Uncyclopedia talk:Poo Lit Surprise

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Poo Lit Surprise.
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

If you have any questions about the PLS, this is the place to ask. Archived talk from past competitions can be found here.

---

So...

So what we're doing here is opening the competition without a finalized list of judges, a primary coordinator or a guarantee of where the prize money will come from? Does not seem wise to me. —rc (t) 23:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Delay again? -- 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 23:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Nope. I'm taking over per Zombiebaron. Rc, are you still in? Or was the delay too much? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:44 Jul 14, 2008

In that case forget the thing i said about Zombiebaron should take over and also can I be a judge? -- 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 23:46, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. What category? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:48 Jul 14, 2008

Anything except Illustrated -- 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 23:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Email me if it turns out that you absolutely need another judge and I'll see what I can do. Otherwise I'm going to have to bow out, I'm afraid. —rc (t) 23:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

With TKF, we have the perfect number. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 23:48 Jul 14, 2008

That was a pretty quick crisis, huh -- 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 23:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I still think it's a bad idea to rush the PLS out. Has Sannse said anything about Wikia providing the swag? —rc (t) 23:54, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to donate one lapdance from Codeine as a prize. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Uh, maybe. rc, if you can come on IRC I'm trying to get to the bottom of this organisational clusterfuck at the moment. And, AFAIK no-one's even mentioned it to Wikia. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 00:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, but I'm trying to make the best of a bad situation. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 00:08 Jul 15, 2008

Looks like Sannse has been asked MrN 00:11, Jul 15

Well, that's something at least. Stop me if I'm being wild and crazy here, but I'd think it would be a good idea to confirm that Wikia are in before opening the contest. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 00:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think Sannse ponyed up the dosh herself personally last time cos we were all to half arsed to get ourself organised... Things never change it appears. Long may it be so... MrN 00:35, Jul 15

Just call me Moist von Lipwig. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 00:39 Jul 15, 2008

I want to judge Poo Lit again. I have my horsehair wig and I look good in my little black dress. Dame GUN PotY WotM 2xPotM 17xVFH VFP Poo PMS •YAP• 15:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Responded on my talk page. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 17:24 Jul 15, 2008

Dagnabit

• If worse comes to worse, I, Modusoperandi, wrinkled curmudgeon and 97 year-old cheapskate, will pony up the cash for the prizes. I'll pitch in $100USD of my very own cash. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

  Appreciate the offer, but first, let's see what Wikia has to say. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 00:52 Jul 15, 2008

  Hence the "If worse comes to worse..." intro. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

  Ah, I always skip over introductions. They're long and boring and usually italicized and assume you've read the book even though they're at the beginning of the damn thing. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 00:58 Jul 15, 2008

  EMC's request was on 3 June 2008, so it's probably a good idea to ask again. Also, for DrS who will not have read the first part of this message... EMC's request was on 3 June 2008, so it's probably a good idea to ask again. MrN 01:01, Jul 15

  Dammit! See, introductions just ruin the endings. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 01:02 Jul 15, 2008

  I contacted Wikia earlier this evening. And I even got Dr. Skullthumper to proofread my contacty. So it must be good. -- The Zombiebaron 01:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

  "Special:Contact"? Was there petting? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

• If the situation turns dire, I could possibly help with the cash, too.--<<>> 10:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Situation is undire... Wikia have agreed to sponsor this again. The cunning plan is that this will convince you all that we are really nice, and don't eat babies (except my boss, but he can't help it). So in the spirit of good will and not-being-shouted-at-by-Uncyclopedians, we are putting up the usual prize of $20 per category plus Sannse's Special Super Surprise (which I promise this time /won't/ be a model cockroach onaspring) -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 1(5!) July 2008 (UTC)

Hurrah! Now we can get back to bitching about Wikia. Oooo, that Wikia! Wikia gives me something to complain about! I am, at this very moment, complaining about Wikia! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Shake your fist at them, I hear that's quite cathartic too. Also, if there's no chance of winning a plastic cockroach this time, I'm not entering. -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 21:15, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Plastic? Those were top quality tin cockroaches! And I really want someone to take a photo of one of them, to prove they were real -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Woohooo! Wikia can kiss my buttocks. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 21:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Woo! I wonder what we'll get this time. But that cockroach is still hanging from the wall of my room. Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 21:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Am I the only one who noticed that Sannse went and post-dated her comment so she said it before any of us were freaking out?--<<>> 00:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you the only one who doesn't know that Sannse is majikal? She's the Wikia witch of the West. She got me. Also, my little dog, as well. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

She should totally put that on her business cards.--<<>> 00:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wait... we get business cards? If we do, I say they should be edible. Otherwise they seem pretty useless to me -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC) (and I fixed the date Brad, it wasn't me, it was someone else, honest)

Um, Sannse...fixing one date doesn't really help when you post twice more right after that from the past. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sannse's not posting in the past, she's just perpetually stuck in Canada Day 2008. Sort of like the movie Groundhog Day. Except I've only ever seen the end of that movie. -- The Zombiebaron 16:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

How do you put an article in your userspace?

-– Preceding unsigned comment added by Goomba94 (talk • contribs)

User:Goomba94/nameofpage, where "nameofpage" is obviously whatever the name of the page is. -RAHB 00:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

In your case, you'd want to move your page to User:Goomba94/Super_Mario_World, I assume.--<<>> 00:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved it for him. —rc (t) 18:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Judges Entering the Contest (from behind)

As I've said last year, this is totally not cool. If you are a judge, you are a judge for that PLS. YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO ENTER THE COMPETITION WHEN YOU ARE A JUDGE. Cross-category or otherwise, you are an official for the competition and that is that. If you really have a great idea, stick around another 6 months for the next one. That's what I did. Please change this rule to reflect this. --THINKER 17:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

That sounds about right to me--Sycamore (Talk) 17:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Piffle. Nobody cares about judging the who-ha. I say do whatever you want except entering the category you're judging. What, you think all the judges will conspire to vote for each other??? OMGOMGOMG!!!   Le Cejak • <18:52, 22 Jul 2008>

I think that having the rule that judges simply cannot enter means that that could never happen, in any PLS, this one and future ones - I'm not saying that judges do this, I'm saying that the suggestion that it does remains - this, I think weakens the final verdicts and the validity of the award (this of course is just my opinion, and this is the first time I've entered)--Sycamore (Talk) 18:57, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Conspiracy? Maybe not, but for whatever reason, I tend to find work funnier when it's by people I like, and less funny when it's by people who have pissed me off at some point. Mileage may vary on that, but I doubt it. At any rate, having one's article voted for or against might color one's opinion of articles written by the voting party. pillow talk 18:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Judges are not barred from entering the competition altogether, but they are not allowed to enter the category for which they are judging as writers

Source: The Official Rules.

With love, your buddy, – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 19:25 Jul 22, 2008

I think we were clear on that... to say again - "the suggestion that judges from different categorys being in cahoots is a problem with the process, simlalry the suggestion that judges have also made their minds prior to judging and are in cahoots is similalry a valid criticism?--Sycamore (Talk) 19:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

There's not much that can be done about people forming opinions before the official judging. However, I understand the criticism of judges entering the contest. Personally speaking, yes, I think it is flawed. But, it would be unfair to change the rules now, when the competition has already started. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 19:32 Jul 22, 2008

Syc, I'm going to do a large pee review style review for each article, so please don't think I'm going to go in and just pick an article I glanced at briefly. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 10:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Then I say let's just bring back a few friends to do the judging. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 19:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Oy, figures this is what would transpire. Yes Dr. S, I know thats in the rules. Which is why the rules should be changed. And to think that voting behavior and other interaction would color a judges voting in this competition should bar such a person from being a judge in the first place. The point is that judges should not be involved in the competition they are adjudicating in any fashion. It bars them from entering any categories in their judged competition in order to keep them fully objective and focused on being a judge rather than a competitor. Like I said: wait 6 months and be a competitor then. But when you are a judge, you are a judge. You are not entering the competition. That needs to be put into effect and reflected in the rules. --THINKER 19:48, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

1. The competition has already started.
2. e|m|c makes the rules. Not you. Not me. Him.
3. We talk in giant paragraphs a lot don't we? Except this time. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 19:50 Jul 22, 2008

For the record, I agree with your opinion, but no matter how big both our egos are, we aren't the people with the power to screw with the rules. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 19:52 Jul 22, 2008

Thinker makes a valid point, but it would be pretty unfair to change the rules mid-thingy, IMO. I think we'll have to learn our collective lesson now and change the rules for the next one of these. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 20:04, Jul 22

Think yourself lucky, I judged the first one and organised the second one. I didn't get to enter the first two. :( -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

You maneged to mysteriously get yourself a Spannish Villa and a new Beemer on the other ones you did though?--Sycamore (Talk) 20:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Those are the perks! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

)--Sycamore (Talk) 20

23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

The real issue is not judges entering, it's judges voting for each other. That's why I think a secret ballot is necessary. Instead of posting our results on the easily-watched judging page, we could email them to emc or whoever is running this thing, since emc has disappeared.

I probably shouldn't have responded to DJ's comment (which came before I posted the entry on the PLS page) and apologise for putting undue pressure on a judge. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  20:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... sorry about that, I didn't know it was in the PLS. Maybe we should make it mandatory to have the PLS template on every entry? Now I feel like a right idiot :( --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 09:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll follow Thinker's lead and won't put in an article then... except there would be only one article in the Best Picture category :/ --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 09:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Secret ballot? Now that's a thought. Would people support if I had the judges email me their scores? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 20:41 Jul 22, 2008

Sounds good, and it can be brought in on this PLS--Sycamore (Talk) 20:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Lord! Rules, rules, rules. Let the damn judges do whatever they want.   Le Cejak • <11:26, 23 Jul 2008>

Users in support of a secret ballot

Score: -1

• For Whether we bring back the old rules, or keep the new ones, it'll help either way. Meh, changed my mind. -RAHB 21:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• For now, however for future competions I suggest having the old rules--Sycamore (Talk) 21:32, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• For! Whether we go back to the old rules or not, the ballot most definitely should be secret either way. Honestly, I kind of wish even the VFH ballots were secret - there have been bad articles by good authors where I felt really hesitant to offend them... pillow talk 21:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• For, obviously. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  21:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Sure why not -- 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 21:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Abstain I understand why people would want it to be secret. Judges don't want their friends, or good writers to know they voted against them. But that only works if, like Hype said, people are worried about offending people. I'm afraid if the ballot is secret, people can now vote for poor articles written by good writers/their friends without any real repercussions, if that makes any sense. I know its pointless to abstain, just wanted to put that thought out there. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 21:55, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Abstain & Grumble. Remember when we fought about judges entering, before? I was against them entering. I had that nude protest and everything. This secret ballot thingy is a kludge to patch around one of the potential problems of them entering. We shouldn't have to worry about such nonsense. Instead, we should be worrying about other nonsense. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Against We don't do it for VFH, why is PLS different? We are talking about $20 right? What the hell are you guys talking about? Surely the best thing is that everything is out in the open. Otherwise, I will arrange with the other judges to fix the vote and you will not even know how we did it while we will split the $20 between us... Come on guys... Seriously. We are a wiki. Let's not start becoming something else. Maybe we need to elect the judges next time... I hope not. MrN 22:46, Jul 22
• Against No need to in my opinion. And just send me the money. --MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 22:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Against -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)
• For We did this for the first PLS. And it worked. And it's not that complicated. And judges are free to share their opinions in public if they want. —rc (t) 23:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
• Against; it seems everyone's always very happy to volunteer as a judge, and, in fact, I believe that some potential candidates are turned away at the door every time. This means that the person running the PLS (who, in most cases, has been voted for after the previous PLS) has the opportunity to select a morally integral group of individuals. That should, right off the bat, negate most of whatever problems have been raised. If we really want to diminish the amount of — shall we say — "affected voting", I feel that it would be much better to have the submissions be anonymous and the judging be done out in the open. But that's not possible, probably. Also, if this passes (which seems likely based on the current score of +3), I'd like to suggest that votes that are made in secret during the PLS be published publicly as part of the PLS afterparty. -- The Zombiebaron 01:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
• Abstain.' I'd be more than willing to do this if it passes, just so that the concerns about judges entering and being corrupt, etc., can die down slightly. I'm sorry this wasn't discussed beforehand, but I wasn't aware of the controversy beforehand. Also, the people I picked to judge are not morally corrupt idiots, either, and I have to agree with Zombiebaron on that point. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 02:52 Jul 23, 2008
• Abstain. Happy to do it if it will make people feel better about stuff. For what it's worth, I think the users who are judges take this site seriously enough not to do anything daft (I know I do, and anyone who wants to suggest otherwise is asking for a manhole cover in the kisser! ;-) ) But if potential entrants will be put off by the idea, I'd support moves to assuage their fears. --UU - natter 08:26, Jul 23
• Abstain Anyone who says they would not at least reconsider their vote after reading someone else's vote would be lying. Plus it lets everyone be honest in what they think and that is why we were chosen to judge. No one has any vendettas or hate with each other on here (that I know of) so a non-secret ballot is fine in my view however. --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 08:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
• Against as per MrN's penultimate and pre-penultimate sentences. This is a wiki, and openness was a core wiki foundation last time I checked... also, I have faith in the judges to be impartial (plus, friend voting in a secret ballot would actually be easier). ~~Heeren ["Meh"] [tecħ] [kurk] [23/07 09:06]

Let's say a group of judges arranged to share out their votes between each other. With the arrangement made, the judges would currently place their votes on the results page, proving to their co-conspirators that they are keeping with the plan. With a secret ballot, any promises to work together would be meaningless, as conspirators couldn't trust each other to actually vote how they're told to.

I don't believe that anyone would actually go to such lengths to win the PLS. The more likely means of judge corruption would come about from someone reading the results page and thinking "Hey, my good buddy Username voted for my article! He's such a great guy, I'll give him a few more marks". Again the secret ballot would eliminate this.

As far as I can see, the only moral issue against judges entering is the swapping of votes. With that problem gone, there is no reason for them not to enter. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  11:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Unless the articles were submitted anonymously we would still (possibly) get "friends voting" happening. I don't think it's possible to submit articles anonymously. MrN 11:49, Jul 23

Technically Sannse could hide the edits I think. That's going a little overboard though in my opinion. -RAHB 11:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Y'know what this reminds me of? Fargo. But without the snow. Or the crooks. Or the pregnant cop. Or the money. Or the woodchipper. To be honest, I don't know why it reminds me of Fargo. They aren't anything alike. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 13:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a good film though--Sycamore (Talk) 13:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

“So that was Mrs. Lundegaard on the floor in there. And I guess that was your accomplice in the wood chipper. And those three people in Brainerd. And for what? For a little bit of money. There's more to life than a little money, you know. Don't you know that? And here ya are, and it's a beautiful day. Well, I just don't understand it.”

~ Marge Gunderson

• Comment Dammit can't we just email our choices to someone and they post them all at once if people are going to whinge? --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 14:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Duh What do you think this vote is about? – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 04:59 Jul 24, 2008
    • icecream? --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 14:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
• Against - I'm not arsed either way about the money, and if judges want to vote against me because I've voted against them on a VfH, so be it. --Knucmo2 17:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
• Why is this site full of Vagina McGinensteins? No to secret ballots, yes to accurate and honest criticism. Isn't that why we choose the judges that we choose: because they are of a caliber with credentials to back up honest criticisms?? Why is everyone on fucking eggshells around here?! Does everyone really just read articles and go "damn, I don't like this at all, but [whoever] is my friend so I'll tell him its good"? People, criticism is the only way to improve. You think THINKER was always the titan I am today? Grow a pair and start telling the truth about the humor in these articles. And as for this relating to the original topic at hand...well it pretty much doesn't, because my point about judges not entering the contest has nothing to do with this; it has to do with what I said it was about a couple dozen rows up. Back to my Remy Martin. --THINKER 04:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well that's the problem really. Most of us can agree that the judges selected are honest enough to give their honest decision. I thought the whole reason this was brought up in the first place though was that there was some suspicion that if judges entered the competition, people wouldn't make their honest opinion. Telling judges they can't enter is a precaution all the same, it basically expresses a distrust and says "I don't think that that the people judging are honest and truthful enough to not cheat, so they aren't allowed to enter to make sure they won't cheat." I think the judges are perfectly trustworthy (in addition to the fact that I don't think PLS is really worth that much effort just to win anyways), but going that route, it should be just fine to let the judges enter in the first place. -RAHB 05:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Judges should be judging, not recuperating from writing. Having judges enter sets up a bad dynamic. I'm not worried about judges massaging their votes on a conscious level. It's the unconscious level that's problematic...which is another reason why judges shouldn't be entering. But, I made my point earlier, when this came up before, and others disagreed. I'm not getting into this again. Instead, I am going back to my box. Good day! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

What the man in the box said. In the context of this, our site's only major competition to speak of, judges should be judges, and nothing else. Its one or the other for the sake of objectivity, not for any suspicion of wrongdoing. --THINKER 05:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I suppose that much does make sense. Obviously some signals got mixed up somewhere. I'd blame the person who started this vote, but being that it was in fact myself, that would probably be self-condemnation. Need to think of a scapegoat....IT WAS CAJEK! OR NXWAVE! OR MANFORMAN! OR KIP THE DIP! BAN!...BANBANBAN! -RAHB 05:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

"From July 29th ― August 12th, entries will be locked and judged." That's two weeks. TWO WEEKS!! How long a recuperation does an entrant need? Am I meant to go on holiday to Barbados to recover from PLS? I'm perfectly capable of reading a few uncyclopedia articles. I do nothing else with my life.

In what way does an entrant lack objectivity? I'm not going to vote on my own article. Besides the fact that they're lumped together on the same project page, we basically have five separate competitions running. The only potential corruption is from seeing how others vote on one's article and subconsciously becoming more agreeable to that judge's work (hence the secret ballot). When I first found the judging page a couple of PLSes back I was amazed that it was so open. Keeping it secret doesn't make it shady and backhanded. It makes it fair.

I don't see any other practical objections. To me the "judges should judge" arguments seem to occupy some higher moral plane that has no basis in reality. That was a long post wasn't it? -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  14:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

What judging pages?! (Scrabbles to find them using the search box) -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 14:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

However, in case you haven't realized this already, Uncyclopedians do not all come from the same mold. Some Uncyclopedians, such as yourself, can afford to spend all day sitting in front of a computer. Others, however, have jobs. Others go out and do things. We're all different. Therefore, the 2-week judging period makes perfect sense. In fact, more often then not, several judges spread out their judging over the 2-weeks in order to afford each article with a great deal of in-depth criticism. So, basically, as to your first point, I feel that the 2-week judging period is good. Also, I think I've made my opinion on judge integrity clear above. -- The Zombiebaron 19:36, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

And then there are those who go to work all day and sit at a computer all day with Uncyclopedia. Gotta love that. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 19:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't mean to suggest that the judging period is too long. One argument against judges entering is that they need to recover from writing. Two weeks is more than enough for that. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  23:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Really? I'm still recovering from writing for the very first Poo Lit. I've still got that bald patch on one side of my head. The other side too, but that's unrelated. I'm almost all better now. The doctors say they'll release me once I stop thinking that I'm Napoleon. On a side note, I'm Napoleon. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

If the secret ballot thingy is picked...

• Someone should probably try to figure out what's wrong with the "Email this user" linky thingy. It appears to think that you don't have an email account, even if you've got one entered in your preference thingy. Sorry if I got technical there. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

  Never mind. I'm an idiot. The guy I asked to double-check if it was broken, after I noticed that it was "broken", is an idiot too, if an affable one with great hair. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:02, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I think I see a problem here.

Everyone can see the votes for this secret ballot. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a secret ballot? Also, that isn't cabal-like at all. You guys aren't even trying to look suspicious.--<<>> 11:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

He knows too little... --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 11:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought there is no cabal --Veita 08:11, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Problem Solved

I have won ALL of the categories in the PLS, thus negating the need for ballots, secret or otherwise. Yah me!!! -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

Yes, problem solved, for one person. --Knucmo2 17:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

ruling requested

i see that entrants are barred from using pee review, but what of the rewrite category? if an article has received a pee review (even if it was a brief one), is it then ineligible to be rewritten? i speak of this article and its pee review here. -SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 16:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

"Using resources such as the Reefer Desk, Image Request, or Pee Review is forbidden." I would say that you didn't use pee review. Someone else did. The rule is intended to bar entrants from asking for outside help. There shouldn't be a problem in your case. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey)  17:06, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I wrote that stipulation, and I agree with Mickey. Go for it.--<<>> 20:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

much obliged. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 21:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Personally, as a judge...

It would be really handy if some user or some bot or something sent me a message on my talk page with a list of the articles which I have to judge when it's time to start... I could then read them all, and sort them into order according to my preferences. So far, I have made an effort not to look at the articles (or authors) which are in the category I will be helping to judge. If I was provided with a list of completed articles and a link to a page onto which I would put my votes (which was different to that of the other judges), I feel I could be more impartial. I would be able to do all my judging without knowing who had written what, and what the other judges had decided. Maybe this option might please everyone? MrN 21:38, Jul 26

It would, if we were still talking about that particular issue. I think now it's that people think that judges should have time to recuperate from writing before they judge, despite the 2 week judging time. -RAHB 21:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Hell I didn't write my article because I was judging, I don't need any "re-fucking-cuperation" /end annoyed --Sir DJ ~ Irreverent 07:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm talking about this PLS. MrN 22:00, Jul 26

So am I. -RAHB 22:30, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure. But all of the articles have their author's name in their title, what with them being in userspace and all that. -- The Zombiebaron 21:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

When I was a judge I'd do my darnedest to avoid learning who wrote what, going so far as to take off my glasses and let my eyes go out of focus when clicking on the link, and taping a piece of paper over the top-left corner of my monitor so that I couldn't see who made it. I still knew who wrote some of them, because of the style (or lack thereof), but it helped me swim in my pool of ignorance virtually unmolested. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Olipro didn't judge that year then? -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I dunno. In any event, I had my own pool. I brought it from home. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Modus you are actually not joking about all that are ya? My first proper laugh of the day. Well, maybe the articles could be moved to a non userspace location under the PLS page? That would not be too hard to do, Or I could just get some of Modus' paper and fix it to the monitor. The screen is all sticky already for "reasons unknown"... MrN 22:16, Jul 27

Modusoperandi never jokes, MrN9000. Everything he says is serious. I thought you'd have learned that by now. Also, I think the "Modusopedandi Mediating Method" should be a requirement of all judges. -- The Zombiebaron 22:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I was serious. Deadly serious. If you aren't going to take judging seriously, and rate the pages you are judging in a scientific double-blind trial (without actually being scientific or double-blind), then why bother? I tried to eliminate any bias (whether conscious or the opposite of that) for or against the people who wrote the pages so that I could focus on the pages themselves. Now you may understand why, in part, I fought against having judges enter PLS. That judges writing can possibly add the potential for even minimal unintentional bias is enough, IMO, to make it a bad idea. Judging is serious business. Deadly serious. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:01, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

The Official Ruling

No consensus = no secret ballot. The primary problem is allowing judges to enter, and I'm sure we can fix that next time around. For now, I don't see the need for a secret ballot. These judges are mostly experienced users with a good sense of sportsmanship. These aren't users out for their own benefit, but for the benefit of the wiki, and they've shown this over time. These are not the kinds of people to secretly collaborate to win twenty bucks. If we can't trust our experienced users, why do we trust them to vote on VFH or VFD? Why do we trust a handful enough to become sysops? The competition may not be completely fraud-proof, but it doesn't have to be. We're a community, god damn it. Never forget that. – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 07:08 Jul 28, 2008

If we don't allow judges to enter, won't that make it harder to get judges? -- naked Ape (meditate on) (Riot Porn) 20:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Historically, the problem hasn't been in finding judges, but in finding enough contestants onces judges cannot enter. -- The Zombiebaron 03:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Creator of I Hate Fangirls

With all do respect,....What the Fuck is "Poo Lit Surprise? I'm sorry people but I didn't read the Memo. n_n;; – Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.161.7.58 (talk • contribs)

With no due respect, what the fuck is "I Hate Fangirls?" I never read...it. -RAHB 20:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Creator: Uh, It's A Forum that I Wrote to Protest against Anime Fangirls. Hey Why don't you look it up on -- Forum: I Hate Fangirls, and you'll see why. ^_^;; – Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.161.7.58 (talk • contribs)

0th: Forum: I Hate Fangirls. 1rd: get an account. 2st: after your post, put four tildes (~~~~). 3nd: stop petting my cat so hard. You've rubbed a bald spot into him. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Creator: Sorry About You're Cat! TT_TT...*SOBS in a Corner*!! (Kidding!:D) The Reason why I'm not geting an Account right this Min. is that I don't have the Time or the Money....TT_TT

Um...accounts are free. -RAHB 22:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

accounts are FREE? Then who've I been sending my checks to for the past year??   Le Cejak • <2:34, 10 Aug 2008>

Yo. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:45, Aug 10

Why didn't you tell me accounts were free, Led? Can I at least have my money back??   Le Cejak • <2:47, 10 Aug 2008>

Well, the way I look at it, you were really paying for the sex. Condoms are getting kinda pricey, you know. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:49, Aug 10

Was that YOU in the alleyway? Thank GOD you used a condom, but I'm beginning to think you're less than ethical!   Le Cejak • <2:50, 10 Aug 2008>

Sorry Led, those cheques have been going to Australian tax receivers. :( - Admiral Enzo Aquarius-Dial the Gate 02:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Sweet! Kickbacks! Now we're stalking -- =Hex= TALK: WORKSHOP: CONTRIBUTIONS: 02:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

No votes at all, not a sausage, bugger all.

Ok I'll admit it I thought I had a decent chance of getting something in the PLS with my entry User:LordWolf/What is a moot point. It was clever, a sort of funny pun and made workmates giggle. What did I do so wrong to score no votes at all? Where should I go from here? Does the article have any merit or should it just be ripped up, binned, buried in soft peat for six months and recycled as fire lighters? If there is a glimmer of hope for it yet, where should I post to get it help? LordWolf 00:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

First of all, where's the question mark. "What" indicates a query. Queries are questions. Questions need marks indicating their status as such. This is to minimize the possibility of them being mistaken for statements. Questions are the Sharks to the statements' Jets. Also, I feel pretty, but that's another matter entirely. Do you see how confusing my first sentence was. How about the sentence right before this one. And that one. And...

A cursory examination of the page in question shows that it's short. Really short. While there is nothing wrong with short pages, exempting that they can't get on the rides at the amusement park (this means that for them, it's merely a park), short pages need to be genius to make up for their shortness. Like that French painter guy. May I recommend that you take it to Pee Review? I'd say that it's good enough to move to mainspace. Nobody listens to me, however. They just gasp, avert their eyes, and quickly move away from my cage, mostly. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Damn fucking edit conflicts. I was going to say "It happens. You could submit the article to Uncyclopedia:Pee Review for feedback. A lot of the regulars there do good work helping you figure out what to do to make it better." but now there isn't any reason to. --monika 00:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Isn't it a rule "Pee Review is forbidden?" It says that in the rules, nothing can win a Poo Lit Surprise if it's been Pee Reviewed. Some new people reading the above might not understand that. I already know that rule, and it confused me. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 00:06, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

You're totally allowed to get Pee Reviewed after the competition is over. --monika 00:09, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for saying that. I knew that, but wrote what I did because it could be confusing to people who didn't know that they can't get one first. It would be awful if someone accidentally disqualified themselves, like I'm disqualified from entering the Noob category because I was here for one day then came back a month and a half later. :P DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 00:14, October 9, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I moved it to mainspace and submitted it for Pe Review, but nobody has reviewed it yet. One day... LordWolf 22:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, don't be discouraged if you didn't win the Uncyclopedia writing contest. The best of the best (allegedly) write for this, it shows off some of our best talent. Not winning doesn't mean that your article was not good, it just means that of all the articles, there were other ones the judges liked more in comparison. That testifies nothing to the article's merits on its own as a single piece. -RAHB 00:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've never won it. Bastards. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I understand that not winning isn't the end of the world, I guess I was just a little disappointed that I didn't even get a single point :P (no pun intended) LordWolf 22:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

And here I thought I had a good chance, too. (I, too, have never won, though I've written two featured articles for the damned thing).--<<>> 11:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, LordWolf, you're in good company. You've got Mhaille and Brad with you, even if they are bitchy. (Watch out. They're also grabby. They only think about their own needs in bed. And in the kitchen, too) Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 14:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

At least we ain't forgetful! Remember that reacharound when you were at the sink? -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

I've never won a PLS either... (sniff) – Sir Skullthumper, MD (criticize • writings • critchat) 16:34 Aug 18, 2008

I wrote feedback for all the articles on the judging page. -- naked Ape (meditate on) (Riot Porn) 21:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and thanks for the fb. I agree with most of what you wrote about my article, though it's not EXACTLY how I felt about it, I was just trying to hit all sides equally hard so it wouldn't come off as biased.--<<>> 11:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Where is the judging page? I can't see a link to it on the PLS main results page. LordWolf 22:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I found it Here. It may be a secret, but if so it's not a very good one. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow...-_-.

I won last summer's PLS in two categories: Russian Roulette for best n00b and UnNews:Hitting children found to have positive effects on brain development for best alternate namespace. However, since then I have won no PLS, although I am rather proud of Physics Act of 1707. My other interests include being an article whore. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 02:46, Aug 19

It's a really funny thing about your Russian Roulette article winning PLS and my Russian Roulette article not winning but getting featured. Just goes to show that PLS doesn't really mean anything if you lose. -- 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 02:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, but it's worth it to know that you're still bitter about it. ;) - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 03:36, Aug 19

Oh, yeah? Well I wroted a bunch of fings an' they all winned the PLS and they all gots features and the teacher gave them gold stars and also my dad can out-write your dads too! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 04:25, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I entered one article in one PLS in one category, and I haven't won one PLS. Is it just me, or am I seeing a pattern in those numbers, huh? It's a conspiracy, man! Conspirators totally made Mickey write a betterer article than what I did. Bastards! --UU - natter 07:16, Aug 19

I haven't won PLS either....wait a second, you have to enter an article to win? Bullshit. The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 13:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I somehow got four points, which I am freaking pleased with. Ain't gloating, just mentioning that you shouldn't get your hopes up with PLS, it's a gamble as to what the judges will like. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 18:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I somehow got five points from a second, a third, and a fourth. But eh, I ain't complaining because I really didn't think I'd score at all! Overjoyed with it. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 19/08 18:22

Mine was weird. For "best rewrite", I got one first place, and two... nothings. That's some divergent voting. As for the Noob article... well... I just don't want to talk about it. pillow talk 23:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Ha, that's nothing. Once I got a first place with one judge and absolutely nowhere with everyone else. The judging system ought to be changed to reflect consensus. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 14:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Like the Borg? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 17:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

No, like Bjorn Borg. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 17:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You just said "Ha, that's nothing" and then described the exact thing that happened to me. pillow talk 17:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Ha, that's nothing. That just happened to me in a dream. Ya should've been there, man. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 17:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I was. I just hope you don't also spend your waking hours picturing Mitt Romney in a bra. pillow talk 17:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea who that is. Is she fit? -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 17:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

For a male Mormon Republican Presidential candidate, she's pretty fucking hot. pillow talk 17:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

In other words, not at all then.
But to get back to the point, It'd be cool if judges read the articles then arranged a time to go on IRC and discuss which they think is the best. But then I'm just a relic from 2006 so hey, ho. -- Hindleyite Converse • ?pedia 17:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

You crazy kids.....that's nothing, I had two first place votes once and then the last judge voted the article that had been second to mine as their first and placed my fourth, so I ended up with one vote less than the winner. I still cry inside over that one. -- Sir Mhaille  (talk to me)

You think you've got it bad: Once, I forgot to keep track of what position each judge gave an article of mine and I found that later I couldn't obsess over it, not even months or years after the fact! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 21:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

My Entry

Just read the rules after submission, there wasn't much on it on the 7th, is it still allowed or should I remove it? --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 11:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

There was more there than nothing, so I would say "no". Of course, I mostly just talk to hear the sound of my own voice. It's really quite melodious, like a bird coughing up an angel. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

answering no to a multiple choice question doesn't help, the article will be much bigger when done and it only had an intro and a paragraph might have had a picture too, I just thought this idea had the best chance. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 12:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

No, IMO, it's not allowed. Better? Better yet, ask Heerenveen, as he's the monkey in charge. Yes, that's right. Monkey. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 12:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

My Entry II

Can it be removed from the list? Something came up with a girl and she got all my attention this weekend. So its no where near finished. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 09:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

You just wanted to brag about getting some. --monika 09:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

lol, I actually wanted to finish the article thought. But yes it's a bonus. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 10:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

:(

Holy motherfucking shit, I just found out this article, which has the same title and topic as mine for PLS. Will that affect anything? :( SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 10:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Well now if you had a time machine, you could enter best rewrite. --monika 14:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

no, really. The main space article was created a couple of days before I started mine. Anyway, it needs expansion and so.. CANT ANYBODY DO ANYTHING?! Can an admin rename my article to "Nile the band" or something? SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 14:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry. Your article will be judged on its own merits and after the judging, you can decide if you're going to overwrite, merge, or change the title. (And you can probably get away with overwriting.) --monika 14:36, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Drop a note to Heerenveen, I'm sure he'll take that under consideration. ~ 14:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Still gonna make time to judge this

By the way. -- 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 08:26, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

Good to know. I'll mark it on my calendar. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:38, September 20, 2009 (UTC)

It always boosts my self-esteem to destroy people's dreams. --EMC ^[TALK] 02:57, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Is that why you're always looking in the mirror? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 04:14, September 21, 2009 (UTC)

Not Fair to Noobs

This competition is held biannually. But if you've been a member more than three months, you can't enter in the Best Noob Article category. That means that half the noobs never get a chance. I think if they wrote an article when they were in their first three months, they should be able to enter it. I think the time limit should be extended to six months, as per CheddarBBQ's idea below. That way every N00b gets a chance. Please give your opinion. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 00:54, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Miley. Either do that, or extend the limit for n00bism to 6 months. It'll give me twice as many dreams to crush. Don Puttano cHeDDs 01:09,6October,2009

I like CheddarBBQ's idea better than mine. It would be simpler to do and you wouldn't have to worry that you already got an article Pee Reviewed. For this award, extend the noob limit to six months. I changed my suggestion at top. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:19, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

How about we not change the rules in the middle of something? We can vote, or somesuch, after. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 03:10, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

For. Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 04:18, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Ban 09's. -OptyC Sucks! CUN21:18, 6 Oct

Yeah. I agree with TDM and Opty. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:20, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

I don't. If you ban '09s, who will I judge? I need to crush some dreams. Once their dreams are crushed, you can ban them. You know, add injury to insult and all that? Don Puttano cHeDDs 21:29,6October,2009

you and me are '09, you idiot.. • FreddCan Shredd • • • 22:20 October 6 '09

They wish. Don Puttano cHeDDs 22:34,6October,2009

Ban 08's and 09's. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 23:08, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. In fact, ban 0-anythings. Let's not let anybody edit this shithole until they're 10's or later. -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:19, 6 Oct

How about we ban this whole century? It's going to suck.-Almost Sir Random Crap

seriously though, what are we going to do with miley's and cheddar's propositions? shall we.. ahem.. silence them or something? • FreddCan Shredd • • • 23:27 October 6 '09

I'm pretty sure we already did whatever we were going to do. -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:34, 6 Oct

We aren't changing it. Let them compete with the big boys. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 23:38, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

exactly. and btw are you writing anything for this pls? • FreddCan Shredd • • • 23:44 October 6 '09

Possibly. Or I could just watch you pawns write for my enjoyment. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 23:47, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Stupid pawns. Don Puttano cHeDDs 23:54,6October,2009

stupid queens • FreddCan Shredd • • • 23:59 October 6 '09

I'm a n00b, and I've only written one article so far. Does this mean I can't submit it, and have to write a new one and submit that during the dates of the comp? (just want to clarify) --Morgz789 06:59, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

You joined less than three months ago, so yes you can enter as a noob. The article must be new. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 07:20, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

And try not to get too attached to it. Ima be harsh. Don Puttano cHeDDs 19:45,8October,2009

6 months. That would make me a n00b... Pup t 05:11, 12/10/2009

Oh damn then I'd have you as competition. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 19:28, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

About scoring...

I didn't mention this last time because it affected a category I was in and really should be decided and made clear before judging starts - If a judge labels two articles as tied, those two articles should split the points they would have had if they'd been given different ranks instead of both getting all the points for the higher position. If you do not do it this way, judges can take advantage of the tie thing to have a greater effect on the final score than the other judges, either maliciously or by accident. Judges who rank everything get 15 points to spread around and Judges who label things as ties get 16 points. It's not fair to the other judges. --monika 18:00, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

How about no ties? Y'know, like causal Friday. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:50, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Monika is exactly right, and since she's a girl, and thus can't possibly fully understand the math behind it, it's pretty odd. In the future, I trust it will not take another female to figure these things out. You can bet that "causal" Friday will cause more than losing your tie if not, gentlemen... --Globaltourniquet - (was TPLN) 21:06, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Damn straight. The only reason I figured it out is because as a female, I know how to manipulate things. I'd also love to see no ties, but it'd be hard to enforce that. By hard I don't really mean hard, but you know judges... --monika 21:33, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean "you people"? --EMC ^[TALK] 20:59 Oct 10 2009 20:59, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

All I'm saying is that if judges could follow rules, they wouldn't have to be judges. (<serious> Best solution as I see it: Say "no ties", but then if any judge gives something a tie anyway, split the points.</serious>) --monika 21:03, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Ban any judge that gives a tie. Bam, no ties then. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 21:08, October 10, 2009 (UTC)

Checking to make sure this is still in effect under the new management. --monika 10:39, February 6, 2011 (UTC)

Manga

I'm rewriting the Manga article so it seems like the Anime article. God bless my chemistry skills.-Almost Sir Random Crap

No more prizes?

When Wikia said they'd stop sponsoring the competition, I didn't think they were serious. I'm not mad, just angry. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 04:51, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

I didn't realize they'd ever said that. I just assumed they were being passive-agressive dicks and ignoring us. Instead they're being agressive-aggressive dicks. --monika 04:57, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

“Wikia doesn't care about Uncyclopeople.”

~ Kanye MO on Poo Lit

I demand retributions in the amount of the prize money we (I) should have received in the past but didn't, adjusted for inflation. --monika 05:04, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

So basically, a sticker with a picture of a thumbs up and the words "You Did It!"? Don Puttano cHeDDs 21:01,12October,2009

Yes, but I want them to actually pay for the sticker. --monika 22:14, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I've talked with Mr Wikia. He says the best he can do is you buy the sticker he'll take credit for it. That's his final offer. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:32, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

Well what is the net worth of the sticker? += 23:56,12October,2009

Gross worth - I may have to claim it on tax. Pup t 00:05, 13/10/2009

Wikia's probably gonna tax our tea next. Hmm, an Uncyclopedia Tea Party, that would be UK Internet Hell.-Almost Sir Random Crap

Do we get to drink digital beer while throwing digital tea into the digital harbor? += 00:14,13October,2009

N00b Articles

It seems like there's a lot less than usual this time. Is the n00b population declining? += 01:11,15October,2009

We are devouring them slowly. --EMC ^[TALK] 01:21 Oct 15 2009

If you want to extend the time you can still be a noob for to 4 months i'd be happy to submit an article to that category :D --DougalJabber at me. 09:06, May 17, 2010 (UTC)

So, who is doing the next one?

If nobody is doing it yet, I call dibs. It'd be nice to run it again. --EMC ^[TALK] 05:19 Oct 26 2009

Christ, didn't this one just end?! Can't we talk about this after the Aristocrat's Ball?! --THINKER 05:48, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Huh? I'd like to call an early dibs and get the next one prepared early because I'll be busy in between now and the next one. Unless somebody else is doing it. That's all. Stop trippin girl. --EMC ^[TALK] 05:54 Oct 26 2009

Digg

I submitted the PLS link to Digg: http://digg.com/comedy/Uncyclopedia_s_2010_humor_writing_competition_now_open So now somebody put a Digg button on the page. I can't be bothered. —rc (t) 06:11, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

Digg Buttons invented jazz. True skibble de-ska de-ska sigguh ah dee dee dee dee sah-deeble ma bo bop story. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 06:16, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

Best Collab

Where the fuck is my fucking caegory? SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 08:32, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

It was eaten by a collaboration of Chuck Norris and Grues. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  16:50, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

What does that mean?

Somebody set us up the bomb? Does that mean the bomb has been set up? Or have we been set up? Is the bomb about to go up us? It's on every fucking page - can we make it a gramatically correct sentence? Nominally Humane! some time Tuesday, 13:51, May 11 2010 UTC

It's a meme, smartass. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 13:56, May 11, 2010 (UTC)

Question on the rewrite category

Can you rewrite an article that you wrote yourself a long time ago? User:Mrthejazz/sig 04:14, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not running PLS but, yes you can. But should you? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:01, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

I'll allow it. --EMC ^[TALK] 01:16 May 18 2010

Illustrated Article Query

I'm thinking about using the vast Jack Chick online resources to selectively piece together panels for a humorous entry, similar to the other comics I've done. Will this pass the "original content" clause for the category? Obviously, Chick parodies are nothing new in itself. It would be outright stealing Chick's intellectual property but, as is well known, he could care less about people who do such things (as they will burn in the fire for mocking god eventually) --    14:55, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

I have no problem with that. I'd make a joke and refer to my favourite Chick Tract here, but I don't want to mess with your plan, should (by some coincidence) it be the same Tract. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 00:03, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

It's tough to pick a favorite. I guess it depends on the particular motif(s) that you find amusing. I'm big on "gratuitous depictions of sin" so The Last Generation is awesome. Then there's Jack Chick for black people. I can't believe he actually has Soul Story online and has absolutely no shame for it. I mean, he has the main character hitting on his dead girlfriend's sister, in the hospital, next to her dead body. Oh those gratuitous depictions of sin! I think my initial idea is to exploit as many panels out of another favorite Chick motif - God as a light bulb headed guy on a giant throne. --    12:21, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

Hey you guys, the Lord shall not be mocked. I'd suggest backing off the Christ-driven and take up a more honorable satire. Al praying for your souls 13:53 15 5 MMX

Thanks for the extra week, it's GONNA HAPPEN!!! I'm getting close to the finish line as we speak. Man, Jesus is a hardass!--    21:10, May 27, 2010 (UTC)

Rewrites

If you completely rewrite an article from scratch without using anything from the original does it still count as a rewrite? --Black_Flamingo 13:44, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

Just coming in with no official capacity. A piggyback question, on features. I've saved a page from VFD and rewrote it, and it's now on the vote-for-features page. I did use some of the original page that was probably going to be huffed. If a festivus miracle occurs and it does get featured, do I get one point credit in our hall of the shamed, or half-a-credit? Thanks. Alesiter in shame 13:49 15 5 MMX

Good question. But answer mine first. --Black_Flamingo 13:52, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

Nah, answer mine first. Me, me, me! (seriously, yours is simple, of course it's a new article, but these archaic Poo Lit rules may say otherwise.) Al des chains 13:56 15 5 MMX

Maybe, but the simplest questions are often the hardest to answer. Having said that, your question's pretty simple too. Maybe we should become monks and reflect on this for a few years. --Black_Flamingo 14:05, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

Answer: both yes. Completely rewriting a page with nothing from the original does still count as a rewrite. also, if you rewrite and use some of the original material but still was your writing it counts as a feature for you and a point on the hall of shame. The first answer is 100% certain cause that's what i did a few years back, the second, 90% sure that's how shit works. Lieutenant THEDUDEMAN Dude ... Totally UOTM KUN GotA F@H 14:27, May 15, 2010 (UTC)

The ad

Why was it removed from the top of the pages?--Veita 08:05, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Did you click "dismiss"? 'Cause it's still there. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:13, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

FUUUUUUUUUUUUU...ahem...nevermind...kthx--Veita 08:17, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

So how do I, like, undismiss it or something?--Veita 08:23, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

You can't. It's gone forever. Dead, and you killed it. Anyway, it had two links. You're on one now and the other is this. Also, the notice, while dead and dead forever and you killed it you monster, will reappear when someone edits it. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:30, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Don't take me wrong, but it kinda feels like you're bullshitting me with the "dead, dead as a turd, dead-dead" thing--Veita 08:37, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comedy is serious business. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 08:52, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, but how DO I get the ad back? 'Cause it's quite inconvenient searching it up every time I want to access it or it's talk page. And yes, it in fact would kill me not to close the tab every time I stopped looking at it.--Veita 09:22, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

UN:PLS. Otherwise, clear your browser cache. And NEVER call Modus a bullshitter. He's a Lambpisser. Or something. ~ 09:25, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Big thanks, mate. I'll be sure to save you a lamb or two for pissing.--Veita 09:31, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

Could you at least put a thing for it on the top of the main page? Having it only as that un-undismissable ad might be part of the cause of the low turnout. += 00:45,19May,2010

I actually do want to enter this, but the timing sucks engorged testicles.

In all honesty, I actually would have convinced myself to get off of my metaphorically fat ass (or on it I suppose) to write an article for this. However, it just happens to be running at the exact same time that multiple schooling-related projects dumped on my metaphorically fat head. This situation clearly sucks the aforementioned genetalia. += 00:52,19May,2010

Ah, of course, we have a solution for that right here.--Veita 05:23, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I'd love to see a new CheddarBBQ article. Been missing my greasy cheesy fix. Nominally Humane! some time Wednesday, 05:41, May 19 2010 UTC

As Uncyclopedia's token caregiver, I'm sorry that happened. I noticed too that PLS began right when some people were going into finals. Maybe the start time can be changed in the future. The problem will probably be that it's tricky with some people on quarter system and some on semester, and some schools finishing in May and some in June, and schools in Australia having really weird schedules because all their seasons are upside down and backwards, etc. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:46, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

@Veita: *middle finger*

@POTR: GET MORE GREASE AND CHEESE IMMEDIATELY

@Why?: Yeah, I'm gonna be stuck with projects and finals for like the next 2 weeks or so. += 11:07,19May,2010

And so? You're putting school ahead of Uncyclopedia? I find your lack of faith disturbing. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:17, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

I find it blasphemous. -RAHB 02:38, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Well, of course. += 02:41,20May,2010

Alt. Namespace Article issues

(about Skinfan13's entry)

I'm pretty sure that articles in mainspace are ineligible. pillow talk 18:37, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

I don't see why not, rules imply that the content must be yours and must be made after the contest starts and before it ends, it meets this criteria. -- Sir SF13 (Talk) GUN WotM RotM FBotM VFH SK Maj. ΥΣΣ 04:02 EST 20 May, 2010

To put it bluntly, it's fine. You may just want to move it to your userspace to keep people from bitching, though, but in no way is it ineligible. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 08:06, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

To put it bluntly, it's not fine. The explanation of how to create articles state very clearly that it needs to be in userspace to avoid anyone else tinkering with it. Your article already got edited, in case you haven't noticed. I've reverted the edit and placed it in your space. With UnNews, there's also a chance that if it's in the mainspace it will get revamped by the UnNews fanatics, which would make it ineligible. --~ 11:49, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Digg button

I'm pretty sure it's not supposed to be hovering over the text like that. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:06, 20 May 2010

BY GOD WHAT ARE THOSE BIG RED ARROWS?! ~ 21:31, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Socky must have let his penises dangle in front of the camera when he took the picture. pillow talk 22:34, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

I know a girl with four vaginas.. She'll fit socky nicely, I think. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 22:41, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Must you weasel your sister into every conversation? We know she's a super freak. A super freak. She's super freaky. Yow. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:49, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

I don't have a sister. I don't have a mother either. I was created from synthetic DNA by evil scientists. That explains it all. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME 00:21, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Apparently I have four red dicks and four people ready to receive one. You all disgust me. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 19:35, 26 May 2010

I think he meant to say "delight" instead of "disgust".  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  27 May 2010 ~ 00:43 (UTC)

Sorry Socky - size is important, and anything less than 10px doesn't do it for me. Nominally Humane! some time Thursday, 03:00, May 27 2010 UTC

Here's an idea

If one of the two illustrated articles which were in the first round don't win outright, I would suggest two winners this time around. One game winner, and one overtime winner. This seems the fairest way to go. Everybody would be happy, all the ducks in a row would quack, and two winners would celebrate with raised hands and a photograph for the album. Al des chains 3:34 27 5 MMX

This idea makes more sense as I read more that went on. Many people greatly enjoyed Hype's Suddenly. Raccoons page. Some others didn't, but they were judges. And although the rules were spelled out, in print, told to us all, the rules were changed. Since they were changed, the "new" rules should also be honored---but so should the old rules. I again suggest two winners in this category, one during the game and one in overtime. Equal winners. With a full share given to each. Only fair. Aleister sans chains 00:14 28 5 MMX

I disagree, simply because even though the time was extended, all competitors in that category have the opportunity to edit up until the judging is actually done. I'd rather that higher points be given to the original entrants prior to the end date - something like a 10% reduction in score for those who entered after the end of original end date or something. Nominally Humane! some time Friday, 00:18, May 28 2010 UTC

Makes sense, yet unless I'm wrong I don't recall anything in the rules allowing for an extension. It's like if an American ump decided that he didn't like that the New York Yankees won a game against the Boondock Saints after nine innings, and out of the blue announced that the game would go, ah, let's pick a number at random, 11 innings. Some of the 10th inning entries seem to be very good, with more to come, and the category is having a good input of talent. Yet, according to the original rules, only one entry met all the rules, and Hype's page was creative and funny. So what is wrong with two winners, Hype and whoever wins the overtime game? I'm jumping in with my three cents because I have a thing about fairness, one of my quirks that have gotten me in trouble in life from time to time (and attracted me to some very good things too). And if a solution, like this two prize solution, comes to me, I have a tendency to share it. And I don't know if everyone knows this, but Hype has left the site, retired, quit like a coward, sacrificed his honored hide for principal, ran away like a cat chased by a hawk, stood up for the little guy, stompled away angry because his prize was taken away, hoisted on his own petard, should be awarded a medal and a decent good bye, scooted south like a bride escaping the altar. . . .Al sans chains 00:35 28 5 MMX

Then, with all due respect, Hype is being a baby. Last PLS there were three entries in this category, and with the way the voting was being scored 2 judges had cast votes, and there was no way that an article by a user couldn't come at the very least second, but more likely first. Thinker was the final voter, and he decided that he would vote two articles to the first position, and vote one article to the third position. Completely outside of the rules of judging, and it sucked for that author. But the judges decision is final. I'm thinking that if Hype's article is of sufficient quality to be featurable, then it gets a score at a mock PEE review of 40 (More than adequate: might be VFH). For a late entry to win then it would have to be considered way above average at a mock PEE review of 44 (Way above average: probably VFH (45)). But the long and the short of it is that the judges last year decided that entries in some categories were so low that they didn't deserve any votes, and this competition hinges on the choices of a select few judges. Hype is a fantastic author, but suddenly raccoons is no way near his greatest work, and for him to throw a tantrum and storm off because it didn't win a PLS award is childish. If he believes in it's merit strongly enough, then after this is said and done he can put it up for VFH, and have the community throw their weight behind it. But he has been here long enough to understand that at times things won't go his way, and all you can do is suck it up and try and get a win with something else another time. Nominally Humane! some time Friday, 01:03, May 28 2010 UTC

In the interests of not starting a drama-thon, I'm also going to say that the judges are the ones who make the final call here, and everything that I've said is just waving the flag and seeing if anyone notices - nothing more. Nominally Humane! some time Friday, 01:05, May 28 2010 UTC

I'M RICK JAMES BITCH!

I HAVE FURY! >:D --FartsAreFlammable 01:36, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

A week from...

...when, now? Has the deadline passed? -monika 17:21, May 31, 2010 (UTC)

Yes. --EMC ^[TALK] 21:15 May 31 2010

's what I thought but nothing's been locked. Thanks for verifying I can still math right. --monika 21:47, May 31, 2010 (UTC)

Question about the illustrated article rules...

[1]? --monika 06:25, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

And all I did was find the book in a second hand book store, scan all the images in, crop the images and re-colourise them, grabbed an image of an open book and edit it to the ideal size, created some significantly complex coding so that it would be flipping the pages without reloading, write in all the text and completely rewrite the book - given that my lack of German wouldn't allow me to translate it properly, and set it all up nice and neatly so that it was a fantastic looking funny article. If you had shown me that site before I might have been able to save about a tenth of the work I put into this. Nominally Humane! some time Friday, 08:05, Jun 4 2010 UTC

Sorry. I tend to work under the assumption that people know things I know, which is usually a bad assumption; for example, I assumed you were writing about the book because you knew about it, and not because you didn't know about it. You might have mentioned that when I asked you about it the first time. Tineye would have helped you find the page and is generally a very good resource even though it hasn't indexed the entire internet yet. Anyway, there's an ongoing discussion on Kip's page that you might want to join. --monika 08:31, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Not that it matters since Dex is moments away from finishing up judging for the category, but I still kind of want an answer from EMC (and I have five chinchillas, so I know how hard it is to catch them), the question is "What is needed to make an image count as user-made? Which side of the line does 'scanning images (all already available all over the internet) from a book and then cleaning up the scans' fall?" --monika 06:16, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, now that it's all over bar the shouting - the lines falls somewhere in the discretion of the judges. If I were to be judging this then I probably would have given a lower score to an article as a result - much the same way Dex has - but I wasn't in the position to be a judge. I wasn't going to enter this into PLS to be honest, except that the level of entries fell well short of what I was expecting, and this had been brewing in the back of my mind for about 6 months. But by the same token suddenly raccoons was a chop of raccoons over the top of images from GIS - not that I'm arguing the validity of Hyperbole's contributions, but others have - so where does the grey line fall there? Much the same the images that you have included in Diamonds and rust are all chops from images found through GIS - are these original images when you have effectively cut and paste predominantly from other sources. Microsoft Knowledge Base lost last time as the images used were not "illustrations" - despite being taken from the from the original site itself, and a huge amount of 'chopping and coding to get everything in together, and creating a significantly large original image that was the centre piece of the article - so this time around I went for pure illustrations - and nearly got shot down again due to fact that they were sourced from somewhere else, much the same as every other image on these pages was as well. I had to settle for "the judges decision is final" for the 8th PLS, and I was relying upon the exact same thing on the 9th. EMC may have a different perspective - in fact everyone here does - but that's my viewpoint on it all. Nominally Humane! some time Wednesday, 01:22, Jun 9 2010 UTC

There are two issues I see here that I should perhaps state better.

• Your images are scans of existing images. Your work on them consisted entirely of cleaning up the scans. I am still unclear if there is anything creative in your edits - I don't see any, and you've only claimed to have adjusted the colors, and even that appears to have been in the cleaning up the scans category. I see shopping as having three gradable components - quality, effort, and creativity. Your posts have clearly demonstrated effort, and the result was an improvement of quality over your original scans, but I'm under the impression that the creativity aspect is what determines whether an image counts as user-created.
• I get the impression that it doesn't matter to you whether people are aware that these are scans and not something you drew, and perhaps you were even counting on people not being aware of this strange obscure German (Danish...) book you found. (This didn't bother me until I realized that people did in fact think you drew those images and are not aware of the book.) I somehow doubt that Per Holm Knudsen is okay with you slapping Creative Commons licenses on his images. It could be that you aren't aware that that license is supposed to only be used on images you actually 100% own the copyright on, such as something you drew yourself, and that a number of other license templates are far more appropriate, but that might also be construed as an attempt to pretend that you drew the images yourself, since that situation would make that license completely appropriate. That... kind of bothers me. A lot. It would bother me if I had nothing to do with the competition.

The first of those two issues is the one that actually determines which side of the line we keep talking about your images fall on. The second one just doesn't feel like fair play. (It actually reminds me of this... somewhere on my old hds is the email exchange with the author, who was trying to argue that it was a homage while I argued that in order for it to be a homage and not plagiarism, the author had to expect the audience to be familiar with the original. She finally asked me what the hell someone who was old enough to be familiar with the original was doing reading childrens' comics, which was my issue in the first place. The real answer was I was browsing them for images to edit for an uncyc article.) Anyway, I'm not screaming, even if it sounds like I am. I'm not even really mad, and I'm definitely not mad at you, I just think that this competition should be fair, and that the people running it should have a clear understanding of the rules and try to make that clear for the participants. I still want EMC's answer on this. --monika 03:21, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Oh - CC licence was an oversight - I didn't even realise I had done that. That's what happens when you do multiple image upload and don't double check yourself. Nominally Humane! some time Wednesday, 03:38, Jun 9 2010 UTC

Oh good :) --monika 03:49, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

HOLY COW I JUST NOW GOT THE PUN!

Wow. That's good stuff there.User:Mrthejazz/sig 13:47, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

So the judging is supposed to be finished by now

So what's the back-up plan for the areas that haven't had the final judges comments? Nominally Humane! some time Monday, 05:16, Jun 7 2010 UTC

Well, I'm filling in for Orian. I'll be finished judging in 5 hours. Colin is going to be posting his crap up soon. Don't know about Happytimes... MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 05:49, June 7, 2010 (UTC)

Cool - just trying to keep track of it all - I need to know who to send the third bribe to. Nominally Humane! some time Monday, 06:19, Jun 7 2010 UTC

I am on it... should be done today or tomorrow.  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  09 Jun 2010 ~ 00:51 (UTC)

Well, read the main page, never mind then. Maybe next time when the timeframe for judging is announced we might stick to it? <expletives deleted>  ~ Avast Matey!!! Happytimes are here!*  (talk) (stalk) Π   ~  ~  09 Jun 2010 ~ 01:31 (UTC)

Maxipad (moved from table)

Not sure if I did this right. I edited it all a bit before I realised it had to go to my user space. Ive moved what was already edited by me. Not sure if this is an example template or if I am supposed to actually fill this all out. --Shabidoo 23:55, January 18, 2011 (UTC)

You did it very wrong. Parts of maxipad that date back to 2005 still exist in your article. I'll let someone else strike this out, though. pillow talk 00:13, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Ive moved this back to rewrite. If no original text is allowed in the article (though that would make it a complete replacement more than a rewrite no? then I will cut all the original text out). According to the competition im not a noob as I made my account last summer [even though I am a noob]. --Shabidoo

Actually I think you can enter the noob article section. Because I think it's from your first edit. Not when you actually created your account. Your first edit was in the last three months, right? Anyway, I may be wrong, so don't hold me to it. -- 02:59, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Pretty sure it's by creation, but he was editing in July, when he joined, anyhow.

And as this is currently in the rewrite category, I figure I should ask - they can't use the original text? In my experience, rewrites often use at least some of the original text, if not more - the problem is cutting it down to what is keepable, fleshing that out, and getting it all to actually work. Granted, my experience with the things is from VFD, not PLS or any other such contests, so perhaps rules are odd... has Sycamore been duly poked? *shifty eyes* 1234 ~ 03:32, 19 January 2011

Hey super groove, ehm, my first edit was in July, I then wrote for the happy monkey competition in August etc... So, even though I am a total noob (and will probably be lovingly looked down on and patted as so for a long time) I wont be able to enter the noob part :) But thanks for caring. Strange that there isn´t a competition reserved solely for the regulars. For instance, users who have a minimum 10,000 edits in the last month or atleast 125 featured articles ;) would be a roaring competition no?

Lytheria, thanks for the tips. Yes, it will be a fun challenge no? I suspect sycamore will tell me something and maybe give me a tip or two. I think the trick with maxipad is to find a balance between parody and bathroom humour no?! --Shabidoo 03:40, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

What's with all this "No" business? And you spelled Lyrithya's name wrong. Anyway, I think that would be a great competition. Not that I would be able to enter. I don't even have one feature. Also, it looks like I was wrong. Sorry, no noob articles for you. -- 03:46, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Man, it means I'll have to compete with the competition then no? The no stuff come from the language I speak every day (ending lots of questions with no?) no?, and the Lyirthya I would blame on the language but I just wasn't paying attention, something we also do here little. I honestly spend more time here than I should mostly to keep my coloquial English writing and reading up to date and to laugh deep laughs. No??? --Shabidoo 04:03, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

1. n00b status is three months from joining for PLS, and 1 month give or take 3 days for NotM
2. No real guideline as to how much original text can be in an article and still count as a rewrite. Technically you could change three characters and call it a rewrite, as long as you first edit was on or after 18 Jan UTC. However, when judging rewrite the judges will look at what the history of the article was and what it has become. Street fighter is a rewrite, as is Love, both done for conservation week. Both of these contain some elements of the existing article or tuff that I found in the history that fit in with my concept. The main thing is though that the result has to be a coherent and funny article, and the more original and witty material you add the more likely you are to win.
3. All other categories have to be original material though. There has been Drama in the past relating to articles that have been low on "illustrations" and articles containing images that have been taken and chopped from existing sources. Amazingly I've been one of those guilty on both counts. Again, it really comes down to the judges say so. If you've chopped well even given original pictures and used them effectively, and the article is funny and image driven, then you are better off.

Hope that makes sense. I'm not Sycamore so he has the final say on what will be accepted, but in most cases if it's a grey area then it's a judges call, and they can mark down due to grey areas. Nominally Humane! some time Wednesday, 04:48, Jan 19 2011 UTC

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Drama? Drama you say, during a competitive writing battle between parody writers? Get out! I don't believe it.

Yes, thanks a lot Puppy, that answers all of my questions perfectly and spandifiticiousely :) --Shabidoo 04:59, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

'articles containing images that have been taken and chopped from existing sources'? Unless that's the illustrated category, whaaaat? This is a bloody wiki; reusing imaged where applicable is a given. 1234 ~ 05:03, 19 January 2011

No. I always use images that I alone created, be it through having set up elaborate scenes such as getting a fat black sumo to meet Miley Cyrus or painting frightening terrified faces of frightened terror, and I expect everyone to always do the same. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 05:11, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Are you the fat guy? *shifty eyes* You are, aren't you... it's all becoming clear, now. 1234 ~ 05:16, 19 January 2011

If I was the fat guy, then who took the picture? MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 06:00, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

I'm hoping you have a sister. Is she hot? 1234 ~ 06:38, 19 January 2011

Lyrithya is Olipro's sockpuppet. 09:32, January 19, 2011 (UTC)MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here

I have spoken in a tired and probably unqualified and unhelpful way on my talkpage to the user in question. While I think this has been resolved, I do invite you all to start bashing each-others brains in and eating the gooey contents. In absence of gooey contents please go to the supermarket and pick up some Tofu.--Sycamore (Talk) 09:06, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

That isn't helpful at all! Gooey brains are usually spoiled! You'll get sick eatin' that, sonny!

On a more "helpful" (as if I ever am) note, I'd say if at least 50% or so of the article is original content then it should count as a rewrite without anyone bitching. People who do bitch should then be permabanned then unbanned four minutes and 32 seconds later. MegaPleb • Dexter111344 • Complain here 09:32, January 19, 2011 (UTC)

Money?

Where does the money come from? It was mentioned in the rules that you get it, but not how. Does someone leave their credit card number on your talk page? —DCCLXXVII (complaints • resume • • • • WP • UMF • GoogHelp • AWA • WA) 07:57, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

It is secreted from the membranes of large squids. 1234 ~ 08:36, 22 January 2011

What happens is; EMC wrties you a cheque, then he mails it to himself. At least, that's how it worked last time. Does that answer your question? --Black Flamingo

What happens is; EMC sells some stuff from the Uncyc store and then offers to give the money to the winner with a 50% interest rate loan rate applied. EMC is one ugly New Labour muthafucker--Sycamore (Talk) 11:55, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

I would prefer if someone left their credit card number on my talk page :) —DCCLXXVII (complaints • resume • • • • WP • UMF • GoogHelp • AWA • WA) 21:56, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Question

Can I make an article for the Best Illustrated Article if i find my images from the internet but not uncyclopedia? --~  11:57, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

No - you need to photoshop them (I.E. Make them yourself either originally or cut up old pictures for satirical purposes) or hope to fuck Sonje will do them:)--Sycamore (Talk) 12:03, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

You mean this can not take part in the competition? --~  14:48, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

I could take part in best article, but not best illustrated article. -- 14:50, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

What if I make some small changes with MSpaint? --~  14:51, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that counts. Especially now that you told us... -- 14:53, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I'll put it gor the best article. --~  15:16, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

Photoshopping isn't essential, the user just has to create the picture. That could mean just taking a photograph. —rc (t) 10:15, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

What about finding it on the internet? --~  10:17, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

No. Unless you take a photo or photoshop a picture, upload it to the internet, forget about it, and then find it again. Then yes. —rc (t) 10:45, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

What if he takes a picture of the internet? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 11:54, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

That's what I'm talking about. --~  11:56, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

No flash photography near the Internet please. It's very sensitive to flashing lights, and you might startle it. Nominally Humane! some time

Whoops

I broke the table. Now the entries for Best Noob Article are in Best Illustrated Article...

How the fuck do I fix this?

User:CrazyChopper

I'm pretty sure I UnBroke it. I does! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:30, January 22, 2011 (UTC)

*shifty eyes* 1234 ~ 23:51, 22 January 2011

Can I..

Request an image for my article, from RadicalX's place? --~  17:50, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Nope. Sorry. -- 17:54, January 25, 2011 (UTC)

Do what I'm doing, find a replacement picture and then request the one you want after the contest is over. ^{Pirate Lord}__Sonic80 (Yell  •  Latest literary excretion) __ 18:52, January 29, 2011 (UTC)

Possible amendment

I notice that the images category subtitle says that all images have to be user created. I think the wording should be tweaked to imply that you can have images from standard templates, like the bouncy/asploding WP logo, etc. —DCCLXXVII (complaints • resume • • • • WP • UMF • GoogHelp • AWA • WA) 08:18, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Volunteer

As fantastic as I feel a job Syc has done here, I'd like to volunteer to run the next PLS in Julgust - unless someone else has a reasonable objection or prior claim. Nominally Humane! some time 09:37, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

You do know you need to buy this position. How much are you willing to pay? ~ 10:16, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

I've just transferred AUD1000 into your account via a shell company in the Caymans owned by a Greek faming consortium. Given current exchange rates, various taxes, and bank charges, you now owe me USD24.89 and half a goat. Nominally Humane! some time 10:24, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Do you accept camels? ~ 11:29, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

If it's a short camel with a pointy beard we might get away with it. Nominally Humane! some time 12:22, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

It's too soon to say I've done a fantastic job. History has to be the judge of that...--Sycamore (Talk) 12:59, February 2, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, from the perspective of the quality that has been generated within the articles I am currently judging, assuming the ultimate goal is to produce numerous quality articles, then Syc has done a good job, but in order to stoke his modesty, I will add thus far, as it is likely to turn like a rabid bull terrier at a dollies tea party. Nominally Humane! some time

DonFphrnqTaub Persina

does not completely comprehend the instructions.

Thank You,

hopiakuta DonFphrnqTaub Persina 17:35, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

Which ones in particular? -- 17:39, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

How to join this contest.

hopiakuta DonFphrnqTaub Persina 20:40, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

In doubt about how to start a page? Put "http://en.uncyclopedia.co/w/index.php?title=User:Hopiakuta/PLS&action=edit" in the address bar at the top of your browser. Write something on the page itself, then save it. That's your entry.

In doubt about how to format when you enter your entry in the entry section on the other page? When in doubt, just do what the guy before you did. That's how I learned it. I does! Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:21, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

This thread indentation stuff is annoying. I have started thousands of wiki software pages; I had asked about only the contest. A potential submission is already here, though it is not very elaborate, & the content is cryptic.

hopiakuta DonFphrnqTaub Persina 22:40, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

This thread

indention is

not annoying.

There's no need to brag about how many pages you've made. You're here, so we already know you're a dork.

You start writing the page when the competition begins, not before. After, we have s'mores. True story. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 23:24, September 11, 2011 (UTC)

I did not brag about how many pages: I did not, here, claim that any page is any good, nor accepted. Please, someone, submit my page for me, as I an an ignoramus as to how.

Or, I don't know, maybe, I just give up. Have either of you read it?

hopiakuta DonFphrnqTaub Persina 00:30, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

If it already exists you can't submit it.

And you can't edit that page because the contest isn't open yet. Editing it would be like running the Boston Marathon before the Boston Marathon is run. You'd be the only guy on the road wearing a number. Ridiculous. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 04:19, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, if that's true, I might be disqualified; but, I, as yet, do not know how to submit it, or anything.

&, I get all of this debate, &, I cannot convince anyone to read it.

hopiakuta DonFphrnqTaub Persina 04:35, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

The contest has not happened yet. Stop. Once it starts happening, then you can write your entry. Stop. Once you've written your entry, then you can submit it. Stop. Rinse. Stop. Lather. Stop. Repeat. Stop. -RAHB 04:44, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

You can't get anyone to read what? This? Does anyone know about it? Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 05:56, September 12, 2011 (UTC)

Bzart

Can I write an article which is in the greek uncy too? I woldn't have asked that wuestion but I wrote the most part of it plus I will add some more parts to the uncyclopedia article m going to make if you let me. --Mimo&maxus 12:04, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

As a translation of previous material? I'm gonna say nah. S'all gotta be unexisting on-wiki (any wiki) prior to the start date. -- 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 12:06, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

Ugh --Mimo&maxus 12:07, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to disagree with TKF on purely semantic grounds. You may right the article, but you can't submit it to PLS. As a curious aside, though, if it is a translated article that has been expanded and improved, can it be classed as a re-write entry? (I was thinking about translating an article from the Australian uncyc myself.) Pup 12:27 04 Oct '11

Fastest Animal On Earth

Are we talkin' in all forms? Land, air, water, fire? The Peregrine Falcon is faster in what it does best as well. 14:47, September 30, 2011 (UTC)

No Collaborations?

You're breaking my heart! --Scofield & The Machine 09:13, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Hi

How do I sign up? -- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0) • Stuy'16] 19:00, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Once the contest starts, you can list your entry on the contest page and start writing it. -- The Zombiebaron 19:58, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Is it okay that I already have the {{PLS-WIP}} sign where I'm going to put the article? -- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0) • Stuy'16] 23:35, June 10, 2012 (UTC)

If it's the only content on the page, then that's totally acceptable. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:38, 10 June 2012

I know we can't do Pee Review, but can we still informally ask others what they think of our articles? ~jcm 19:38, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

If you make it clear that you don't want a detailed, mini-Pee-Review-esque reply, I guess it's alright. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:37, 12 June 2012

Socky is correct, asking other people's opinions is alright, asking for other people's input is not. -- The Zombiebaron 01:21, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Everything bar rewrite and mainspace is dead. Nikau (talk) 06:07, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

As per usual. Photoshopping and being new are dead arts. Not much to do about the second one, but you can still contribute to the first. Don't gotta try to go out of your skill set, I remember this one time some shitty MS Paint article won.

On the other end of it, this is the healthiest main article pool I've seen in a while. -- 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 07:02, June 20, 2012 (UTC)

Where does the judging take place?

-- Sir CuteReshiramOnTheRadio [CUN • PBJ'12 • PLS(0) • Stuy'16] 21:03, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

Here. -- Sir Xam Ralco the Mediocre 21:12, June 27, 2012 (UTC)

When?

I just wrote that HMC will be around March 20th. When do you plan on having the PLS? --ShabiDOO 23:31, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Question!

I noticed there isn't an "best alternate namespace" category. Does that mean I can enter "alternate namespace" stuff in the main category? User:Mrthejazz/sig 03:27, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The "Best Article" section makes it pretty clear that no alternate namespaces are allowed. Maybe it is a mistake though? -- The Zombiebaron 04:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Probably just nobody ever changed the wording. I could have sworn we merged the two categories the last time. -RAHB 04:37, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Cutie mark crusaders category mergers!!!1 107.1.89.187 04:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

We did merge the categories last time, so maybe this is an error. I'll talk to EMC aboot it. Lord Scofield Stark 12:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey guys. Sorry about the confusion. You can enter articles from any namespace into any category including Best Article. Good luck to you all. --EMC ^[TALK] 21:11 Apr 26 2013

Judging

When are we gonna find out who the judges are? All rise for Acmed2 (talk) 16:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

List of judges is here. -RAHB 17:19, 27 April 2013 (UTC)