, I believe that since BlueYonder did more total, he should get the vote. Nachlader for next month. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 00:54, Nov 5
• Hasty for. I can't believe that he hasn't won this yet, and I've been out since August. Nothing against this Nachlader guy, I don't know him and I'm sure he's a fine reviewer. But my vote goes to BlueYonder on a much broader scale in that I believe that he should have already won this. Great job, Blue, I love you. sirsysrq @ 00:57 Nov 5

  Comment: I'm a BY fan as well, and he's done a fine job for some time now. But if we're voting on number of reviews done in the past, wouldn't Javascap be the runaway favourite? (I have no problem at all with BY winning - excellent reviewer, but my vote stays right where it is). --UU - natter 09:10, Nov 5

  Comment on UU's comment: What happened to Javascap anyway? I remember he reviewed one of my articles... I miss him. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 16:48, Nov 5

• Well, I'm flattered-I'm not going to vote for myself because I don't fancy being hated, but thanks, guys, this is really inspiring me to push on. Oh, and thank you especially, SysRq; since I'm incapable of human emotion I'll never love you back, but I appreciate it anyway. BlueYonder - CONTACT
• For -RAHB 01:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

December

Nachlader (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: +8 anagrams of Red Hal can

• Nom & for. So, Nachlader has settled in well. He's done a whole bunch of in-depth reviews (he's closing on 25 after just a couple of months) and along with Mnbvcxz did more than anyone else last month. My vote goes here because I think he gives more feedback than Mnbvcxz, but damn me, it's a close call. --UU - natter 11:03, Dec 1
•  For.--Sycamore (Talk) 11:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
•  For.. Very, very close call. M-z for next month. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 16:53, Dec 1
• Bandwagon vote. Actually, I'm quite the fan of young Nachlader, despite my inherent inability to get any meaning out of his name. Explain it to me after you win, buddy. Nice job keeping Pee Reviews alive. Keep it up. sirsysrq @ 22:34 Dec 1
• for. reviewed my article last month. --Allmightyred 10:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
• For giving my article a scathing (but very in-depth) review. IronLung 05:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• For On the bandwagon, there is always next month. And I don't want to be the only one voting for myself.--Mnbvcxz 02:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
• For. Last month, I thought it was kind of a toss-up between Nachlader and BlueYonder. So this seems to be Nach's month. pillow talk 23:57, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Mnbvcxz (talk) – contribs (new • del) • edit-count • block (rem • list) • all logs • groups • checkuser

Score: 0 keyboard bottom rows

• Nom. Mnbvcxz has just come in, got his head down, and got on with reviewing. Actually did more reviews than Nachlader last month, but not quite the same depth in one or two. However, that doesn't change the fact that he's been extremely helpful and done a top job worthy of recognition. --UU - natter 11:03, Dec 1

• Against. Mnbvcxz reviewed my article on Depleted Kitten, but didn't give any constructive criticism except telling me it was a stub. Ryuinfinity 20:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Um, you could try asking for more information in the review, or writing more when before you place it on review. If you place a stub on pee review, it causes two problems. First, the reviewer doesn't have much to review, and will tend to focus on the article's stubbiness. Amateur reviewers will often ignore any other problems and complain solely about its stubbiness. Second, the reviewer may assume that you are incapable of writing anything beyond a stub on the given subject. (I have known some authors who seem be incapable of writing full articles) This will result in tons of beginner advice, or even suggestions to consider working on an easier subject. Some subjects are just hard to write on, and although telling a writer that might be discouraging, it is less discouraging than allowing them to bash their heads against the proverbial wall.--Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 23:17, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

• For: Chin-up pardner, perhaps next month will be yours to shine on ROTM.--    00:44, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm under the impression that this vote if for the contributions from the month November (with some weight given to earlier reviews, plus factoring in the hesitance to give the same award to the same person multiple times, et cetera). During that month, Nachlader did a better job reviewing than me, and also did a good bit of work in October. --Mnbvcxz (Annoy) 01:31, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Popularity contests have inherent quirks and question marks but it's all just a bit of fun, it provides motivation/feedback and gives you the chance to insult people in clever ways. For instance, in our recent encounter I joked "we let the British have all these pages that nobody understands but them....". That was a bit of fun because, of course, I'm joking. I love limeys and most of the humour. I've got over a month of music on my iTunes and I'd be surprised if half wasn't UK musicians and groups. So why am I saying this? I'm buttsucking! See, it's fun!--    10:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

That's a fairly accurate summary, Mnbvcxz, I'd say. Your fantastic work this month has not gone un-noticed, and I suspect next month should be yours... --UU - natter 12:12, Dec 30