User:HooPammI/A perfect article, absolutely destroyed
“A perfect article has to begin with an Oscar Wilde quotation.”
The Beginning[edit | edit source]
A perfect article resting to tell. Byhout saying too much, so it stays inte unless of course the author decides to write more than hast’s possible to use four se but only if there is something really inteone paragraph in t the way, that der]] wiintroductiree sen to begin by meres is it,ntioning enough to intrigue the ntencven fivereatheon of his article. In tsenteuction; how funny was ths in the introdoator|introduction uses no more than two sentences. Welhat case, io gnces me, ley thted of a [[story]t’s sa: one day I reates. Maybe e thid a perfect article in which there were six l, ok [[sting. Ances buPenetr remindat!
The First Chapter[edit | edit source]
Even if it’s not as impo even martant as the introduction, the first chapter is essential. From its title, the reader has to understand what it is going to be about. Sometimes I read so-called “perfe
ctecond orybe the third chapter. This is totally inconceivable when you talk about a perfect article. The idon implea of perfectiies that the first chapter should only include what belongs to the first chap articles” where I found in the very first chapter some ideas that should rather be in the ster. No more, no less.
Nevertlustrateheless, the peet a perfection of the first chapter is a necessary condition but it’s not the onwith great How oftenstrrden of Mostly Weird Sist i attention.mportance and you should consider it the utrationtmo ha the wronve I seation]] in total osmosis with the text. The positioning of ts also of ly condition to grfect article. he illughts|illustration iYou can achieve perfection only if you include - beside the words - an [Ild Gaen text with a perfect balance totally tumble down due to an illus being inserted ing spot?
And I haven't even perfect article as a smallest's caption yet! Don’te first ch fall in the c trapperfect” of ne]]: each piece, even the [[Pr, has one and only one spot where it fits. The article can be camentioneglecting the caption below the illustration in thapter. Consider the classilled “only when all its pieces are in the right place.
A lot of pe. It deretty simple four e length of the introduction. The first chapter must have exactly twice the numberspeneople ask me: "What should be--2.182.823.126 14:50, December 30, 2011 (UTC)ro</matxampl the length of the first chapter?" The answer is p of paragrto bn thaphs ids on thction. For ente, if the introduction uses two paragraphsrmula used to recall this rule: Failed to parse (syntax error): {\displaystyle Lfc = 2 * Lih> , then the first chapter has e introduparagraphs long. There is the [[Math|mathematical]] fo == The Second Chapter == [[Image:PF2e.png|thumb|right|200px|Careful: sometimes it's not that easy to find another perfect caption.]] The creation of the second chapter is induced by the existence of the first chapter. Some would think this part is easy but more than often, the second chapter is much more difficult to write than the first one. Sometimes, the author, with his fingers flying over his keyboard like an unstoppable [[Bird|falcon]] over the forest, has already revealed so many new concepts in the first chapter that he doesn’t know what the hell he’s going to talk about in that motherfucking bitch of a second chapter. Well, these kind of excuses can’t find their place in a perfect article. It is obvious: perfection cannot be achieved by everyone. [[Genie|Genius]] is a [[Petroleum|rare resource]]; you won’t find it in the bottom of your toilet (well, I hope not). In my life I’ve met a lot of [[Ernest Hemingway|pretentious authors]] looking for perfection, who tried to disguise their lack of literary skills by filling their articles with tons of useless and sometimes totally unintelligible sentences - and sometimes directly in the second chapter! But you can’t argue with perfection. When your [[Soccer|goal]] is to write a perfect article, you cannot make any compromise. Trying to be a genius and improvising is nonsensical. It’s so easy to write tons of words and sentences about any subjects - like, for example, seafood. Seafood is not a topic you will find very often in a perfect article. Is it necessary to illustrate the second chapter? It is an obligation by all means! Perfection is a synonym of [[Harmonica|harmony]] which is a synonym of peace which is a homophone of piss. And symmetry is one side of the harmony. So as long as you illustrate the first chapter, you ''must'' illustrate the second one. Concerning the length of the second chapter, it also has to be in phase with the length of the first one according to this formula: <math>Lsc = Lfc}
The Other Specifics[edit | edit source]
The perfect article cannot be made up with only one introduction and two chapters. Like a famous recipe of a norench|Frenc
h chef]],[edit | edit source]
some other ingredients which may seem to only have a decorative purpose to the eyes of the newbie h
ave to be inco
rporated tlawallless result. Among theso obtain a fe toringredients, you will find what we cous [[Fiould c
tconcer specificsning thhe "other" ject of the artie main subcle.
Sos le awill me pelerated?[1]” Unfortunately there are no univeraximum nsal ans “Is there a risk they mt possible to add some footnotes in a perfect arttter sed iicle?[2]” orWhat i oay inops if footntees toth the smoorfere wiotthness of the article?[3]” and sometimes “wers to these ques the mumberstions. This man the very ending of thibe addressk me: “Iarticle.
At this poifront of histance from the goal line as the second to last opponent is not ihis opponents' half a veryct, digression. A player is in The questiems to be of important subje the field and is nearim. A player at equal der to his opponents' goal line than the ball, and fewen ant,[[an offside position if hefside position.
it seoblig]] is in r than two of his opponents (which might include the goalkeeper) are in n ofatory to talk abouton of the importance you should give to these other specifics (footnotes, digression, and lists of items between parentheses… still divides thee article u community of the [[Enid Blyton|perfect authors]it would l]. In my humble opinion, the totd the lengal length of these specifics should not exceeth of a whole chapter. Ot)herwise eave the wholnbalanced.
== The Conclusion
a perfle.fto let the rearticle bader try tot should to crext. As a perfent by heart. Each one represents a necessary condiatiwriter, you shcome netionould not act as if you always hold the ect articTruth. And please never Lect pts I explained in this aheorget the conc imagine whalusion. It has to sum up tThe concenghe ideas been understand trevealed astrous forll along tt it still has urticle have to be leart the readerhat you do.
It is iuld that have beusiond ending. that makes the difference between ordinary writing and a mace of get anmportader's mind tnt to remember that the conclu disa a perfect ae evavorticle luation juece of texst because of a baIt's gsterpieenequality of the conclsion will be the final pit for the reao integrate. It wo unfatorablrally the perfection.
Notes[edit | edit source]
Aoz0ra's comments[edit | edit source]
This was absolutely hilarious, not sure if an AI attempted these edits (and if so, how much influence it had from Scots) or if it was an editor attempting to actually vandalise such great and powerfully perfect writing.
Aoz0ra: [Laughs.] Wow, I couldn't not save this. The only things I've reverted are the category names; they were originally ‘Article about article’ and ‘Peigs that look laik the fings they're abbaut’.