From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Article: The Al Pacino Academy of Shouting
|
Score: 6 People who don't need a lesson in ear ache.
|
| Nominated by:
|
Matfen815 14:45, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
|
For: 10
|
- Nom+For Well i did write the thing, illustrate it and get it pee-reviewed --Matfen815 14:45, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Could we have the Pee Review link, please? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 19:58, Oct 18
- For. --Docile hippopotamus 23:07, October 18, 2009 (UTC)
 He's one of my best friends!! Ya know, cause he's Italian. »» Back ² Tha Hood»»  00:13,19October,2009- FOR!! Man this article's totally damn hot right now!!! YEAH!!! mAttlobster. (hello) 14:39, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
- FOR!!!!. ChiefjusticeDS 15:04, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
- For. Pretty good though perhaps the dialogue bit could be trimmed or reduced.
 RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 16:05, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
- !!!!!! —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:41, 19 October 2009
- FOR! If for no other reason than the title. -OptyC Sucks!
 CUN22:55, 20 Oct
 yep Given the reason's for me voting against are no longer valid, and the lols are there. Pup 04:50, 26/10/2009
|
Against: 4
|
 Against. I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I thought the black stereotyping was well over the top. I'd accept it in an article where the concept asks for it, but here it's actually just racist and unfunny. Also too long and doesn't hold humour the entire way through. There are some very funny elements in here, but the unfunny just destroys it. I wouldn't want to see this front page without substantial edits. Pup t 01:07, 22/10/2009
- Against. But a qualified one. Here's my beef: there's a good idea, and some funny stuff here, but: 1. It's quite ugly - needs some nicer formatting, and a bit of a list prune as mentioned; 2. It can't decide what it wants to be - that dialogue section is an UnScript, but the rest of it isn't; 3. It hangs together less and less well the more it goes on. I like the title, I like the idea, but the execution is just too patchy right now. Give it a ruthless pruning, a spring-clean and make it a little more consistent, and I'm sure then I'll love it as much as I want to now. --UU - natter
 11:01, Oct 22
- Against.
 TKFU UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK  10:09, October 25, 2009 (UTC)
- against as per UU. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 22:43, October 27, 2009 (UTC)
- Against Yep. Tis awesome in places though. I look forward to seeing this taking a bit more of encyclopaedic style myself, but it does need to figure the style out one way or the other as per UU. MrN
 01:21, Nov 2
|
| Comments
|
Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/The Al Pacino Academy of Shouting
- Abstain. Far too listy in places, puts me off a bit, so gonna just watch from the sidelines. Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 09:31, October 19, 2009 (UTC)
- Reformatted In case anyone still cares, I've reformatted it quite a bit.--Matfen815 11:36, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
He's one of my best friends!! Ya know, cause he's Italian. 
yep Given the reason's for me voting against are no longer valid, and the lols are there. 
Against. I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I thought the black stereotyping was well over the top. I'd accept it in an article where the concept asks for it, but here it's actually just racist and unfunny. Also too long and doesn't hold humour the entire way through. There are some very funny elements in here, but the unfunny just destroys it. I wouldn't want to see this front page without substantial edits. 
