User:An Ape that Only Exists on Thursdays/PLS6
These are my notes from judging PLS, presented for your enjoyment viewing so that you can see that my judgement is not just random and arbitrary. For each entry you should find a brief but detailed review (can I have my 'Best Judge' award now Zombiebaron?)
Physics Act of 1707[edit | edit source]
This is an OK article, but certainly not up to your usual standard. In fact, I found it rather hit and miss.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
There were a number of good jokes/quips/funny-things here. For example:
Frederick was wise enough to know that the kings and queens of Europe would not simply attend the conference to solve mutual problems and collectively work towards a common goal. This would be too easy.
Peter the Great of Russia, meanwhile, was mailed a piece of paper with a large yellow arrow on it. He began to follow the direction that the arrow pointed towards, and walked headfirst into a wall. When Peter regained consciousness, he was at the convention. (Incidentally, headfirst should be hyphenated – yes, I'm that pedantic.)
to pick a random sample.
For the most part, the prose was your usual well-written, engaging style. Good use of images.
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
Comedy French accents are never funny – ever.
The section on the existence of god (as well as a couple of bits in other sections) were a bit OTT and random; they read like sophisticated n00b humour. For example:
"It's not fair," she wrote in her diary. "I wanna conquer the heathens and colonize the world and the changing directions make it hard and that makes it more work and I don't wanna do more work, I don't I don't I don't! I don't wanna!"
and pretty much the whole God section. (In fact, there shouldn't be a God section anyway because that is metaphysics and not physics.)
User:Enzo Aquarius/Wikipedia Transit Authority[edit | edit source]
I feel like I a missing the joke here (which has happened before) so apologies if I have entirely missed the point. To be honest, I didn't like this article very much. It read a lot like a Wikipedia article for a bus company might read, if anyone were ever to read one (at one point I realised I had stopped reading entirely and was spinning on my chair. As with Leddie, this doesn't live up to your usual standard.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
There were a couple of good lines in the article that I liked. For example:
”A light beard, as shown in the photo to the left, is looked highly-upon by Wikipedia Transit Authority board members, as are smug attitudes.”
”President Jimbo Wales celebrates the opening of El Hormiguero Stop, moments before being bottled by protestors and this woman's husband.”
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
- Endless lists.
- Numerous typos and spelling errors. For example: ”Jimbo shrugged off the idea and used the money on developing a new colorful for the WTA”
- The general paucity of humour. (Sorry to be so blunt/tactless)
User:Knucmo2/Pulitzer Prize[edit | edit source]
This is good. There is quite a lot of quality humour here.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
There were a lot of good, smart-alecy quips here like:
”Public service - An editorial or report provided to the public at the public's expense, awarding a journalist merely for doing his job properly”
”General Non-Fiction - Given to works which resist all attempts at being pigeonholed bravely, without realising that it falls into the category of the 'Non-Categorizable'.”
”The award, as yellow as the rags that Joseph Pulitzer published ”
and so on.
The images were good also.
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
Well, for one thing, it was a little too short. Also, there were some prose and grammar issues.
User:RAHB/Observational Comedy[edit | edit source]
I liked this article, it has a good sort of flow to it. The screaming at the audience reminded me of Bill Hicks (Why couldn't Jay Leno die instead?)
What I liked[edit | edit source]
The nice flow to this article. It didn't really have any stand out funny bits (in fact, that was something it was lacking) but it all worked together really well. Well written and funny.
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
The fact that it ended with tomatoes – that is too much of a cliché. The fact that you reused the same image (which wasn't funny in the first place) and the poor editing of the last one.
User:Bradaphraser/Universal Declaration of Human Rights[edit | edit source]
OK, the problem with this article is that it is quite clearly your actual opinion, plus a little sarcasm. As such, it doesn't really work as comedy, in my opinion.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
Some of the sarcastic remarks were quite good. For example:
”Note that the government used for this purpose was theoretical and had little in common with the actual government in control at that time.”
etc.
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
Apart from the fact that you opinion came shining through like... a bright shiny thing, the abbreviation jokes (RTFM, etc.) and accompanying footnotes were kind of lame. Also, a sentence starts with a capital letter.
User:Awesomeguy/epiclulz[edit | edit source]
Just no. You were right when you said ”it's not the article that's funny”. I see what you were trying to do. You want to win the prize without trying because of our sense of irony. It's not gonna work.
User:The Thinker/Interpretive Death[edit | edit source]
Good article, I like it. ”Sometimes death can't be expressed in words; sometimes, you just have to dance ” is one of the best things I have read.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
Most of it, really. Plenty of humour. Good use if images.
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
Some grammar issues – for example: ”Though dozens of fringes exist, the three main philosophical approaches to croakcraft.” is a fragment, not a sentence.
Could have been a little longer. It also seemed to be lacking a certain something that I can't quite put my finger on.
Gemini[edit | edit source]
Very good. I like this article a lot.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
The use of sarcasm and the way you subtly dismiss all of astrology. There was a clear theme running through the article, which was “astrology is nonsense and makes only vague or obvious predictions”. Good use of images, though I wouldn't have bothered with the fat guys on motorbikes.
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
Nothing really.
User:Zad/Middle Children and Middle Child Syndrome[edit | edit source]
Before we begin, may I just point out that Meg is the oldest of the Griffin children on Family Guy.
Ok, I didn't find this article particularly funny. The image kind of redeemed it at the end, but otherwise, it wasn't really funny. Also, the formatting was terrible – way too much white space. Also, ”ClcK hErE 4 h0t pr0n!!!!! ” is not funny.
User:Sycamore/The Philosophy of Massive Attack[edit | edit source]
I'm sorry to say that, since I know fuck all about Massive Attack, this article didn't make a lot of sense to me. For this reason, I judged that this is only really funny to those who are au fait with Massive Attack and not to most people. Either that, or I have missed the point again. Sorry.
User:Zombiebaron/wip/EPIC POETRY![edit | edit source]
This was funny in a bizarre sort of way. But, like Led and Enzo, I think you have done better stuff in the past.
What I liked[edit | edit source]
Stuff like:
”This is a barometer. It is in no way related to iambic pentameter, or poetry in general. Unless somebody's written a poem about weather. Which is a distinct possibility. ”
and
”"Sing to me of the man, Muse, the man of twists and turns driven time and again off course, once he had plundered the hallowed heights of Troy," indeed. ”
What I didn't like[edit | edit source]
Giant letters, and the fact that the main joke is changing “EPIC FAIL” to “EPIC POETRY”. (Can I have my Best Judge award now?)
User:LordWolf/What is a moot point[edit | edit source]
First of all, this really isn't long enough to be a PLS candidate. Secondly, you weren't particularly imaginative in coming up with the origin of the term “moot point” (Moot sounds like Moose). Also, the title is a question, and thus requires a question mark.
User:Cap'n Ben/The Gathering Horror[edit | edit source]
Ah, very good. A nice parody of bad sci-fi. My favourite part was the quotes, especially the one featuring Prof. Hotchicinglasses. You could have done without the Triva IMO. The images were good also.
User:Mrthejazz/Getting pushed into bananas (Mario Kart)[edit | edit source]
Haha, excellent. I love the fact that you took the time to mention all the things that are actually worse than being pushed into a banana before you launch into your rant. If I have one complaint, it is that you reused the same image twice. If I have a second, it is that you referenced Is This Some Kind of Fucking Joke?! And, just so you know, it was very difficult deciding who got top spot, but Gerrycheevers just pipped you to it in the end.
Rankings[edit | edit source]
- User:Gerrycheevers/Gemini
- User:Mrthejazz/Getting pushed into bananas (Mario Kart)
- User:Cap'n Ben/The Gathering Horror
- User:The Thinker/Interpretive Death
- User:Knucmo2/Pulitzer Prize
- User:RAHB/Observational Comedy
- User:TheLedBalloon/Physics Act of 1707
- User:Bradaphraser/Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- User:Sycamore/The Philosophy of Massive Attack
- User:Zombiebaron/wip/Epic poetry
- User:Enzo Aquarius/Wikipedia Transit Authority
- User:Zad/Middle Children and Middle Child Syndrome
- User:LordWolf/What is a moot point
- User:Awesomeguy/epiclulz
Please direct any complaints to my Complaints Desk.