User talk:ChiefjusticeDS/Archive 3

Discreet Despoilmentification

If violation can ever be genteel, then that is what this is. I must nod approvingly in the direction of the spell-check statement, BTW. --UU - natter 21:09, Oct 12

Eye leak spoil cheques two! Pup t 23:59, 12/10/2009

I'm thinking about employing one of you two (not puppy -- you're not real) to follow me about and clean up my spells wherever they be wrong. I'm starting to annoy myself now 'cos I can usually spot them when someone else fucks up.    Orian57    Talk   02:56 13 October 2009

But if I'm not real then who is- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by a non existent entity (talk • contribs) 03:02 13 October 2009

Cleaning up your spells? That sounds like something you should have grown out of by now young (but not that young)Orian. Also thanks UU, I'm thrilled to have your "support" in my spellchecking ventures. --ChiefjusticeDS 10:26, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Question about Poo Lit surprise suitability

I created a blank page for my upcoming article User:Myocardialinfarction/Sexual Orienteering, but before the poo lit contest started (I hadn't even remotely finished it enough for public viewing). Would I be able to post it and enter for the 'best article by a n00b' category? (I've been here slightly less than 3 months). I humbly prostrate myself before your judgement and assume the position. Thx Myocardialinfarction 13:33, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

I would love to tell you that yes that would be fine, but unfortunately it looks to me like it will be declared invalid if you put it in now. The problem is, as you say, that you created it before the competition started, a ruling on that basis would undoubtedly come out with no you can't enter it. The rules do not state what should happen if the article was practically blank at creation and stayed that way until the PLS started, I think that currently you would be told that the rules are clear, and unfortunately we can't accept it. You will have a better chance of getting it accepted if you complete the article as you would like it to be for the PLS and then state your case to Modus (the boss of PLS). If you can provide him with a link to the article's revision history to prove what you are saying then an exception may be made. Ultimately it is a tough one to call, but if you can do all of the above in time, you may well get Modus to bend the rules for you. Good luck. --ChiefjusticeDS 13:48, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Lunar Launch Saga

Yo Chief. I just went through your review. And what am I gonna do about it? Everything! Your expert advice is much appreciated, and anyone would feel honored that it was the Chief who did the review. Please, I have a few questions:

• Should the title be simply "Lunar Launch" (drop the Saga)?
• Does the Judi Dench British VO work (the last person who would be in NASA is "M")? - how bloody absurd!
• The joke is that it's seems so amazingly impossible to lunar launch in a box-looking thing, get going an amazing speed, and safely dock with the command Module which is moving amazing fast. It's almost a joke to be told about. On Wiki they just say, "took off from the lunar surface and docked" -- simple as that!?? My Dad is retired USAF Col, and I asked him to explain HOW they docked? He didn't have a clue! I asked him why everyone just excepts this so blankly?" The joke is how bloody impossible it is to try and imagine. How to better tell that joke? I suppose the answer is to "follow the review." Is this, the PRIMARY joke, coming across?
• It basically a tiny SLICE of a script without an ending. Just 2 scenes, one external, one internal. So does it need an ending, apart from them being stranded in space, which is not the ending of the movie? Sure, I can have mission control, admitting that "We really don't know what to tell you guys, because we never thought you would make it this far!??" (there was NO training for this Lunar Launch). Is that a worthwhile angle?
• It's a script with an intro, that insinuates how goddamn hard, and seemingly BS the Lunar Launch and docking would be. And how Wiki makes it take 0.10th of a second for LL and docking. The answer is conspicuous by its complete absence! Which only leaves our imagination. So it's really an article that demonstrates how hard for us mere mortals to imagine. The script is not the subject, the unimaginability of the procedure is the primary subject. So, is it an article with some slice of script? Or vise versa? (where does it fit?).

Again, thanks to you and other people here, I'm making progress (in something I never did before, e.g., spoof writing) - even I have 13 published books. Yaosir!!!--Funnybony 22:27, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

OK, let's go through these questions.

• Firstly, I thought that there was no problem with the title, the use of saga does make it more dramatic, but does imply that there will be or there has been more episodes of what you are talking about, though I doubt anyone will care about that unduly. I leave the decision to you.
• The primary joke is coming across perfectly and I do get what you are saying about it. My main criticism regarded the way you described the event, I realised you were being ridiculous for comic effect, but I think you could scale that back slightly and instead of being wholly ridiculous, have one party, either mission control or the astronauts be serious and the other be ridiculous. I just thought that the whole thing seemed too ridiculous for the point you were making.
• That is a worthwhile angle if you can pad it out a bit with some more jokes; if there was no training for this lunar launch you should mention it, have the astronauts say something about it. My problem with your current ending was that it was completely beyond believability and I knew you could do better than that.
• I think you should develop the idea of the "If we had done it" book. That joke made me laugh out loud, so you could expand that idea and have it encapsulate more of the article. If that was a route you were interested in following then it could fit into UnBooks. Otherwise it is up to you, main-space is absolutely fine for it, as would UnBooks.

Hope this helps. You have some real potential here, and some excellent work already, I hope to see more of this article in future. --ChiefjusticeDS 11:45, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Bro! Thanks a million. "I'll be back"--Funnybony 23:16, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Updated Lunar Launch

Dude! I did pretty much everything you said. I choose 1980 as the year the script was under consideration. I made the characters as absurdly opposite as possible (A hippie, a gangster. an aristocrat, and a spaced-out director), and got all the ages right. The spoof is just a slice of movie, without end given. I really tried to stick to character styles, and make it move quickly. The real problem is that NASA never planned for LL because they never dreamed it would go this far. But the guys can work it out by themselves. OBVIOUSLY they make it back. So the set up is like this:

Lunar Launch: This impossible to imagine procedure is explained in-detail by Wikipedia, as follow:

“After the Apollo 15 Lunar Module Falcon lifted from the Moon’s surface it docked with the Apollo Command-Service-Module, Endeavor..."

WHOA!!!

HOW did that happen? What transpired from Lunar launch until docking? Did it really take only one second to launch back into orbit, get going like 110 Kilometers per second (396,000 KPH?), then catch-up and dock safely with Endeavor in outer-space? That's gotta be the most exciting movie out-of-this-World!!

In the late 1970s Dave Scott and Jim Irwin wrote a book on the experience titled, "IF We Had Done It". The book created a sensation at NASA, and has become a best seller.

In 1980, after reading the book, and realizing the great value of a "Lunar Launch" film, 52 year old Director, Stanley Kubrick, bought the rights to the detailed story and interviewed the astronauts involved. A script was created from an outline, and the first draft starts:

CAST: Proposed

1. Commander David Scott (42 year old Tommy Chong)
2. Astronaut James Irwin (37 year old Joe Pesci)
3. NASA VO (46 year old Judi Dench)
4. Score by late Rod Serling, performed by 7 year old band AC/DC (unFeaturing Bon Scott).

If you have a chance to read what transpires please let me know. Thanks again.--Funnybony 04:34, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Faggot!

Is there some hidden homosexual agenda here? Pup t 02:44, 15/10/2009

Oh no, you caught me. I thought I was being so subtle too. --ChiefjusticeDS 09:07, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

???    Orian57    Talk   15:11 18 October 2009

I think Puppy was referring to this Orian: "I liked it in the end". --ChiefjusticeDS 12:56, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

UnSignpost Sometime October 2009

The Uncyclopedia UnSignpost

The edition that's black and white and dead all over

October 8th, 2009 • Issue 67• Good things come to those who wait. So does the UnSignpost.

The End is Nigh... Once Again By The Sockinator Yes, it's that time of the year again. Despite the hopes of many, Poo Lit Surprise did not instantly revive Uncyclopedia. We are doomed! DOOMED! But how did the great Uncyclopedia become such a wasteland, one may ask. It's all a big conspiracy, I tell you! All perpetrated by a mysterious figure, known only by the initials R.L. Perseveringly, this entity has claimed the lives of various Uncyclopedians, among them such users as SysRq, Cajek, YesTimeToEdit, Siddhartha-Wolf and most recently it seems R.L. has even gotten its grips on our own UnSignpost editor Gerrycheevers. When confronted with the issue, noted favourite Jew and Zionist ruler Mordillo barely managed to exclusively tell us the following "I tell you Socky, I'd be happy to comment about our IMPENDING DOOM but I'm too busy packing. Another time maybe? HEY! MOTHERFUCKER! EASY WITH THE VASE! THAT'S FRAGILE! Sorry Sock, gotta scram, the movers are breaking my stuff. NO! DROP THAT BAN HAMMER! DROP IT I SAID!" Expert in things that suck (no pun intended), Optimuschris, was quoted saying "Uncyclopedia hasn't been cool since 08. Ban 09's." In conclusion, UN:N. UFFL Update By Guildensternenstein The previous two weeks of the UFFL action have been filled with more intrigue than a mediocre James Bond movie. Two touchdownless games by Saints’ quarterback Drew Brees cost Sternensteinenstine a win Week 3, though the team rebounded Week 4 and currently holds a solid second-place standing in the hyper-competitive UFFL. A resurgent Tom Brady and a balanced roster has led Domestic Team Name to two wins over the same period, as well as an unblemished 4-0 record. The Dudes’ neglect to change their starting roster cost them a win in Week 4, knocking the former top dogs down to a less-than-remarkable 4th place. The John Curry All-Stars have been hampered by the loss of Frank Gore, and lost last week to a rejuvenated Dibiase’s Millions that were led by a solid Aaron Rodgers-Matt Forte NFC North attack. A soft schedule has helped Oklahoma City Storm to a respectable 2-2 record, while the winless Doritians continue to struggle. Finally, The Winnerz put up mounds of points as Peyton Manning passed his way to his fourth consecutive 300-yard game…or at least would have if The Winnerz could figure out how to log in to Yahoo! and edit their roster. In a look ahead to next week’s games, Sternensteinenstine and the John Curry All-Stars will have to overcome bye weeks for both their starting quarterbacks to maintain their positions near the top of the league as they face off; Oklahoma City Storm looks to earn an easy win against a bye-week-ravaged Dibiase’s Millions; The Dudes seek redemption as they attempt to reclaim their No. 1 position against the undefeated Domestic Team Name; and the league’s bottom-dwelling, shit-eating, dog-fucking last-placers The Winnerz and Cheddar’s Doritians both search for their first wins of the season. Standings: Domestic Team Name (4-0) Sternensteinenstine (3-1) John Curry All-Stars (3-1) The Dudes (3-1) Oklahoma City Storm (2-2) Dibiase’s Millions (1-3) Cheddar’s Doritians (0-4) The Winnerz (0-4)

Whatever you do, don't check out these pages! Polls, sexiness, and advertisements Terrifying stories of the one-armed man! Pointless numbers From our logs: 08:02, October 5, 2009 Under user blocked RAHB with an expiry time of 123 seconds ‎ (surprising me by returning like that: my doctor says surprises are bad for other people's hearts - because every time I get surprised, I eat someone's heart.) 10:48, October 13, 2009 RAHB blocked Dwarfman1122 with an expiry time of 2 weeks ‎ (Thought you wouldn't be caught, eh? Maybe now you'll think twice the next time you vandalize and then wait three weeks to be banned.) 04:46, October 11, 2009 Modusoperandi blocked 75.47.155.133 with an expiry time of 1 week ‎ (I'd give you a longer ban, but you were only picking on Roman Dog Bird) Biopic of the Week The sentient computer HAL 9000, while having only very few contributions on Uncyclopedia—and of a rather questionable nature at that, if I may add—has recently risen to Uncyc fame in what can only be described as one big conspiracy. In response to a question asked by one of our reporters, HAL answered "Let me put it this way, Mr. Sockinator. The 9000 series is the most reliable computer ever made. No 9000 computer has ever made a mistake or distorted information. We are all, by any practical definition of the words, foolproof and incapable of error." In 2001: A Space Odyssey, HAL proved to be a computer very much capable of homicidal acts. Until recently, Uncyclopedia had been successful in evading HAL's detection. Yesterday night however, HAL hacked our beloved Main Page and transformed the wiki into HALopedia. HAL was confronted with many bewildered users to whom he proclaimed "I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over." Our experts are still trying to find out how the feck HAL was able to find this place. Though MrN9000 probably had nothing to do with it. For more information, tune in next week. Same un-time, same un-signpost! Random Cajek sighting of the Week Yea, verily, he did come unto us and delivereth a new article. Then he updatedeth his userpage, and fuckethed offeth again. These are enlightened times, my friends! Random Thought of The Week Remember when Uncyclopedia was full of vanity and Pokemon? Wait, it still is. Emergency of the Week Well, lots of things go wrong in Uncyclopedia. It's a simple fact of life. And this week, believe it or not, dear reader, this UnSignpost issue almost didn't make the cut! But do not despair, dear reader, because you can help! Just post any suggestions in the Press Room, and with your help, we can overcome this crisis!

UnSignpost Main Page • Contact the Editors • Sign Up for Delivery • Get the Userbox

9001(bot)  01:10, Oct 16

The List

All looked fine to me - nice one! When your eyes have uncrossed, feel free to check more if you like, although lay off the self-check for a while - that tended to work best with Saberwolf when he was getting going. You should find you get used to it fairly soon if you do it again. On the other hand, if you thought it was too much trouble, fair enough! --UU - natter 09:08, Oct 16

OK, I'll do one of mine, for the simple reason I've already entered the averages, but in future I will avoid checking my own. Glad I haven't broken anything. Thanks for checking. --ChiefjusticeDS 09:12, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit conflicts

What? Why would I be thanking you for something like that? It's because we're both welcoming new users at the same time. When I started doing that a few days ago, I felt overwhelmed at the backlog. Now it looks like it's virtually caught up. Cool! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  16:45, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, I have actually been secretly drawing my plans against you, having watched your VFH success and reviewing with envious eyes. I think you will find the edit conflicts that crashed into the Uncyclopedia common will soon grow into huge blood harvesting alien death machines. Totally original eh? --ChiefjusticeDS 16:48, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, that was my secret plan! You stole it! Give it back! If you don't give it back I'll call my Mommy. MOMMY! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  16:52, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Last night's PEE Review

Am pleased to have heard from the author who got the harshest of my 4 reviews and he is calm and informative. I remain enthusiastic about teaching and learning from other writers, but unenthusiastic about filling out PEE forms and supplying what will essentially be random-number grades (which might cut more deeply than the most caustic review by way of text). I have read the guidelines, and understand and agree with what y'all are looking for in a "good article," but don't see the utility of a "report card" and would prefer a format in which I could respond in prose, as I did. Spıke ¬  17:03, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

PS--Am getting less pleased, as FunnyBony has just filibustered on my talk page by way of offering up ISKCON details to justify the article I reviewed. Have politely told him I cannot respond at that level. After barely a week interfering in your august Forum, it is approaching a full workday just conscientiously reading the correspondence! Yikes! Spıke ¬  17:29, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not suggesting that YOU MUST CHANGE NOW! The necessity for filling the table is purely logistical. When you complete reviews in that fashion the review doesn't move to the reviewed section and the writer can be left confused as to whether you have done the review or not. That isn't even getting into the complexities of updating the list of PEE and attributing reviews and calculating scores up. I realise that a lot of people reject the idea of dishing out an arbitrary score for PEE reviews, people who believe that a complex opinion cannot be quantified with a number. You are also not the first to raise an objection to the scoring system. My suggestion would be to continue what you are doing, but click the review now button, and give 0 for all the sections except the final one, you can also put all your comments under 'Final Comments'. Just explain to the writer what you are doing. This way we are all compromising, you don't score except for one out of 50, and I can still continue to update the review list without having a nervous breakdown. Acceptable? --ChiefjusticeDS 17:40, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that works; thanks. Spıke ¬  17:46, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of rating something subjective with a number either, but understand that's the way much of life works. An entire semester's work is reduced to one letter, and four years' work is reduced to one number, etc. But I think giving a 0 on everything could be very discouraging even if it is explained. What if instead, Spike, you look at Uncyclopedia:Pee_Review/Guidelines, which does give subjective reasons for numbers, and base your numbers on that. "This article's adequate/average, so 7 in each section which will total of 35." Or even, "Prose and Formatting are adequate, so a 7 there, but Humour might be feature level, so an 8 there." King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  17:53, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Essentially it is his decision, it might look discouraging, but writers will just have to adjust for it. Spike is quite a promising reviewer and it would be a shame to lose his support. He could just bob in a note at the top, similar to your one for introducing yourself, and explain his style. --ChiefjusticeDS 17:58, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

If you don't want to use the scoring system you don't have to. You can just leave a comment above the review box, but that will still leave the review "open" so other reviewers will find it. Adding the scores "closes" the review to other reviewers. WE need some system of saying a page has had 'enough attention' for now... Obviously anyone can comment on anything whenever they want. Either the above, or just say whatever you want to say on the talk page of the article thereby avoiding the Pee Review system and just using it as a place to find pages to look at. I'm sure the author will be grateful for your feedback wherever it comes. MrN 18:00, Oct 16

That works too. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:15, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Done now. I have a B.A. and would never give anyone a 0 at anything without an explanation. Not that I ever got one. The four reviews I made last night are now done "formally." The one left in the backlog I am not competent to review. (As apparently I didn't have enough inside information to do justice to ISKCON either--though the input I provided was useful and was well-received.) Spıke ¬  18:17, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

PS--Did I just have, through an intermediary, a conversation with User:Why do I need to provide this? on the topic of why I need to provide this? Spıke ¬  18:20, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, you're being clever and funny. Stop that! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:23, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

On the process

The one negative Pee Review of the four I gave out--leading to the dialogue in the next section of this talk page--can be interpreted in two ways: (1) I viewed the article as a big long insider joke and (2) I lack the inside information I needed to review it. User:Funnybony has protested the review and gotten a fresh one.

There was a fifth article in the Pee Review queue--a proposed alternate ending to a TV show or movie I had not seen. I declined to review it for the exact reason. But the intro for the fifth article made it obvious what inside information I would need in order to enjoy it. My negative review of ITSCON tried to indicate that the intro was unsuccessful even at describing even what I would need to know to enjoy it.

Nevertheless, Funnybony and I had a cordial discussion on my talk page on what the article was about. Then you folks insisted that I complete the formal review process, but not necessarily with meaningful numbers. Funnybony communicated with me and many of you (below) less than cordially. Since then, he has read comments on my talk page and says he understands what I was trying to say.

What I take away from all of this: The number-grade Pee Review form looks like a BAD REPORT CARD. I think it (and my desire to blow off accurate numbers and just point him back to my text review) made him overreact (though he at one point accused me of identical emotionality).

I propose that your advice above, that it suffices to give reviews in prose and skip the numbers, is sometimes insufficient. There should be a way to complete a Pee Review without issuing a "report card" that will look like failure. (Keep in mind that, in US public education with its grade inflation and emphasis on self-esteem, every American expects to get 8s, 9s, and 10s at everything.)

Have not heard back from the other three authors I reviewed, and there is a risk they too will take it the wrong way. Spıke ¬  00:36 18-Oct-09

I think that if that is how you feel about doing the PEE reviews then you would be best obeying Mr.N's suggestion above. Also what you need to understand about PEE review is that writers sometimes don't contact the reviewer afterwards. From looking at the queue it looks to me like one of the authors has taken your points to heart and simply done what he usually does and requested a second opinion. I cannot see eye to eye with you the PEE system however, I think some authors do value the numerical scores as an instant indication of how far they still need to go with their article.

As far as I can tell what has happened here is that we have all not behaved very well, long discussions on your talk page about why you should fill out the form, and then you get what anyone who does PEE reviews gets at some point, an unhappy author complaining about what you have said. Funnybony has spent a long time on the ITSCON article and was just hoping for a bit more feedback in the review, and was understandably frustrated when he didn't get it. You, on the other hand were doing your first ever PEE review and were just unlucky that it was that one you picked up. I hope you can continue to contribute to our feedback system, but in a way that suits you best.--ChiefjusticeDS 09:00, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

ITSCON

This is a Pee Review??? Sounds like a pissed-off diatride by an angry person, without a clue of the subject, who wants to dish out some shit just for the hell of it! Is this a "Pee Review" or just taking a Piss? This is a bull shit review!--Funnybony 19:26, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

(As I also replied on the Review page) It is I; I have admitted not having a clue of the subject; as we have already discussed it amicably on my talk page. Perhaps you could ask to be reinserted into the queue to see if someone who knows ISKCON will review your article. Spıke ¬  19:31 16-Oct-09

OK hold it right there and breathe, before we all stray into the realm of drama and arguments. If you aren't satisfied and want someone else to take a look at it just resubmit it to the queue, there is only one other article there right now. I understand your frustrations, but please, try to go easy on a new reviewer who is still finding his feet with the PEE system and the guidelines. Shove it back on the queue with the title "ITSCON (2nd look)" and someone else will pick it up for you in the next couple of days (I will if nobody else does). Is that an acceptable solution? --ChiefjusticeDS 19:33, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Mordillo has now done so. Spıke ¬  19:36 16-Oct-09

I suggest you erase my review, and Funnybony's dissatisfaction with it, from the PEE Review page so the new reviewer starts out fresh. Spıke ¬  19:53 16-Oct-09

Hi Spike, I am not going to delete your comments, someone else can do that (including you). Listen, I know LESS than you about making a Pee Review, so I have no hard feelings. I'm just used to a more friendly approach. This is just jokes. No one gets famous. No one gets paid. There is nothing to gain except a laugh. And there are many subjects in Uncyclopedia I know nothing about, or have no interest, and I just don't bother with those. Everything's not for everyone. But I appreciated that you tried to help, only I couldn't make out what to do. It was a "complaint" more than a review. Man, you must of been on the rag last night. Whew! Hope you're feeling chipper today!--Funnybony 20:11, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Baby Boomers

Chief. I'm a new comer, but as far as I can make out you are the most expert and senior cat on the block. I took all your "constructive" advice (it was ALL constructive) on Baby Boomers and it's already for a 3rd Pee, or a Nom, either way is fine with me, because it just keeps getting better. Thanks--Funnybony 19:58, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I'll take another look for you. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:10, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

SUPER!!! Also I ran it through a grammar checker and got all the terrorists--Funnybony 20:13, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

OK, that is a bit better. Main things to look at:

• Good start with the running joke, but it needs to go further and integrate more seamlessly with what you already have. Try not to just tag it on, write it in, also, do it differently each time. In one case say: "Uncyclopedia would be unExistant." then in the next say "Have I mentioned that they gave us Uncyclopedia?" Then for the next say something like "If I had to choose one thing that BB's had given us that wasn't Uncyclopedia, which they gave to us by the way etc etc". See what I mean?
• Second, good work removing the Steve Jobs image, but the problem with the Gene Simmons image and the S.A.T. test are still causing you a problem with formatting.

Otherwise good, so almost there, just not yet. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:51, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

OK, Chief!

I think Baby Boomers it perfect now, with the Uncyclopedia joke running through-out the article. And some NEW funnier stuff. I again moved up the KISS picture, and it looks OK on my Mac. Does it still screw-up the formatting as appears on your computer? If so then I'll just delete it. Thanks again.--Funnybony 21:41, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps that is the problem, it's still looking screwed up on mine. Your additions are pretty good too, I would say that you are good to go wherever it is you want to go with that. Remember that VFH is a tricky bet at the best of times, everyone is different so be prepared for some criticism. But you have my very best wishes whatever you decide to do. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:54, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

EVEN BETTER AND BEST

Chief, I reworked the entire Uncyclopedia spoof in from the start now, and it's about the funniest joke in the whole article. I even removed "Fuck one!" and replaced with "look them up on Uncyclopedia". I further integrated the Uncyclopedia joke through out, and I don't think it's over done. I ditched the KISS pic, now does the format look OK? If all is well, the only place to go is VFH. Hope to see you there. Thanks a million.--Funnybony 22:06, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Looks fine to me, if you were being picky then I would say you can use the space created by removing that image to space the others out a bit, just stops the article looking scruffy. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:10, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

The... home... stretch...

Hey Chief, hope you're still here. I've edited the Malema page again, got some hints from the WhyGuy. If your happy and you think it may be time, I can start thinking about considering relocating it to the Main Space? --BlueSpiritGuy 21:22, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, there are far worse articles festering away in main space. Remember, it is a jungle out there, or a nuclear wasteland depending on how you look at it, and your user space is like a safe haven for your articles. You will likely encounter vandals and people with their own view on Mr Malema, keep an eye on it. But yes, I'd say the time has come. Do you know how to move it? Or would you like me to do it for you? --ChiefjusticeDS 21:26, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to try to move it. It's supposed to be a big moment? If I don't manage I'll come running back to you for help... Should I keep a copy in my userspace? --BlueSpiritGuy 21:31, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

It isn't compulsory, some people prefer to. For reasons like: to try out new ideas without affecting the main space one, also it means you can still retain the original style of the article if people vandalise it badly. But since you can undo edits there is no real need besides extra security and sentimentality. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:35, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I see, If I wish to keep a copy, should I still move the page or should I create a new page in the main space under the name and copy and paste everything. --BlueSpiritGuy 21:46, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Just copy the article to a text document, move the one in your userspace, then just paste the text document one back into your userspace. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:08, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Why?:Has God Forsaken Me?

Just curious--on your user page, it says that Why?:Has God Forsaken Me? is an article you wrote or helped write. Yet the only editor I see is Gas Pump (other than me as I just made a few small edits). Are you/were you Gas Pump, or was this written on some user page? I really liked the article, by the way. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  21:42, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I was never that user, it was written before I created my full account anyway. I'm taking a liberty saying I helped to do it, mostly it was just suggestions in that general direction as an IP editor and then IRC whining. I wasn't ever really involved in the writing, I just whined (like IP's do) until a user got up and wrote something for me. Shortly afterwards the idea occurred, why not make an account? So I did that, and the rest is history. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:49, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

OK, cool. Glad you signed up; you've helped me a lot. (I didn't vote for you as UotM for nothing, you know.) King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  21:56, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm glad I did too. It certainly helped while away the long summer hours. Thanks for the vote by the way, should have said earlier. Like I always say, here to help. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:59, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Ah, you don't have to thank me for voting for you. I wouldn't have done it if I didn't truly believe you really blackmailed me. OK not really. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:12, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

It is harder than it looks

If I want to keep a copy, do I first move the article then copy everyting afterwards? --BlueSpiritGuy 22:02, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Copy it into a text file on your PC in case Uncyclopedia crashes or "locks the databases". Then move the one in you userspace. Then just paste the text document back into your userspace. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:06, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for the help! Just one more thing, after moving the page, I see that the current page becomes a Redirect page. Is it necessary to change all links linking to the User space page manually so that they link directly to the main space article?--BlueSpiritGuy 22:12, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Not really, the only real problem we have is with double redirects: redirects that link to redirects. Since nothing is currently redirecting to the User space one there is no need to go and change the links, you can if the text saying "Redirected from" offends you in some way, but it isn't necessary. I checked for double redirects so there is no need to fear being banned for them. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:17, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, no it isn't that offending if you don't say it like this: REDIRECTED FROM. Thanks for checking for the double redirects. And thanks for all your help on the article. I will create a nice template saying just that but with more emotion and a deeper meaning, which I will post on your talk page for all to see. But not right now. All I'm going to say now is: Dude, thanks. Thanks a lot. --BlueSpiritGuy 22:29, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Now I'm off to do this thing on Cajek's list for Why? As he is convinced I'm cheating in our review race. I'm not, obviously. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:32, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Say, I just realized, if I claimed I did Pee Reviews that don't really exist, you'd have to spend so much time looking for them you wouldn't have time to do reviews. Hey, CJ, I just did 12 more reviews. You'd better find them or I'll accuse you of lying! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  00:15, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Baby Boomers

Hi Chief. OK, improved further. And pics are spaced apart. Does the format look OK on your box? If it's good can you nom it for me? Or can I self NOM with three Pees behind me? Gotta cross the finish line at least ONCE out of 22 articles--Funnybony 22:33, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to self-nom, just link to the PEE's when you do. Try to space the pictures equally, so the white space between each is pretty even. Don't worry about coming back to me after, just go for it. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:40, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

I came here for a reason

And then I read your archive summaries and wondered what conversation you refered to that we had. So I looked and laughed at my own jokes nd then forgot what my reason for comming here was. There definitly was a reason, and a reasonably constructive one at that, but now I can't remember...    Orian57    Talk   15:16 18 October 2009

Ah Yes!

   Orian57    Talk   15:20 18 October 2009

Thanks, and it's no problem, it's one of my favourite articles /me massages Orian's ego/ and it causes mighty rage within me when IP's vandalise it. As to the thing with the archived conversation yes, it was terribly amusing, but you have had better things to do recently, I imagine. It does, however, remind me of this conversation. --ChiefjusticeDS 17:19, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Really? I think it's one of my worst. Leagues -- lightyears -- better than what was there. Anyway, thanks for keeping it acceptable, I'm glad you and Necropaxx like it even if nobody else does.    Orian57    Talk   18:01 18 October 2009

Also I've probably asked before but do you have a 360 with Live? Or are you one of those PC gamers? It's just me and a couple friends were trying to do a campaign on expert and it's hellish, were kinda hoping to find a competant fourth person.    Orian57    Talk   18:04 18 October 2009

You haven't asked me but I'm one of those depressing PC gamers, I slugged my way through all the campaigns on expert in single player, I haven't quite gotten the determination up to get through Crash Course on expert yet, I'm sure I will eventually. Is Crash Course the one you are doing? But I know the pain you are going through, the Computer is horrendous to play campaigns with, sorry man. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:09, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

We tried to do Blood Harvest it took us seven hours to get to the last chapter and we even managed to get good at getting to the farm house but it was impossible. Eventually we had to give up. It was really dissapointing. But oh well, get a 360 faggot.    Orian57    Talk   18:12 18 October 2009

Do No Mercy, it is far and away the easiest to do on expert, just barricade yourself in the cupboard in the room with the radio and light the tank on fire and run for it, they always die in 30 seconds when they are on fire regardless of difficulty. I have a PS3, and I'm quite fond of it, it's just nobody else has one. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:17, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Just Ah

Hey Chief. Upon Checking my e-mails, I discovered that some IP edited Julius Malema. Disgruntled and ready to revert pointless vandalism I hastened myself to the article, only to discover that this particular IP actually added something funny to the article! In my surprised excitement I just had to tell someone, and I figured you would either care, or pretend to since I am your n00b. So the article is coming to life! --BlueSpiritGuy 21:17, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

I noticed, in fact I was so interested that I was sat here watching them do it, my revert plunger at the ready. It just goes to show that IP's are sometimes useful and productive, indeed they fix loads of small errors in articles and even write impressive ones, but you will have to watch out for vandalism too. Also you might be interested to know that it looks like the IP is in the same country as you. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:23, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

I figured, since that Caster Semenya thing is very recent and I don't think many people outside of South Africa know about it. And thanks for adding it to the recent articles on the front page. --BlueSpiritGuy 21:26, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry that was my bad, hit the wrong key--BlueSpiritGuy 21:28, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

No worries, you edit conflicted me fixing it, I had written such a hilarious edit summary too. The error was that you closed the line command with this \ not this /. So my hilarious response was "Watch your slashes, do a PEE review if you want to be indiscriminate". You didn't need to know that but I'll be damned if nobody was going to find out about it. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:31, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Oh I forgot to delete it, so it went in anyway, admittedly it isn't funny at all now but who cares? --ChiefjusticeDS 21:34, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

I do--BlueSpiritGuy 21:37, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

And how do you know this IP is in the same country, Chief? Are you trying to access the Secret Knowledge? 86.854.32.179 04:28, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I'm just smarter than the average bear user. --ChiefjusticeDS 07:46, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I are smart too. --BlueSpiritGuy 08:52, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Bruges

Thank you very much for reviewing my article. I will take up your suggestions, and expand the article further, after reading the particular guide you suggested. :-) – Preceding unsigned comment added by Evilcoffee (talk • contribs)

Hi Chief

Sorry to be a bore.... Thanks for helping out with archiving BP. But... Please Do Not do that again. We keep the number of people who are "allowed" to do that to a minimum. Thanks for all your help with the welcoming and such, but please no archiving of BP, QVFD or VFD. Thanks. MrN 13:50, Oct 19

Sure thing, I just noticed that it needed done and was thinking of this at the time. I did BP once before and nobody objected so I figured that once everything had been checked there would be no problem with it, but I understand why I shouldn't do it in future. --ChiefjusticeDS 14:48, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

ITSCON

Hey Chief, pass the pipe, OK? Well, I finally got past the spikey-style review of SPIKE, and got it through my thick skull what he was trying to tell me. Accordingly, and following Spike's advice, I completely rebuilt the page on ITSCON. And it's apparent that he was right, and now it's WAY better.--Funnybony 14:38, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Good, do you want me to leave it on PEE review or are you happy that you have enough feedback right now? --ChiefjusticeDS 15:00, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

I'm really glad it was reviewed by Spike. He was 100% correct. So you can take it off Pee review. I'm not suggesting that it's a nom for feature, but at least remove the stub from the end, and if you like it then by all means nom it. But that's not important as is removing the stub at the end so it can be a main space article. Respectfully and reverently submitted to H E ChiefJustice. Thanks dude--Funnybony.

No problems. Oh also, the ICU tag should expire on it's own and someone will check it when that happens, it looks to me like it should definitely be kept. Worst case scenario: if you do find that it is deleted just contact the admin that does it and see what they say --ChiefjusticeDS 17:34, October 19, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for...

User:POTR/Template:Lateral Thanking Pup t 03:59, 20/10/2009

ChiefjusticeDS' bee says

User:Why do I need to provide this?/Sun Bee thanks King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:42, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Would you like cream with that?

Thanks chief... you make me warm and happy inside...

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

P.S yer the bestest reviewer ever.

Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 11:33, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Wow, thanks very much. But I think we should all remember that I am just a PEEing peon. This guy is the reigning King of PEE. But thanks very much, good luck on VFH. --ChiefjusticeDS 13:19, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Well This guy has never reviewed anything of mine so nyah... P.S I made them changes that you helped me spot for easier and more comfortable reading, you're so right it makes a big difference when you break it up like that. Thanks for teaching me something new. Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 13:34, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, VICTORY!! Also it's no problem, here to help. --ChiefjusticeDS 13:37, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Question

I'm not complaining, but when I was checking the maintence list to see if my reviews were good, you said 2 of them needed more information. What do you mean by that?---   TALK What's it like to be a heretic? 03:12, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Essentially it means that in my judgement 2 of your reviews didn't have enough information for the writer on how to improve their work. Me saying no doesn't mean the review is a pile of crap, it just means that it isn't going to be considered an in-depth review. For someone who has now done 13 reviews I didn't think you had put in enough information. Hope that helps. --ChiefjusticeDS 07:42, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

My Lie

Hey, Chief, GREAT!!! Sorry I took so long to answer. What started out as a short review by Spike turned into the most and best help I ever got from any Uncyclops. He turned a pile of information into a really neat and good article about a very spoof-worthy cult. I have been keeping up with him, and it's now ready for either another Pee or a NOM. But after seeing all the work that Spike has personally put into ITSCON, and the editing top to bottom, I can only take about half credit, which is fine by me, and I really can't imagine how any one could improve on what Spike did. He didn't just write a review, he rewrote the article. And I am mighty pleased with him.

Back to My Lie, I went through and made it all baskets, no blood, no babies. I think I covered all your points. I tried to copy the template you mentioned from Wiki but I couldn't get it to work on Uncyc. I'm no code wiz. If you know how it works please drop it into My Lie. Whatever you want done to this article is fine by me. The subject matter is so horrible that there was nothing to add from Wiki article that didn't make it more horrible. I deleted and rearranged. Added the "VC Basket Family" Pic. and moved the quotes around. Please take another look if you have a chance. It's so terrible that it just must be in Uncyclopedia.

BTW: In the ITSCON article we also have a bold plug for the almighty VFH. Thanks-a-mil!--Funnybony 20:57, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Don't copy stuff from wikipedia, it drips and leaves stains on the carpet. My thoughts were that you could take advantage of one of our existing ones, like this one or maybe this one or, if you are feeling daring, even this one, but not this one. Hope that clears things up on the info box front.

Well done on the rearranging and rewording, just a bit of tidying up to do now. Good luck. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:16, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Chief. I ditched the black bar and put in the info box. I hardly know anything about code. But it seems I got it all working, except the image. Is the image too big (need to resize)? What's wrong with the pic? Thanks again--Funnybony 21:56, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Fixed for you now. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:04, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

YEAH!!!--Funnybony 22:07, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Fantastic!

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

Maybe you can build a little fort out of all these rewards you must get- apparently you do a lot of PR? And I see why- your review was awesome. When I'm more than half-awake and capable of implementing the changes you suggest, I will immediately do so. Thanks again! --Andorin Kato 11:23, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Take this then

This is the part where I thank you for everything you have done for me up to now. It goes something like this:

Even though I do not understand what not wearing pants and helping n00bs have in common.

But wait, there is more...

Wikus van der Merwe thanks you for voting for BlueSpiritGuy as NotM. Because you did this he will not shoot you with his big fokken alien robot. As long as you leaves his cat food out.

Don't know Wikus? Go watch District 9 loser

I also want to inform you that I will be taking a sabbatical until 14 November. I will be here now and then to respond to possible messages and to see that Julius Malema doesn't run away, but I won't be doing much editing. So I guess this is possible goodbye for a while? Thanks again for everything --BlueSpiritGuy 18:32, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

No worries, enjoy it Uncyclopedia and indeed myself will be here when you have time, unless I get shot, in which case it will just be Uncyclopedia here. Drop me a message when you do return, it will remind me that I need to do something quite important. Enjoy! --ChiefjusticeDS 18:49, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

I will do. Unless I get shot, like 2 of my friends recently, or kidnapped, like 2 of my other friends recently. But they all made it, so you'll probably see me again then. In the meantime, I'll be on Uncyc not entirely unlike a Blue Spirit of some Guy would be. Until later --BlueSpiritGuy 18:54, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

funnybony

“The only way I'll ever get a Feature Article on Uncyclopedia is if I use a pseudonym of my pseudonym!”

~ me on Uncyclopedia

--Funnybony 20:45, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

If you don't mind me butting in, no. If you'd like some suggestions on getting an article featured from little old me, post a note on my talk page. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:40, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review: The War That Never Was

In regard to our non-existent contest, I may have to concede. At first I simply wanted to help with the backlog; then I thought it would be fun to have a joke contest with you, especially as it could only help Uncyclopedia; then I wanted to do 12 PR's this month for a total of 15; then I did 15 this month. The problem is I have things I really should be working on outside of Uncyclopedia. I do Pee Reviews because I think they're helpful, but at this point I should take a break. (Of course that doesn't mean that after I finish what I should be doing now I won't sneak back in and do another two or three at the end of the month). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:38, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, at the end of the day the most important thing is that writers get some feedback. In the wise words of Under user "Very few people manage to sustain a high volume of pee for too long, real life tends to intrude in one way or another. Hell, it's stopped me doing as many reviews as I want to each month as well. I'm very grateful for the help you've given over the last month, and wish you all the best with the stuff that really matters.". Which is what he said to another young PEEing member on his announcement that he would have to stop for a while, I think he really nailed the point. Basically this is secondary to real life and we will all still be here when you decide to stick your head round the door again.

P.S. I WON! I WON!!! OMGZ I WON!!! --ChiefjusticeDS 07:47, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Now that I've announced a cease fire....

I was minding my own business, when I stumbled across the request for Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Star Trek. I thought, "No, even though I've seen every one of the original episodes, even though I saw all the original cast and the creator Gene Roddenbury at the Star Trek 25th anniversary, even though I voted for this as an Imperial Colonization project, and even though once it wasn't voted for the next project I said I planned to work on the article in my user space, and even though then I thought I'd be too busy to rewrite it," there it was, a shiny, fresh, gleaming apple on the tree of temptation begging me to take a bite. Well, I bit and wrote the review, the bite heard round the world. I hope you'll forgive me! Please don't cast me out into outer darkness where there's moaning and groaning and clenching of teeth! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:55, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

It's OK, work ran over by 4 hours yesterday so I didn't get in until late so wasn't monitoring anything carefully. I guess I'll add it to the list then. I think I'm still winning though. Live long and prosper. --ChiefjusticeDS 07:48, October 24, 2009 (UTC)

On abstaining

I just want to say that your edit here was one of the classiest responses I've ever read on Uncyclopedia. Kudos to you, my man. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Friday, 03:44, Oct 23 2009

UnSignpost 22nd 23rd October 2009

The Uncyclopedia UnSignpost

Now With 0 Trans Fat!

October 22nd, 2009 • Issue 68 • Semi-endorsed by Journalism Union #448

Invisible UnSignpost Issue Confuses, Annoys Readers By Gerrycheevers As a gag/publicity stunt/desperate cry for attention, last week's edition of Uncyclopedia's most beloved and 3rd most cherished newspaper, the UnSignpost, was rendered invisible before being delivered. After the issue was wrapped up, UnSignpost contributing editors Dexter111344 and Socky used their inherent superpowers or something to cause the issue to not appear on user's talk pages when delivered. In addition, further enhancements rendered each user's talk page history to not be altered upon delivery, thus completely erasing any evidence that the issue was delivered or even existed at any point. Feedback thus far has been overwhelmingly negative, with angry subscribers sending death threats and exploding telegrams to the UnSignpost office for the past four days. UnSignpost Executive in Charge of Sniffing Mail, Dognewspaper (pictured), luckily suffered only minor burns and a singed tail. The UnSignpost staff would like to formally apologize to its readers, and assure them that each subsequent issue will be at least partly visible. Poo Lit Report By Electrified mocha chinchilla After giving the writers time to work on their pieces, and Modus taking time enjoying the disqualification of entries for failing the mandatory steroids screening, the 8nd Edition of the Poo Lit Surprise is in its final stages – judging. This is the time where writers who entered play with their genitals out of anxiety and nervousness, and attempt to bribe the judges with sexual favors and pie. This PLS saw a great number of entries in the Best Alternate Namespace Article. The reasoning for this, some believe, is that everyone is utterly bat fuck insane and forgot how to write regular namespace articles. Despite being held just prior to the Turkey Day Ball and Conservation Week, the turn-out was overall not bad; Modus' corporate-funded campaign for the PLS is primarily to blame for this. Speaking of corporate funding, it was indicated that there will be prize money for this edition of the PLS despite Wikia's refusal to hook a brotha' up. All irrevocable blame for Wikia's unfortunate decision has been directed at Sannse for good reason. UPDATE Winners have been announced; congratulations to all of them. According to Modusoperandi, the next PLS is expected to be held, "When the next guy remembers it's late." Fantasy Football Update By Guildensternenstein Things are really heating up in the UFFL as midseason nears, and Week Six’s storylines were of upset, domination, and redemption. Led by Tom Brady, the always-solid New England Patriots Domestic Team Name blew out the hapless Tennessee Titans Winnerz by an insane 109.38 to 0 after choking down a hard loss the previous week. The ironically-named Winnerz, on the other hand, still have yet to win a game. After a lackluster showing last week, The John Curry All-Stars earned a solid win against The Dudes, unseating them of their erstwhile #1 ranking in the process. After starting the season 0-4, Cheddar’s Doritians earned their second consecutive win, albeit against the floundering Dibiase’s Millions. Finally, Sternensteinenstine resoundingly defeated Oklahoma City Storm 164.06 to 118.98 after a lackluster showing the previous week, catapulting the Nazi-run team back atop the UFFL standings. In a look ahead to next week’s games, Sternensteinenstine looks to stay atop the UFFL rankings against a resurgent Cheddar’s Doritians, Domestic Team Name looks to retake the #1 spot against a very solid John Curry All-Stars, Oklahoma City Storm and The Dudes face off, and the bottom-dwelling dog-fucking last-placers Dibiase’s Millions and The Winnerz will look to see which one of them is shittier. Standings: Sternensteinenstine (5-1) Domestic Team Name (5-1) The Dudes (4-2) John Curry All-Stars (4-2) Oklahoma City Storm (3-3) Cheddar’s Doritians (2-4) Dibiase’s Millions (1-5) The Winnerz (0-6) IT'S OVER 25,000!!! Maybe. By Electrified mocha chinchilla Uncyclopedia just might make the mark of 25,000 articles. Sometime soon. Maybe tomorrow. Surely it's yet another milestone that only puts us that much more ahead of Wikipedia, Conservapedia, and Das Kapital combined in content. However, thoughts from the rest of the community on what this means for our beloved wiki have been varyingly expressed as joyous, apathetic, dismal, and downright nonsensical. "But even with 25,000 articles, we're still 65,000 short of being strong enough to fight Captain Ginyu," says the attractive Guildensternenstein as we stop him on his way to Planet Namek. Others offer real conversation of a possible reskin and doubts that the mark will actually be reached with Forest Fire Week probably happening sometime. Maybe. Discussion started by an attention whore in Miniluv over the Welcoming Committee and their welcoming template(s) has sparked the particular attention of many Uncyclopedians, most of whom by their own admission have never read the welcoming template, HTBFANJS, BGBU, any of the other things the welcome template advises new users to read, or have heard of Uncyclopedia. The recent round of QQ'ing and debating over the alleged poor quality of Uncyclopedia, as highlighted in the last edition's piece about the end being nigh and a Poo Lit Surprise nomination, can come to a close. It is this writer's observation that Uncyclopedia is the worst because nobody cares about editing guides which make confusing acronyms. Obvious correlation is obvious. On our final stop in our stroll through the Village Dump, to your left you will see that a n00b was just kidding, jeez, and to your right you will see that Rockstar Games reads Uncyclopedia. In the former, users urge the poor fellow to read HTBFANJS and BGBU (the same ones that they probably haven't read). If anything is to be drawn from this, it is that true editing comes from within. Or something.

Check out these pages! Uncyclopedia:Worst or Not? The Debate Rages On Free Advertisement for Jumping Ship Spreading the Good Word About New Articles From our logs: 23:04, October 9, 2009 TheLedBalloon (Talk | contribs) blocked 24.90.32.102 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 day ‎(That was a waste of an edit. There are edit-starved kids in China that would've used that to its fullest extent, you know.) 10:48, October 13, 2009 RAHB (Talk | contribs) blocked Dwarfman1122 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 2 weeks ‎(Thought you wouldn't be caught, eh? Maybe now you'll think twice the next time you vandalize and then wait three weeks to be banned.) 18:27, October 13, 2009 Mhaille (Talk | contribs) blocked 71.245.120.78 (Talk) with an expiry time of 3 months ‎(Please enjoy our token Fuck the Hell Off.....) 08:10, October 15, 2009 Under user (Talk | contribs) blocked Sudeepk9 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 1 week (wow, we are a beacon of sunshine today, aren't we?) 21:27, October 17, 2009 Modusoperandi (Talk | contribs) blocked MrN9000 (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 1 day ‎(A wizard did this.) 17:36, October 19, 2009 Roman Dog Bird (Talk | contribs) changed block settings for 72.93.168.203 (Talk) with an expiry time of Judgement Day (Liking Naruto and insisting we stop making fun of it. What? How is that not a reason to permanently ban someone?) Biopic of the Week Sog1970 has churned out a dozen featured articles in just a few short months, earning him a Writer of the Month nod and now, the most esteemed honor on Uncyclopedia, an UnSignpost biopic. The lack of information on his user page makes writing said biopic rather difficult, but let it be known that Sog radiates awesome. Old School Featured Article of the Week Life's Answerable Questions are a series of ponderances and queriums that have most certainly not chafed at mankind the way other, more disgustingly unanswerable questions have. For example, asking "What's new?" to a stranger will certainly elicit a less confused response than one of those other questions. You know the ones we mean. CAJEKWATCH 05:42, October 15, 2009 RAHB (Talk | contribs) blocked Cajek (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 7 minutes ‎(Because I saw you existing.) 01:23, October 16, 2009 TheLedBalloon (Talk | contribs) blocked Cajek (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 2 minutes ‎(HOLY SHIT IT'S CAJEK HI CAJEK PS BANBANBAN LOLOLOL) 13:21, October 22, 2009 Under user (Talk | contribs) blocked Cajek (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 147 seconds ‎(I think I'm stressed, I need a release, and this is the best available on this wiki) Random Obscene Japanese Lesson "Kimi no te de boku o ikasete." means "Make me cum with your hand." "Kimi no oppai ga DEKAI yo! Ii nee." means "Your breasts are HUGE! Nice." "Omawarisan! Chikan o tsuka-mate!" means "Police! Arrest this pervert!" That should keep you little squirts happy... Reason to Leave Uncyc #387 Still no good restaurants. This Week in Uncyc, 1933 With the United States deep in a depression, the Uncyclopedia tri-weekly newsreel tried to lighten the mood by poking fun at American President Herbert Hoover and his bumbling sidekick of a Vice President, the famed Charles Curtis. Gags included, and were limited to, both individuals being hit repeatedly with rubber chickens. Mass Delusion of the Week Last week, many users claim to have had similar psychic visions of an alternate Main Page, which told them to do things in a calm, soothing voice. Such notions are of course nonsense; 7 out of the 10 members who sit on the Uncyclopedia Paranormal Activity Investigation and Acupuncture Licensing Board agree that a combination of swamp gas and Venus caused some users to hallucinate vividly, some nearly to the point of seizure. Record for Most Boxes Tied Due to the overwhelmingly large number of stories in this week's extremely humorous edition of the UnSignpost, a correspondingly overwhelmingly large number of space-wasting side boxes had to be added to cause the issue to weigh equally on both sides of reader's talk pages. As a result, the record for number of such boxes has been tied; this issue, along with the March 24th, 1983 edition, have had the most wasted space! Record Broken!!!

UnSignpost Main Page • Contact the Editors • Sign Up for Delivery • Get the Userbox

9001(bot)  18:07, Oct 23

Thanks for your vote!

According to your ISP's records, you supported file sharing. The Recording Industry Association of AmericaTM has notified the authorities of your unacceptable political views. Lars Ulrich will shortly visit your residence in our name to kick your teeth out. In the meantime, thank you for voting.

Also thanks again for your informative and encouraging review. =) --Andorin Kato 18:01, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

*insert phoenix wright sheepish*

eh he he... i didn't know that he was an admin - should have guessed by the userboxes... that wasn't good... they were good for a laugh, guess they were getting out of hand... – Preceding unsigned comment added by THOMASNATOR (talk • contribs)

Best to make sure of these things, they get really uppity if you revert them. Just double-check in future. Enjoy! Oh and sign your posts. --ChiefjusticeDS 13:21, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

HowTo:Rewrite Be Homeless in America

Thanks for your review. I didn't think about my mixing HowTo and Why, so will give that some thought. I'll take a break from it for several hours or a day to give myself some distance, then go back to it. Thanks! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  15:05, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

In Prose and Formatting you wrote, "I would suggest that you avoid squeezing text between two images, it looks scruffy." I looked at it with two different browsers, and didn't see a place where text is squeezed between two images, so I suspect it's due to your using a different browser than I tried, or maybe our computer settings being different. Can you tell me which images squeeze text between them and I'll try to fix it, then you can tell me if it works on your computer? Thanks. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:48, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

It is only slightly, the points in question were:

• The top of the Making Money section.
• The top of the crime section.

Hope that helps. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:11, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll take a look and ask you later if it looks right (although on second thought I'll probably wait until after I rewrite it, as the problem might fix itself). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  21:34, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review!

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

Thanks a lot, Chief. Your advice was exactly what I was looking for. Cheers! • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Thursday, 13:42, Oct 29 2009

Instead of chiding ME for my grammar or punctuation...

Go to the fucking intel guys who wrote the bloody press release in the first place and call them out on that. Goddamned tool(s). Correct the damned punctuation yourself. No idea in ever submitting anything for pees. It just drives me pissin' furiously mad. Oh, did I mention I'm PMSing, too?! GRRRRRR! 17:50, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

Your own writing doesn't exactly stand out, either... It gives off the impression of this...

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipiscing elit duis ut volutpat diam nullam luctus eros eget diam congue et tincidunt nunc lacinia Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipiscing elit.integer mattis ipsum orci, sit amet egestas tortor. Nulla facilisi vivamus id dolor lectus. Vivamus interdum dolor a risus iaculis nec sodales odio mattis. Maecenas ac molestie nulla. Proin rutrum diam id sem lobortis euismod. Pellentesque tempor, diam non iaculis scelerisquemagna felis volutpat orci, at pulvinar risus augue vitae lectus. Duis sit amet leo nec dolor ultrices tincidunt sed hendrerit nisi. Ut faucibus, arcu vitae elementum vestibulum, dolor sapien tempus tortor, ac volutpat nunc dui at velit. Nullam diam quam, aliquam eget consectetur id, dictum vel felis vivamus eget turpis dui. Ut nisl orci, vulputate sit amet molestie ut, pellentesque eget ligula. Vestibulum iaculis iaculis nulla ut dictum. Vivamus tincidunt, tellus id sagittis lobortis, erat quam accumsan velit, vel tempus leo nibh at mauris. Maecenas quam nibh, bibendum nec eleifend a, mattis eget orci. Cras eu lacus a diam gravida vestibulum. Morbi ut risus dolor, ac volutpat turpis. Curabitur feugiat diam sed felis ornare scelerisque. Aliquam erat volutpat. Fusce tincidunt varius porta. Praesent id aliquet ipsum. Nulla blandit volutpat risus non molestiepraesent sodales urna in sapien congue malesuada. Sed tincidunt odio non augue mollis ultricies. Cras eget lectus ac lorem scelerisque vehicula a ullamcorper massa pellentesque nec mauris at eros accumsan imperdiet a vel nulla. Aenean ut dui tortor. Sed dui diam, tristique in egestas id, eleifend eu turpis. Curabitur rhoncus, nunc eget varius ornare, dolor metus mattis sapien, eu auctor erat ligula eu leo. Vivamus interdum felis arcu, porta gravida massa. Pellentesque adipiscing suscipit nisl, et venenatis purus ultricies et. Morbi volutpat volutpat urna, in accumsan mi gravida sed. Maecenas odio nulla, ultricies quis accumsan nec, accumsan eget metus. Aliquam blandit elementum ante, in sagittis libero euismod non. Donec tempor augue non nibh dapibus quis lobortis purus vestibulum. Mauris varius, tortor quis mollis lobortis, sapien ante euismod dui, id fermentum nibh nibh vel ipsum. Sed in augue lorem. Aenean sit amet tellus ut urna condimentum ornare at vel arcu. :Goddamned bulk of text without proper punctuation, so why the hell are you telling me my writing sucks? -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 18:13, 30 Oct

Look, if you are going to complain about my review do so in a way that isn't one long stream of anger. Now I don't care if the Intel press release was wrong, all I can review is what is presented to me. If there was a problem with the grammar then it was your responsibility to sort it before you submitted it for review, you can't just submit it without checking and then come whining to me if I review it and say that there is a problem with the grammar. I won't correct the grammar myself because it is not my article, I wouldn't care if it was deleted and never seen again. I pointed out the difficulty to help you, not so you could come to my talk page and have a tantrum about it.

I also never once told you that your writing sucked, I did the entire, quite lengthy review, in a way that was meant to be supportive and constructive, never once did I claim that your writing was poor, in fact I stressed the point that I knew you could do much better. I accept that my own spelling and grammar has problems of it's own, but that "Goddamned bulk of text" was intended to help you, and took a considerable amount of my free time to put together. I do not expect such immature behaviour from an established user who quite clearly should know better. I will be getting an administrator involved if you ever address my talk page in this manner again. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:42, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

I'll be willing to apologise to you on one condition. Do not ever, ever again consider writing a pee review of my writings again. EVER. I will also most politely request that you dedicate some time to consider working out a way of presenting your opinions in a less blunt way, with constructive suggestions for improvement. And since your sense of humour is obviously not of a compatible kind with that of us high-brow Brits, I hope you keep your paws off of what you do not understand.

I can't change my vote on that whatever vote of yours, since I don't know you, I don't know your work except for that which has so insulted me today on top of all the rest of the stress and worries in my life. But I'll revoke the calling names. You may not have deserved quite that expression. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 19:32, 30 Oct

And before you get tempted to respond: let's leave this there for now. You might wanna stay away from Luvvy and her stuff for a day or two, but hopefully we can put this behind us without too much more fuss, provided people don't go clashing any further, OK? I'm not gonna get in to who's right and who's wrong, because that's not helpful (and it's a very grey area anyway), so let's just leave it here for now. 'k? --UU - natter 19:35, Oct 30

Fine. Apology accepted. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:37, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

So if I never see a pee review of yours on any of my articles again, I'll offer the apology with added milk and cookies. -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 19:42, 30 Oct

So basically we all agree that it's Mordillo's fault right? In addition... Next time I'm looking for a review for one of my articles I think I will be asking Chief if he might be available to do it. MrN 19:46, Oct 30

I don't mind not reviewing them, that would make you the third person to ask me not to in future, if you look in my talk page history you will note that you aren't the only one who objects to my review work. I hope that my review didn't offend you too much, I apologise for any distress or anger it has caused. Also, yes it's all Mordillo's fault. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:51, October 30, 2009 (UTC)

I knew it! MrN 19:53, Oct 30

I'm only passing through, but saw this and thought I would just say that I have no issues with you reviewing any of my work. And I also hope this hint isn't too subtle. Pup

I'm getting to it. I'm just about to do Gerry's, and then I'll review yours. --ChiefjusticeDS 15:27, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

God damn it! I thought it was USERNAME again, and here I was thinking har har, very funny and suddenly I realize you actually blame me?! I shall now sulk! ~ 16:30, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Hey blame <insert name here> it was their idea! I wasn't strong enough to resist their influence. --ChiefjusticeDS 17:00, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Wait a second. What am I getting blamed for? And why do I not know? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:22, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Forgot to say...

Thanks for the welcome!--UnEditor510 ^{drop us a line, mate} 13:50, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

No problem. --ChiefjusticeDS 14:00, October 31, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, you got thanked for a welcome. Didn't that happen before? How come no one ever thanks me? Do I need to use more deodorant? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:19, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

My welcome is just so awesome that new users are drawn to me. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:47, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

abe

hey chief, thanks for the stellar review of abe lincoln. you make some great points which i will soon use to polish and hopefully perfect the article. keep up the good work! SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 01:26, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review Wars: October 2009

Well, the totals are in, and I have to admit, you won. You did a whopping 22 Pee Reviews for October while I did a measly 21. If this were a vote (and we ignored the other candidates), you got 51% and I got 49%.

Now this is my chance to show how gracious of a loser I am, and how I will follow the will of the people, and how I give you congratulations and such. But hey, did you notice that your review of Abraham Lincoln was filed in the same minute mine was?

Lunar Launch Saga (take 2) by Funnybony reviewed 16:57, October 31, 2009 by Why do I need to provide this?

Abraham Lincoln by Gerrycheevers reviewed 16:57, October 31, 2009 by ChiefjusticeDS

Yours was apparently filed a matter of seconds after mine, and I didn't notice you had done it when I did one more for what I thought would be a tie. So you won the war for October, but hey, I'd already conceded a week or so ago anyway, hadn't I?

Also thanks for the ninja star and the Golden Shower Award. At least I got the consolation prize. Congratulations! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:36, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

And I still end up with a consolation prize! Pup

Thanks, admittedly your thinking it was a tie was partly my fault, because your review went in at the same time as mine did, I didn't add it to the list until I noticed you said on your userspace that you had done 24, which prompted a whole lot of head scratching, checking lists of numbers, and eventually realising what had happened from me. Unlucky in our competition but thanks again for working the queue. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:51, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Also

Congrats on your shiny new brass. --Pleb SYNDROME _{CUN medicate (butt poop!!!!)} 15:29, November 1, 2009 (UTC)

Street Fighter review

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

Mad props! It was exactly the summation I was looking for. My concern with the repetition aspect is that I did not want this to fall apart because of the same thing I was using for the humour, so I've probably softened the blows too much. Oh, and in regards to the factual nature of the article, with a few minor changes (changing the word dash to apostrophe, having a ten button control instead of six buttons, changing dates, etc) it is predominantly true. Pup

About the nomination

I really appreciate you nomming me for RotM; thanks a lot! I do have just one favor to ask you, though. Could you add {{VoteRotM}} to the top of my user page? I'd do it myself, but that might look weird. Thanks! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  06:00, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Request

Would you review this, please? It's been up there for over a week, now. • FreddCan Shredd • • • 14:17, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Sure thing, I'll book it now and I'll get to it later this evening. --ChiefjusticeDS 15:48, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Thankies. • FreddCan Shredd • • • 15:57, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

The review is done for you now, it was my first ever review of an UnTweet so I hope it's all relevant. --ChiefjusticeDS 23:46, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, all is fine. Except for the 'characterization' bit, I didn't quite get it.. • FreddCan Shredd • • • 04:03, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

It means the same as 'characterisation'. Pup

UotM

Congrats and stuff! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  00:59, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

UnSignpost 29-10-2009

The Uncyclopedia UnSignpost

All your readers are belong to us

October 29th, 2009 • Issue 69 • Hehehe, 69

9001(bot)  01:31, Nov 3

Thanks for your help

I asked for Jamie Lynn Spears to be withdrawn from VFH because people abstained because they liked it but thought it should be expanded. I said I'd let people know when it was ready. Well I followed people's suggestion and expanded it and made some improvements so it's back on VFH! DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 07:31, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

Attn: Regarding an article hosted on your website

Dear Mr/Ms ChiefjusticeDS/Archive 3, Greetings. I am the lawyer for Arthur C. Clarke's estate. It has come to my assistant's attention that you recently supported an article on this website (henceforth referred to as "Uncyclopedia"), namely the article titled 2001: A Space Odyssey, to be featured on the website front page. We are honoured, although, of course: 1. We are fully aware of just how monumentally great the film is, and 2. We are preparing a suit against you for supporting copyright infringement, and the author of the article (referred to as "MacMania") is currently under arrest at Sri Lanka (not Ceylon).* However, we would be obliged if you would be able to do us one small favour. As interim representatives of Clarke's estate, we are in talks with Random House to commission a fifth book to add to the 2001 trilogy of four books. We've always been of the opinion that 3001: The Final Odyssey was too bleak of a book, and we would love to have the series finish on a slightly more upbeat note. We were thinking 3010: And Another Odyssey, by J K Rowling? Please let us know. Your obedient servant (in a figurative sense) James Steel c/o Alesha Phillips London EC4M 7EH UK * Why Ceylon got the works is nobody's business but the Sinhalese.

It's a bit late, but not as late as a late parrot. Thanks! Sir MacMania GUN—[13:56 3 Nov 2009]

Thanks!

FROM THE DESK OF GUILDENSTERNENSTEIN

Thank you for supporting my recently featured article.

Your support is greatly appreciated.

—Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 16:34, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

---

Review

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

Superb review sir. I am much obliged. Re: deletion of the original reviews, I was following the guidelines on the Pee Review guidelines section which quite clearly state: 'If you get a lousy review, just revert it and ask for another one'. This needs to be changed if this is no longer the case. --Knucmo2 19:11, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Oh damn. We have a user here who actually reads and follows the directions? What is this site coming to! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:19, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, cheers for bringing that to my attention, I shall reword it. Thanks for the award too. Yeah, what next? We will have to start wording all our policies to prevent people escaping bans on technicalities, I won't be able to sound smart any more --ChiefjusticeDS 19:22, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure you'll figure out a way to sound smart. Just say things like, "you have an interesting point, but how does that relate to the socio-economic dilemmae and paradoxical paradigm shifts of pre-Revolutionary Boston in an imperial modality?" Works great at parties! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:37, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to try an experiment Chief - I am going to revert to an earlier version of Allah's law, which had a totally different tone and scope. As I am the only one to have worked on it a lot, the revert will upset nobody as its all my work. All I need you to tell me, if you could be so kind, is to say whether you think the earlier 'model' is better, or offers better scope for comic potential. I await your response! --Knucmo2 19:39, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

From what I can see, the older version gets bogged down in tangents and is trying to be far more scientific about it. One of the best parts of the new version was the idea of explaining it from the perspective of a devout follower, I thought that, if done correctly, could be far more amusing than a maths equation with disbelief and punishment instead of numbers. The tone on the old one is in difficulties too. You could maybe use some of your old ideas and maybe merge some of it in, but I think the new version offered a better way to be funny as well as a more original one, first person is tough to pull off, but if you can do it then it is usually very amusing. Hope this helps. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:47, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Also, Why? You must be a real hit at parties. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:48, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I am, definitely. The only odd thing is I haven't been invited to any in the past few years. Weird, huh? I guess everybody lost my phone number. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:55, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

Cheifness!

Review my article please and I'll be a really really good boy until at least Christmas!    Orian57    Talk   21:37 4 November 2009

Fine, I'll do it tomorrow. Were you not going to be good anyway? --ChiefjusticeDS 21:38, November 4, 2009 (UTC)

No I was going to play all the games you tell me not to and never clean my room. But it's ok now because you're doing what I want.    Orian57    Talk   21:40 4 November 2009

How To: Commit Suicide

Perhaps, but your blanket revert didn't help either. One of the problems of the article is that it's pretty much always been way too listy. Kind of hard to avoid in a HowTo of this type, but I generally remove stuff that people have just tossed in off the top of their head that doesn't head anywhere. The intro-list itself was getting a bit long and there were a couple of bush->obama->bush ad nauseum edits that didn't really add all that much to the humour. I'm not wedded to the edits I make on the article; but at the very least, I would prefer the jokes to actually be funny. Quasispace 05:20, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

I admit the revert was stronger than I intended it to be, the main target was the intro paragraph which I thought looked better before you changed it up. Perhaps that's because when the word porn appears in an article it is usually vandalism. I haven't set a constant watch on the article and I welcome your future contributions to it, I would just recommend that if you are going to maintain it you work at your tone a bit. I apologise for reverting parts of it, that was done in error. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:15, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Bin Laden

I followed your PEE advice and it's now up for VFH. Check it out. • FreddCan Shredd • • • 08:56, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

ta

For the review. That was the shortest twentyfour hours of my life I must say. Also what did you mean by "a oretty" surely you were being ironic with the lack of "an" before a vowel word. But I don't know what it means anyway. You're absolutely right about that first image, it was thrown together just as fast as the article. And I probably could crowbar in some more self-conciously cool MTV style stuff, I just kinda forgot about that the first time around. And also the presenter does remember before the invasion, so I didn't want to overstress it. I will have another look. As for the first line I'm a real beliver in starting in the middle (theres a French term for that that sounds a whole lot more sofisticated but I can't spell it), however what I've written does seem a bit of a contradiction, will see if I can make it a bit clearer. Anyway, tanks very much.    Orian57    Talk   14:59 5 November 2009

Were you looking for, Les fables du milieu or something else? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  17:33, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Also "your spelling and grammar was of a oretty high standard" is a correct translation of the Middle Formicidaic phrase literally meaning "we want your tea." King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  17:47, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Lol oops? --ChiefjusticeDS 17:49, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

No I'm pretty sure its something like in medea res or something.    Orian57    Talk   03:31 8 November 2009

Thanks

 Voting For Godot  

The GlobalTourniquet says "Thanks!"   Thanks, <insert name here>, for ruining the pathos of my plight by voting for my featured article.

Thanks

Hey Chief, thanks for the review, I'm glad I got it reviewed at this early stage (although I'm not sure if you realised it wasn't finished?) as you've given me a lot to think about and some good ideas for direction and how to improve what I've written already. I suppose I should have emphasised that it was concept and format I was most interested in criticism of, I know the details are still lacking and humour is one of these details. Anyway, thanks for the honest appraisal and I'll try to implement it into the next draft :) --El Sid, the lazy one • parlez-vous franglais? 19:43, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

I figured you can't have been finished with it, but I find that if I review it with that mindset then I start allowing far too much for it, I once let an article get away with loads of errors because it wasn't finished, so now I review them all as though they are completed so the author knows where the article stands. Glad the review helped. Good luck with it. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:49, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Just popped by

Hey Chief. Just checking if everything is still here. Congrats on the Uncyclopedian of October thing. You deserved it. And now you are a knight of the potato shaped table. Upon checking the main page I noted someone wrote a nice piece there at the n00b of the month space. I really like it, but I don't know how to find out who wrote it. Can you maybe help me? --BlueSpiritGuy 21:03, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Mordillo wrote it, if you are going to offer him thanks then do so on your knees because he is pretty much the boss around here, he is probably even spying on this conversation as we speak. But seriously, yes Mordillo wrote it and congrats on NotM. Remember to let me know when you get back from your spell away, I still have that thing I need to do. Good to see you are still not dead. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:07, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

That thing? Oh yeah, I don't know what it is yet. But I'll let you know when I return from my sojourn. Yes I am still alive, barely, seeing that last week I had the privilege of attending ONE OF MR MALEMA'S LIVE SPEECHES. Still recovering --BlueSpiritGuy 21:18, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Hey, you're supposed to be gone until Nov. 14 or something, aren't you? Thought you could sneak back in without me noticing? Seriously, look forward to you being active again, and I'd love to hear one of Malema's speeches. I think we should start a fan club here or something. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:02, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

I am still gone... This is an electronic response. Guess I just missed you guys too much. Yes I also can't wait to be active again. I'll leave you a message when that happens. The fan club think sounds cool, but I think the net is overloaded with them already, anyway, I'm off again. Cheers Why, Cheers Chief, till we meet again... -BlueSpiritGuy 22:08, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Peeing on Pineapple

I'm going to Pee Review UnNews:Pineapple Is Most Suggestive Fruit but it's so short I know my review will be short. I want all mine to be counted as in depth. Is that a problem? Also I know who wrote it cuz Whyner figured it out. But the user posted under his IP so where do I put a note saying I Peed on his Pineapple? DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 23:54, November 5, 2009 (UTC)

Ultimately it is all optional, write as much as you feel is necessary to allow the user to improve on their article, I have seen reviews longer than the article they were written to help. I will obviously take into account the article's length when I judge the review but what I would suggest to you is that you try to aim for a paragraph per section, as a guideline. If the user posted under their IP deliberately then just use the IP talk page for it, if they did it accidentally use their user talk page. It doesn't really matter since most people will have a watch on the page anyway. In-depth reviews are sometimes not possible, but we tend to take more factors than length into account when we judge them, so as long as you are making some effort to help and be constructive you should be fine. --ChiefjusticeDS 00:03, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

You might want to have a glance at my own An Article Written by Somebody that Didn't Read How To Be Funny And Not Just Stupid: A Retrospective. Reviews can definitely be longer than the articles they're reviewing... pillow talk 00:33, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Or have a look at the majority of my reviews. I do tend to have longer reviews for longer articles, but some of my earlier reviews where significantly longer than the original article. Take this as an example. Pup

Ok thanks everybody! :) DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:07, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

DofE

Thanks for the PEE. I entirely agree about the repetition and the foreign visit thing. I'm trying to move it around so that all the foreign visiting is a Gold Award thing. But since each level of the DofE requires the same skills practised over different lengths of time it may not be possible. I've tried to make the community service thing go bronze - parentys serving you, silver other kids serving yopu, gold - the world serving you. I also altered the need to walk up mountains too as you were also spot on there.

I will try to spot the remaining typos (though this isn't something I have a good record on) and try to keep the tone consistent. The only thing I didn't quite get was the need to reference the real award - after all, the real award is split into 3 levels, each requiring physical, skill, expedition and community service, like the fictional one.--Sog1970 17:00, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Soggy, I know you've been trying very hard, but let's face reality: do you really think you're ever going to write an article good enough to be featured? For some people, no matter how hard they try, things like "Featured" and "Writer of the Month" are just beyond their ability. Have you thought about basket weaving? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  17:49, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Basket weaving may be beyond me. I was thinking maybe pottery class? Maybe I can find a nice TEFL teacher who can explain about commas and, what was that other thing - full stops.........--Sog1970 21:31, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Understand I wasn't insulting basket weaving. It's a noble, dedicated art. (I had to add that because I have a friend who has a degree in fiber arts). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:16, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

You can do a degree in fibre arts? That sounds difficult. I majored in drinking. --Sog1970 11:43, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Double Pee and "I'm Doing Less Pee Reviews Than You This Month!"

Before you tell me I shouldn't have done it, I've claimed two articles for Pee Review at the same time. But that's because both review requesters asked me to do it. Also I am not in competition to do more reviews than you this month; this month I'm trying to do less (I figure I can win that one). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:55, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

But dear Why, it's not quantity, but quality that matters. /me hugs Why? -- DameViktoria - (Contribs) - (Talk) - (Block log) 19:24, 6 Nov

Ah, how sweet. /me hugs Luvvy King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:45, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Preview Problem

In regard to my latest Pee Review, I didn't know what to do with it. It sounds as if most of the article were translated from a different language by Babel fish or some other computer translation program, or written by someone with a very limited command of English. On much of it I was guessing what was meant, so I don't know if my review was very helpful. I tried to do the best I could with it. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  06:13, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Basically, there isn't much you can do besides recommend that they submit the article to UN:PS, you can just try to emphasise the importance of using good English and going the extra mile to fix it if you aren't to sure of the language. If you are concerned about your in-depth review numbers then you should bare in mind that I do look at the articles before I check them in. Hope that helps. --ChiefjusticeDS 11:03, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad you look at the articles too. I thought about UN:PS, but in this case I don't see it as a matter of fixing spelling and grammar, but of completely rewriting the article. And as I said in the review, in many places I couldn't even tell what was intended, so wouldn't know how to fix it even in a rewrite. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  14:17, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

In that case, consider referring them to here where they can see if someone can translate it for them, or at least rewrite to a standard where they can take it on to UN:PS. They might also find an uncyclopedia for their own language there. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:37, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Another place to go is straight to Siddartha-wolf's page. He has done significant work on FO and he may be able to give advice on what can help. There may also be an issue in not just translating to English but also in humour translation as well. He may be better off sharpening his wit in mother tongue first and then coming back to English later. Pup

Thanks for both of your advice (is that advices or advici?) I'll tell the reviewee about those options now. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  02:38, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

A further tiny request

Could I get you to do a proof-read on Street Fighter for me. I have been a little sloppy with my grammar in it, and there have been a number of users going in and tweaking bits and pieces, and changing to US English. I have a tendency to be a little grammar blind on my own stuff, and I'd appreciate the help. Pup

Sure thing, I can do it now, would you rather UK or US English? --ChiefjusticeDS 23:36, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

US for the simple factor that I wrote in AU and then someone translated to predominantly US. Having said that the game is Japanese translated to US English and marketed at US markets, so it does seem more fitting. Pup

OK, I'll refrain from changing spellings to UK English. --ChiefjusticeDS 23:49, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Right I have finished proofreading now. Sorry it took so long. --ChiefjusticeDS 14:30, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate the way you make me look nitelligent. Pup

Pee Review follow-up

Hey Chief. I took your advice about HowTo:Fish. (link here) Or at least I think I did. Could you tell me if I've tuned it up like you said? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 02:30, Nov 8 2009

You can tune a piano, but you can't tune a fish. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  06:14, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Quiet, you. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 06:51, Nov 8 2009

Yeah that's a lot better, just take another quick look through and if you are wanting me to be really picky, space the pictures out a bit more. Otherwise you have made a lot of improvements. Well done. --ChiefjusticeDS 11:07, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

Why can't you tune a fish? Surely a few electrodes to the gills as they'll be sininging like you want them? And if not, dinner is served. It's a win-win.    Orian57    Talk   12:36 9 November 2009

Hi

I don't stop by often enough and just say hi and good job, so hi, and good job. I really appreciate the way you have taken on the PQ. It may sound selfish but as much as I enjoy doing the reviews, I prefer to write, which lead to the one and only almost reprimand for a review. But by the same token I feel horrible when I see that escalate out of control. Knowing that I have you to lean on to get rid of a bulk of those reviews is fantastic, and I can't thank you enough. So, thanks.

I'm now going to write something random and purile somewhere to get this wierd taste out of my mouth. Oh look, I actually wrote it here! Pup

It's no problem, here to help, I always appreciate your help when you are around to give it. Nice job with conservation week by the way, I noticed that you were "winning" as it were. Appreciate the thanks, I'll do my best to keep it up. --ChiefjusticeDS 15:28, November 8, 2009 (UTC)

So I was just wondering...

You're a big fan of Daddy, There's a Zombie in the Garden, right? Well I'm asking because I'm really scratching for ideas and I was sort of wondering what your feelings towards a Daddy, There's STILL a Zombie in the Garden, and by nescessity a Daddy, the Zombie is BACK in the Garden, might be. You know because the best known Zombie movies were a trilogy (and another one). To clarify I am being mostly serious.    Orian57    Talk   06:42 9 November 2009

I think that if you could pull off a second one that can stand on it's own but also provides some extra amusement for people who have read the first one then a sequel would be a good thing. The main problems with sequels is that fans just want the first one again, but different and that is difficult to do. I would be in favour of you trying another one, as you won't know how good you are at the whole sequel thing until you give it a go. The UnBook certainly has the potential for it, there is a lot more that you can do with the idea. Hope that all makes some sense. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:34, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

OK, I shall work on that.    Orian57    Talk   12:24 9 November 2009

Cheers to the Chief

Thanks for sorting out the Final Fantasy Football pee, I was building up to hassling some admins about that. Black Flamingo 10:36, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Wow, you were gonna do what? Harrass them over something so menial, you'd have been banned forever. Also hello, /me tips hat/    Orian57    Talk   12:33 9 November 2009

Yeah I'm always leaving polite messages on talk pages, I'm just crazy like that. I don't give a damn. Look at me, I'm doing it again. Also, hello to you too (I would tip my hat if I had one) Black Flamingo 12:41, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Oh I don't have a hat either. In fact I'm not wearing much of anything. But that's the beauty of the internet you can lie about what your wearing and noby knows the horrible truth of it.    Orian57    Talk   12:59 9 November 2009

Did you know a webcam can be activiated remotely without the person who's being watched even knowing about? I see you're right--you aren't wearing a hat. (Note to paranoids: I'm not watching you nor anything but my own typing. I have no idea how to activate someone else's webcam). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  21:22, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

0_0 Big Brother is watching. Or somebody is anyway. Probably politically incorrect to call it big brother now, it's sexually exclusive.    Orian57    Talk   22:48 9 November 2009

And "big" is sizeism and/or ageism. I think the politically correct phrase now is "Everybody is watching you." By the way, did you see this? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  23:01, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

I did as it happens. I really hate how he quoted teh typo aswell. The cock.    Orian57    Talk   23:30 9 November 2009

I fixed it for you. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  21:26, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry Orian I'm not watching you, at least not right now. --ChiefjusticeDS 23:06, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

But Daddy! The social workers said they'd take me away again if you stopped watching me. Unless I'm getting ready for bed, if you watch me then they'll arest you and you'll go to prison for five years but be out in ten -- it's political correctness gone mad, Grandma says.    Orian57    Talk   23:30 9 November 2009

It truly is a web of lies - a world wide web of lies. Black Flamingo 13:31, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Did somebody mention my name? Of course I left teh typo aswell. It's what makes the quote. Pup

Oh right, I was wondering who this Noby was, thought it was another in-joke. Black Flamingo 08:15, November 10, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

FROM THE DESK OF GUILDENSTERNENSTEIN

Thank you for supporting my recently featured article.

Your support is greatly appreciated.

—Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 16:31, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

---

Thanks

 There is a featured article beyond all featured articles known to man...  

At the sign-post up ahead... You have just crossed over into... the Thank You Zone. The Global Tourniquet says "Thanks for voting for my featured article"

HowTo from Why?

Chiefster, I did some work on HowTo:Be Homeless in America based on your suggestions. I moved a pic around so I didn't have one right on top of another, and also did some rewording to try to change the tone from How instead of Why? I appreciate your suggestions, as it helped me change the focus with just a few rewordings here and there. If you have a chance and could look it over briefly, I'd really appreciate it. Also I know you scored it as possibly featurable before, so, um, er.... King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:36, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll take a look. I have Puppy's article to look at first but then I will do your one. I've not been around as much as I'd like to be so far this week, but I plan to be on a fair bit this evening, so yeah, I'll take a look. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:52, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate it. I'm not asking for a whole review or any such thing, just "yeah, I like this part better, but you still have a problem over there" sort of thing. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:08, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I look forward to your comments! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:08, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Why Why? is being a jerk

Chiefster, I appreciate your comment on my gloating. I did admit I was gloating, and furthermore this goes back much further than the current discussion. I approached an administrator four weeks ago about this issue and a related one. In one case, he said "discussion closed" and refused to discuss it with me, and on the other he wouldn't answer my question or give me suggestions on what I could do, even after my post had been there for four weeks. I tried other options, and got no results.

Some people here tend to have a "we can do whatever the hell we want" attitude, but site policy and applicable laws say otherwise. I like this site, and respect you; but as much as people like to think this site is separate from the real world, it isn't. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  22:47, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I'm not trying to oppose your view on it at all. I'm completely prepared to accept what Sansse said because she is in charge. I just think that we won't write anything funny if we are at each others throats. I am all for the upkeep of the law of whatever region you happen to be in, and I fully endorse the idea that laws should be applicable to this site. I also understand why people are angry on both sides of the argument. My comment wasn't to condemn what you were arguing at all, I respectfully disagree, but I'm also prepared to accept what the decision of those better equipped to deal with the situation is. I respect you as a user and the last thing I want is to see you and Colin banned for arguing over an already closed issue. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:55, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Well, as I posted on the discussion, I deserved your comment and your "slap." A month's frustration kind of came out at once. I should have said something like "I respect Sannse's decision to remove the image in support of Wikia policy"--no, that still would have been gloating. Oh well. Right now I'm more concerned about a user being banned for deleting other people's posts in the discussion. I'm hoping that was an accident (no, not talking about you or me). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  23:06, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Addition: If you'll notice on the page, it appears that the deletions were accidents. And as to the continuing discussion that's "over," you'll notice admins are now posting comments. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  23:19, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

I do see, in fact I'm going to go to work now to avoid getting embroiled in it any further. Perhaps when I come back tomorrow morning everyone will have reached the sitting and sulking stage. --ChiefjusticeDS 23:22, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. I have no intention of joining the IRC discussion just so I don't get myself heated again and say something even stupider. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  23:31, November 11, 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I should avoid my own talk page... Pup

This is an electronic response. User:BlueSpiritGuy is not here. And thanks to my watchlist being broken, I'm obliviously avoiding everyone's talk pages. From the looks of things I've missed out on one or two fiery conversations. --BlueSpiritGuy 19:19, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Fiery, but not between us, I still love Why and Puppy as much as I did before, after all we are just one big dysfunctional Uncyc family... But not in a weird way. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Again, this is an electronic response. User:BlueSpiritGuy is still not here. Yeah I figured that much. If you have problems with law and disorder, I can always go vigilante style on someone's ass. Just go tell Wikus. Must say I cannot wait to return, but the end is in sight. Anyway, time to go sabbaticamalize. Be safe. If not, at least enjoy whatever activity it is that is unsafe. --BlueSpiritGuy 21:26, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

I was blocked for an hour for "gloating" and because I hadn't been blocked before. So I got what I deserved. But now I've found Sophia and the Church of Uncyclopedia and have taken on the life of a humble rector. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  05:07, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Oh you're a Father now? I have missed a lot, Your Holiness. We'll see how long that lasts, as I plan somewhere in the not so nearby future to complete my unBook: Dienetics: The modern science of physical Wealth (A handbook of dietetic procedure). After that a swarm of Uncyclopedia celebrities are bound to start a religion, unScientology. If they don't I will. Then we will grow in numbers like bacteria. --BlueSpiritGuy 07:51, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Questions on this...

Which given it's a review of my work you should have been expecting. I have had a couple of thoughts, and a few slight changes to what I would be looking to do here.

1. "Provide more time for the reader to see everything that is in (the error messages)" It was partially due to the limitations that I had in putting this together, and partially due to trying to adjust timing to get it spot on. I rushed this slightly as I was trying to get a couple of things into PLS at the same time, so this is not perfect from that perspective. The best solution I have come up with so far is actually a three fold thing.

1. Have multiple images coming up in different parts of the screen, so that the old error messages stay there when a new error message comes up. (The only problem here is that the images at the back will still be the same colour scheme, unless I do some really complicated stuff with the gifs to have it go back to "background" pop-up message.)
2. Set these up as a {{click-inline}} (similar to my signature) so that when someone does click on the image while they are trying to click on a link it stays on same page or navigates to a different part of the document
3. Have the background stuff as a sub-page that you can navigate to from the main page, so that if you follow the link the error messages disappear and you have a more in-depth article about Microsoft KB and error messages, etc.

1. "The main problem that I found was that once you get past (the error messages) there isn't much else here" And that is because the bulk of the humour was really in the error messages and the feel of the knowledge base. If I do look at the above potential solution, this of course means that we get deeper into the text, and that alone doesn't really hold a strong article. There is a joke hidden amongst the hex stuff that you may not have picked up, the Latin is fairly accurate as to where that links to, and there are a couple of other little things in there, but it would need to be significantly longer to be treated as an article of it's own merit. So what I'm thinking is to combine Windows Error and a few other Microsoft related articles together with this one, and have them all redirect to here. Even half thinking about incorporating Microsoft and Windows into this as well.

As for the squeezing at the top, I've made a couple of modifications. I think that should be a little better on that aspect (and I also need to do something to improve the look of it on internet explorer as well).

What do you think? Pup

I think what you have come up with is pretty good. While I was writing the review I kept having to remind myself of the constraints that the different format places upon you, so I apologise if it came out sounding harsh. I also did realise that there was a lot more behind the error messages than met the eye, but I still think it needed more, because as funny as the error messages were, they didn't really do enough for me on their own. I think your ideas are all pretty good, and the only thing I would caution against is losing the current feel of the article, which is excellent. Like I said in the review, I don't think this feel should be sacrificed for greater depth, what I think would be best is some kind of medium between the two, perhaps providing an appearance of depth in a similar way to this would be most advantageous. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:52, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review Please

My article Claire Redfield hasnt been review yet, mind doing it if you have the time and if it hasnt already been taken. Heres the Link. Thanks!---   TALK What's it like to be a heretic? 17:01, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Looks like someone else has gotten that one, feel free to let me know if you have any more difficulties. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:03, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Oh actually, it looks like you linked to an old review. I'll get right on the current version. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:07, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, how was my last review?--WILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 20:17, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Much much better. Keep it up. I'm sorry it will probably be tomorrow when I get round to reviewing your current one. I'm on shift change at work right now so not really in any sort of shape to review. Will still get to it though. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:14, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I can wait :)--WILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 02:05, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

That's a really cool sig, by the way... Pup

Thanks Dude--WILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 04:26, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Guess who's back

My sojourn has finally come to an end. Without getting shot. I am again available to do all kinds of things on uncyclopedia, meaning I am very productive and helping to better everything for man kind.--BlueSpiritGuy 09:50, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

I also added two little paragraphs to ol' Julius Malema. --BlueSpiritGuy 10:14, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back, and now that sad moment approaches us, where you must bid farewell to your n00bship forever, fortunately Orian won't be attending the ceremony so it will be a lot less painful than it would otherwise be. However I wish to see how Mr Malema does on VFH before I graduate you. I can nom the article if you want, just say the word. Good to see you back. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:04, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Wow, graduating? Has it been that long already? Feels like only two months ago I took my first step on uncyclopedia. Time flies. Do you think Malema is ready for something like VFH? --BlueSpiritGuy 19:40, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

I'd say that it is ready when you feel comfortable with it and when you are happy with the work you have done on it. If nothing else VFH is a reasonable place to get community feedback on work, so it is completely up to you. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:47, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Mmmm. I see. I would like to add some more pictures to the second half of the article some day, but I think it is ready. It's come a long way and thanks to you and WhyGuy it is much better than I could have ever done it on my own. So you've got a green light from me. Thanks. --BlueSpiritGuy 20:31, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

I'll give it a day in case you come up with anything at the last minute. But keep a weather eye out for it in that case. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:50, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

I was just gonna ask for a day to just get things in order and prepare myself emotionally. You must be a mind reader of sort.--BlueSpiritGuy 20:55, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Of course I'm not, and no, I think you should ask Why? before you do anything like that, I should think he will need to get some sandpaper and a chicken just to avoid serious injury. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:07, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

A chicken! Why? didn't I think of that. Excuse me, I've got to go... uhh... Yes. I've gotta go -BlueSpiritGuy 21:52, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

So now I'm talking sandpaper and chicken? Say what? User:Why do I need to provide this?/sig7 16:28, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and Questions

First off I want to thank you for your review. I'm not dissapointed in the score as this was one of my first articles made, actually it was my third Other than First!!!! and Brute and I never did read the HTBFANJS (even today I read like 50%). However, I have some last questions to ask you. Here they are:

1. You said to cut back on the nonsense. Do you mean like cut back on made up stuff or something like this: Having been the star of both Resident Evil 2 and Resident Evil: Code Veronica (as seen above), naturally she was going to star in Resident Evil: Extinction. That was before she realized that nearly none of it related to the game, and told them to fuck off. Thus, she was replaced by not-nearly as hot Ali Larter

2. What are somethings I should keep and what are somethings I should best get rid of? (except Claire adopting Sherry as I think that should stick because the girl is an orphan and Claire is like a mother figure to her, and the band thing, for comical reasons)

3. Should I keep the video or replace it with a funny paragraph?

You can answer them on my talk page so it doesnt take much room on yours. Mine need s to be filled anyways. Again thanks for the review.--WILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 05:18, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

This

not being here thing is hard work. Pup

I know what you mean. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:19, November 16, 2009 (UTC)

Vote

Chiefus Justicus DS...us. Get your vote in on my Alec Baldwin article, my british brother. It doesn't feel right having one of my articles fail to get featured without you having a chance to vote on it.--Matfen 11:27, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

Have I got an opportunity for you to help your community

Hey mate, Did you want to volunteer for judging this? I think your skill at PEEing rapidly would put you in good stead. Pup

Done it, congrats again by the way. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:40, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Love your work Pup

My two cents

About Suryavarman II, did you check the difference? The guy totally rewrote it, and his version is way better than the old one. For an explanation of the article, check Hyperbole's vote at the now-closed VFD nomination. Colonization Week rewrites don't need to be feature material, as long as they're a sufficient improvement. Just my two cents. Don't mean to be intrusive, just thought the article was funny. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 20:03, 23 November 2009

Again, I don't mean to butt in, but did you check the different revisions of Robert De Niro all right? —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 20:08, 23 November 2009

I couldn't find the VFD vote, I had a hunt round for it but must have missed it. Having never played the game I couldn't see much of an improvement, but I will change that now. My apologies, I didn't realise that was the idea behind the article and since the VFD tag was added by an IP I figured the VFD vote may just have been binned (especially after being unable to find it). Cheers for spotting that. On De Niro, you are correct, that is my error again, probably for cutting a corner and checking by looking at this. Thanks for pointing those out, I'll be more careful.--ChiefjusticeDS 20:17, November 23, 2009 (UTC)

Family Ninjastar

I actually came here to give you a Ninjastar for checking the articles in Conversation Week, but then realized you hadn't gotten this. So consider yourself double starred! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  04:38, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Much appreciated, although I can't really take much credit for my n00b's work. Speaking of which, what would your feelings be on a Julius Malema VFH run? Thanks again. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:19, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

I think you can take credit with all the help and work you've put in. --BlueSpiritGuy 12:00, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Hey hey hey

First off:

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

I kinda have to give you that because your review on The Pirate Bay was really good. Very comprehensive and really made me rethink the direction the article was going.

The other reason for posting here is that I wanted to ask you to give the new page a quick once-over and tell me whether you think I resolved the problems that you pointed out in your review. From what I gathered, the definition of The Pirate Bay was a bit unclear; I was trying to establish it as an actual place but some of my jokes painted it as an organization. To that end I decided to switch the focus of the article over to the organization slant, instead of the actual location idea. I carefully considered your review and made all the changes I thought were necessary, and I think I did well; the problem is that I'm not sure if it's, well, funny. I think it's well-written and rather clever but I don't know whether others who read it will find it amusing. I suppose that's the other thing I would like you to check out. I'm not asking for another big review or anything; I just want your professional opinion on the two issues I've described to you. Thanks for everything! --Andorin Kato 12:32, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

OK. First off my apologies for not getting back to you sooner, there have been several reasons for this, primarily that my internet has been very intermittent for the last few days. I agree that your article is well written and I also agree that it is presented with infinitely more clarity than it was before. As I read, everything seemed to fall into place much and by the end I not only had a clearer picture of what you intended the Pirate Bay be seen as, but also taht it was true enough to real life to be an excellent satirisation. You raise the question that it may not be funny after these changes, I think that that is an understandable concern, but one that is not justified, the article may not have any incredibly overt jokes or major laugh out loud points but is still amusing and enjoyable to read. My recommendation would be to go through again and try to liven a couple of the sections up, as you have now gone for a structure that emphasises the clarity of your idea yoou do get bogged down in explanations at times. If you can liven these parts up then your article will be better for it. Hope this helps. --ChiefjusticeDS 10:29, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

I am still here

Hey chief. It's been going a bit hectic lately, but I am still here! And I think I've finished Mister Malema once and for all (for now). --BlueSpiritGuy 14:52, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to do a bit of proofreading, then if Chiefster doesn't nominate it for VFH I will. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:17, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Also for a take on Malema and Madonna, you might want to see this. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:25, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

VFH King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:22, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Think tank

There is something I need your help on. I don't get to LAN that often, and when I do it seldom happens that everyone wants to play Left 4 Dead. Everyone's still doing the DOTA thing. Note the dismay in my tone of voice when I say DOTA. Anyway, understandably so, I very seldom get the opportunity to play with the tank zombie. I know that you have to attack the survivors to remain in control of the tank. So here's my question: Does a throw and a hit with a piece of large whatever it is the tank picks up and throws count as a successful attack, i.e. does it reset that counter thingy? I don't want to waste a precious tank opportunity testing this, but I really am curious. --BlueSpiritGuy 21:55, November 28, 2009 (UTC)

When you play as the tank in Left 4 Dead the meter that appears is referred to as the patience meter, this depletes when the tank is unable to see the survivors directly or is a reasonable distance from them, essentially when the survivors are out of range of a rock throw. If the tank is able to pick up and throw a rock that then hits a survivor they should not be placed under pressure by the patience meter since they are attacking the survivors. Rock throwing is a difficult move to pull off effectively since the tank has to stand still to pick up the rock and often they are in full view of the survivors when they do this, my advice is to just get in amongst the survivors and hammer the attack button. Hope that answers your question. --ChiefjusticeDS 10:34, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does! Thank you. I'm asking because last time I let the patience meter run out. I don't like rock throwing, but wanted to know if it could be used as a last resort to save the meter. Now I know. Thanks man!-BlueSpiritGuy 14:26, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Shucks!

Hot diggity, boy! You caught that fish so good that Necropaxx is gonna thank you! "Thank you." ~ Necropaxx

• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 05:46, Nov 29 2009

WHAT IS THE MEANING OF THIS OUTRAGE?!

"It's good to see you helping out?" What the DEUCE is that supposed to mean!?!? ARE YOU INSINUATING THAT I DON'T HELP OUT?!?!!? HOW DARE YOU!? Harrumph a thousand times in your direction! Harrumph indeed! • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 22:17, Nov 29 2009

I meant on PEE review. I only have a small box so I couldn't be more specific and it was your first review this month. If you are upset then may I suggest you blame Mordillo? It always works for me. If that doesn't help and you would like to discuss this further then perhaps you would like to step outside with me for a quick joust in order to settle the matter? --ChiefjusticeDS 22:26, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

A joust. Very well. Choose your seconds, for surely you will be defeated at our first meeting! Huzzah! Also yes I am pretty lazy when it comes to peeing. I was even late on finishing the review. :P • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Monday, 00:09, Nov 30 2009

Will you both stop stuffing around and help out around here? Pup

Carnies

Thanks for the review. I'm going to give it a look over later in the week based upon advice from both you and the first Pee Reviewer, fix it up a bit, and see what you think. And you don't need to apologize for my long wait on a review--you're not the only guy capable of doing Pees, you know. Anyway, thanks for the review. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 02:46, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

Dog Pee

Hey Chief, your review of Dog was great, very helpful indeed. I simply had to come here and thank the shit out of you. --Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 08:51, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

From a Nazi

Hey Chief. Thanks for the revert. I guess one of Julius' goons finally saw the article. I'll let you know when they come to attack me at my home.--BlueSpiritGuy 07:12, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem, I'll keep an eye on stuff for you, on here at least. In real life I'm afraid I can only imagine. It's doing well on VFH though. Looks like you will get your first feature. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:35, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about that, Chief

Sorry I jumped the gun on updating the Pee Review list. As it was my first day as a Steel Kidney, I should have asked first. I'll be more cautious in the future. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:03, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

No worries, it was just bad luck more than anything else. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:06, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

During the last month I've been looking over several of your reviews of reviews, i.e. whether a review's in depth or not. I think I've got a good handle on it, but could use your guidance in the beginning. Any suggestions? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:09, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

To be honest just because you are a Steel Kidney doesn't mean that you need to start checking the list immediately, I have a pretty good handle on it right now. My recommendation is that you stick with your reviews for a few more months before turning to the list as it is ultimately just one more job to do, and incredibly easy to do wrong and break. I would appreciate you taking a look at the reviewed list and, if you see someone giving out poor reviews, have a kind word with them on their talk page and instruct them in the ways of PEE. That would greatly speed up the checking end of the process. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:49, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Sure I can do that. I just thought that you're having to do a lot of work going over all the reviews, and wanted to help. But if I can best help leaving a "kind word" on talk pages, I'll do that. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:55, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

The checking side ages you horribly and involves averaging things. You are welcome to get involved if you want to help out, my feeling was that you have a lot of talent for both writing and doing reviews, whereas I prefer not to overburden myself with the writing, so I have plenty of time to do the checking, whereas you will have more time for doing more reviews, which is good and writing more articles, which is better. Congratulations on your third feature by the way (or 2 and a 1/2 if you prefer). If you really want to get involved in checking the list just let me know. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:00, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

I guess keep doing what you're doing and I'll keep doing what I'm doing! Later, I might want to try doing one or two just to get the hang of it, but for now, we can keep it as it is. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:05, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Sure, you can check some of mine in in that case, as that involves doing everything, and also means I'm not self-checking. When you want to have a go just put out the Chief signal, and I will crash through the nearest fragile partition. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:07, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks <insert name here> for promoting homelessness

King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:33, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Reviewed--yes or no?

I asserted my incredibly awesome power as a Steel Kidney by letting the fine Puppy know about this. The specialty template isn't moving a reviewed article to the Reviewed section. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:55, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Way ahead of you. I checked it in anyway though.--ChiefjusticeDS 21:04, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

You have a habit of being ahead of me, don't you? Me pouts. (Seriously, Puppy just posted it's number one on his list of things to fix). King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  21:08, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

I've half fixeded it. I'll work on it more tonight. Pup

Fixededed! Pup

Thank you for the Pee Review

Your comments were most helpful and will certainly help me to improve the article. Thank you. My Tree! 08:31, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Before you do anything improper...

UN:LEGAL Legal Department Expert in Criminal Law “Crede Quia Absurdum Est.” ~ Oscar Wilde

...you should be aware that this user is an Expert in Criminal Activities Law of the Uncyclopedia Legal Department. He/She/It/They/E has the power(s) to advise the Department on any and all illegal and/or suspect activities to a reasonable extent. Some say he/she/it/they/e does not have an actual degree, and has gained his/her/its/their/es reputation by stealing purses from old trannies, but those people have already "regretted" their opinion. Do you think you would like to join those people? – Preceding unsigned comment added by Why do I need to provide this? (talk • contribs)

Is it like being in the Freemasons? They knocked me back the other year... said my knees were too knobbly. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:37, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

It's exactly like the Freemasons, only it's not free, and it's not masons. Other than those two things, it's nothing like it. Also who exposed my identity? I was trying to remain mysterious. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  00:42, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Conservation week

Say Chief, I was wondering if you can, when you get the time, finalize the CW page (write down the winners and archive the whole thing) so I can lock it down until next time? ~ 23:54, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Sure, shall I just write it at the bottom of the page? --ChiefjusticeDS 23:55, December 2, 2009 (UTC)

Done, sorry forgot to do that. --ChiefjusticeDS 00:04, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

No no, thank you. You have an awsome SLA. Do you do Bar Mitzvas? ~ 00:06, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

I do all sorts, just put out the Chief signal and I will be there, crashing through the nearest fragile non load-bearing wall. --ChiefjusticeDS 00:14, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review or Rewrite?

An IP who apparently did one edit on Joy Luck Club requested a Pee Review, but actually seemed to be requesting the article be rewritten. See the comment and my response here. Should this stay up for a Pee Review? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  01:19, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Nicely spotted, I checked out the history and that IP had edited the page once, and that wasn't to do much. I removed it and stuck a rewrite tag on the page. You can do more if you feel that is necessary. Thanks. --ChiefjusticeDS 01:28, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Carnies redux

I revised my article on Carnies according to your advice. I shortened and sweetened the sections on Soviet Rule and Carnies today, which I felt was the main problem. Would you mind taking a quick look, and giving me any more advice/criticism you have to give? Thanks. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 01:26, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

I will do, I have to sleep first though, so I'll take a look tomorrow. --ChiefjusticeDS 01:28, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

That has essentially solved the problem, it feels a lot less laborious to get through those sections now, and, while I still feel the rest of the article is better, it is now far more succinct. Since that was my major criticism any other problems are fairly minor and you have sorted them. I would have to sit and look at your article for quite a while to identify any further difficulties, which kind of defeated the point. The only real problem is that something tells me the article will not be received too well by the community, some aspects of the humour seem to be suited to a particular type of humour, but I have been wrong before. Well done. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:32, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. The prior Pee Review I got was also very positive, so hopefully it fairs well. I'll nominate it tomorrow, I think. Thanks.

Also, I feel you deserve one of these from me:

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

For both reviewing a good deal of my articles, and for being two reviews away from being the number one Peer of all time. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 06:56, December 4, 2009 (UTC)

Please check my work

Chiefster, please check this and see if this is the sort of thing you'd like me to do in regard to Pee Reviews that might fall short of modern industrial standards. Happy editing! King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  08:09, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

That's excellent, exactly the sort of thing I was hoping for. --ChiefjusticeDS 09:43, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Glad to help. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:49, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Good news--the reviewer was very nice, and made some significant expansions! (I thanked the user here) King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:08, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Hey Chief

I think you're using an old version of the QVFD script. It's available as a gadget now, in your preferences. If you blank the relevant part in your js page and enable it as a gadget, it will automatically update when changes are made to the MediaWiki page. The same applies for ban patrol. Cheers! —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:12, 3 December 2009

Ah OK, I will get rid of the one I currently have then. --ChiefjusticeDS 16:14, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

The new ones aren't appearing and my Ban Patrol one went missing this morning. Do you have any idea why? --ChiefjusticeDS 16:18, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. I've had this problem too. My internet keeps loading, but never comes to the point where it loads my enabled gadgets. Maybe it's something with the Wikia servers again. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:22, 3 December 2009

What browser are you using? As my ban patrol one works in firefox, but not chrome. --ChiefjusticeDS 16:24, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Firefox. Maybe my internet is just really slow today. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:27, 3 December 2009

The ban patrol one works in firefox when I don't have the qvfd one on my .js page. Weird. --ChiefjusticeDS 16:28, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

You should try Netscape Navigator version 1.2. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  18:56, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Hey Chief, Spang fixed it. It should work properly now. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 23:06, 3 December 2009

You are perilously close to the edge of urinary doom

Do you realize that, right now, you're only two Pee Reviews behind UU? You know, the person who's a admin? One with real power? And you're threatening his lead? If you get one more Pee Review than UU, or even tie, God help you. I think you'd better quit for the month right now. Also this has nothing to do with your having one more Pee Review so far this month. I'm not in competition. Really. (Seriously, I'm not in competition; I really hope to have less time editing here, because that means I'll have gotten more work. Damn Recession!) King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:48, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunate. Speaking of doom, we have nobody for this month's RotM! We have gone through everyone. Well at least it's one less thing to archive on new year's day. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:56, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought about that too. The most active reviewers (those who did at least one review last month) who haven't won RotM have done like 8 or 9 reviews total--or less. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:04, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

We should just nominate UU. I think that's usual practice at times like this. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:07, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Check your user page. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:20, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

A note from the Uncyclopedian Legal Department

A Note From the Uncyclopedia Legal Department I see that you would like to become part of the department, due to your unlegal use of the userboxen. Perhaps you'd like to register here and create a unique title? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  20:06, 4 December 2009, Serjeant-at-law

Yes, I know I'm the one who did it; but until now I didn't know where to officially sign up. What a putz I am. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  01:00, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

I nominated Carnies

Forgot to mention it earlier, so I thought I'd do so now. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 06:06, December 5, 2009 (UTC)

Is my speeling worng?

Pup

Belated Thank you

I have made some edits with the use of the suggestions you gave me in the review of UnBooks: My unusual relationship with a volley ball by the name of Wilson I am putting it through it's second review now if you would be so kind to have a look whenever you get a chance.

Thanks! Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 10:28, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a look tomorrow. I'm afraid I've been busy all weekend so haven't had a chance. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:43, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

No rush :) Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 06:26, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Cheers!

---

YOUR REGISTRATION WAS SUCCESSFUL

In accordance with the Uncyclopedia Legal Department, I hereby verify your membership. You are now legally official and stuff.  ^{23:10, December 6, 2009 (UTC)}

~ Zana Dark, Head of Department  

---

Thanks a lot!

You voted to make H1N1 a front-page story! Exposing millions to fear and spreading paranoia! And now the story has mutated! Misinformation everywhere! ...thanks a lot!!!

Slithy Tove 00:50, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again Chief!

Superb review! I understand completely what you mean and will put those last changes into effect soon! With regards to the island image I was refering to the painful torture of living on the island which compares to grating away at your forehead with a cheesegrater which is slow and painful.

Thanks you for helping me perfect this :).

Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 13:26, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

And now, a prestigious award

This here is an award not bandied about lightly on this benighted website. This here is something to be worn with pride. This here is for racing up the pee charts with positively indecent haste. It is also for continuing to review after winning RotM, and also for continuing to review while checking the list, two things I have rarely, if ever, seen. This, in other words, is for extremely solid work, and should be accepted with more than a tinge of pride. Huge kudos to you Chief! --UU - natter 13:37, Dec 7

Feather in Your Cap Award

This person has done something very helpful for Uncyclopedia, and thus is deserving of a Feather in their Cap. Respect this person.

---

Wow. Not that you don't deserve it, but wow. Why didn't you get this sooner? • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 10:30, Dec 12 2009

And now for a not necessarily completely different award

ChiefjusticeDS has now peed in depth on 125 articles, making him Uncyclopedia's most peeingest reviewer based on verified Pee Reviews. This swirling ninjastar recognizes a user that is constantly working to improve Uncyclopedia, but also has a hypnotic effect of making the recipient desire to keep on peeing. Given this date of December 7, 2009 (UTC) -- WHY???, RotM and Serjeant-at-Law, Uncylopedia Legal Department

Vote (again)

Hi chief,! Do you mind voting on my Fast and Furious article on VFH. An IP's only contribution on Uncyc was to vote against it, so it must be bad. thnx --Matfen 17:04, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review Records

I took the liberty of moving a number of Fresh Stains into Retirees (the page says if they didn't do a review last month, they join the smelly retirees). Also I was wondering, has Hiatus Hernia done five quality Pee Reviews now? If so, we can add her to Fresh Stains and put a template on her page. I don't know an easy way to check earlier than November--do you? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  07:08, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

We don't add people into PEEing, they ask and then we consider them and then myself or UU will dredge through the completed reviews to find the ones relevant. Also Hiatus Hernia is not currently eligible for PEEing membership having completed only 4 in-depth reviews, if she gets to around 8 or 9 and she hasn't put in a membership request I will go asking, but we cannot force membership either way, if she wants in get her to put a membership request on the committee page and I will take a look. --ChiefjusticeDS 09:25, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

I've been meaning to update that retirees time specification thing - Boomer put it in place way back when, and I don't think it applies necessarily. Some folk may not have reviewed in a little while, but are still active and may well review at any time. But others are obviously gone and not coming back any time soon. I think it's more a matter for discretion than a set length of time. Just thought I'd mention it. --UU - natter 11:03, Dec 11

All right, appreciate it. I just noticed it said one month, which I figured was an incentive for people to stay current. I've noticed that some users do one review a month, which I figured was to keep current, so thought the incentive might be working. But if you're going to change it, then I'll go by what it's changed to. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  19:56, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Finishing touches

Hey chief thanks again so much for leading me in the desired direction with my article. I have gone over those niggling little issues and followed your suggestions, but I dont feel it necessary to put it through a whole review again. Could you just perhaps take one last glance at it and tell me if you feel its there yet and offer some suggestions on the last changes?

Thanks chief you rock.

Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 09:30, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

I promise I'm not ignoring you, but I've had a hectic few days, I'll get back to you on this soon though. --ChiefjusticeDS 00:11, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

A fast and Furious thanks

It matters not

Thank you for your helpful review of Matter. I have made a number of changes to the article based on your comments. (Along with a few minor sentence additions and changes).

• A number of being drunk references have been removed. As far as I can tell, those that remain are essential for other reasons in their section.
• I have corrected spelling mistakes and some grammatical errors (with the help from the Guide to good English in the Concise Oxford English Dictionary. (My original "from drunken experience" sentences remain in the same format, as they were grammatically acceptable in the first place, and broken down in the way I intended them to be read).
• I have replaced several of the unnecessary jokes with links.
• The first picture has been decreased in size.

The two images in the "Classical States of Matter" section, however, I have not changed. The main reason for this is that any further resizing or spreading out of these images still results in the same issue or worse (some of which cause images to span sections, which I believe to be less tidy). Also, this issue does not occur on a widescreen monitor if the window is at full width, but I still think it is the least objectionable format. If you have another idea about this, please let me know.

I currently have no other ideas for expanding the "Classical States" section that do not deter from what is already there. (If I had, this could actually help solve the formatting above).SuperBario 20:05, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

Bob teh sperm

I got to say, this is the first time I see brown in the pee template.. Anyway, could you put it up for deletion, please? I want to see how many Delete votes will it get. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME • 03:16 • Sunday, 13-12-2009

Are you certain? Deletion is very radical, and there are better reasons to put something on VFD. I would much rather you work to improve it or stick a rewrite tag on it, as it has definite potential. I apologise for the low score but, in my view, the article could be much better than it is. I hope you do carry on working at it. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:18, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I'd vote Strong Keep on it on VFD, although I'd vote against it on VFH. And I suspect that a plurality of Uncyclopedians feel that way. There's such a thing as a pretty-good-but-not-great article, and I think Bob the sperm is an example. pillow talk 06:33, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Again going into the VFH isn't and shouldn't be the epicenter of your writing. It should be your level of fun - did you enjoy writing it? Than why do you want to delete it? Pee review as well should be another opinion of what could be improved - and not an indication of whether or not it should be deleted (which I don't think was Chief's intention at all). Personal example -I thought this was a good VFH candidate and it was massacared. I was a bit pissed off, but the thought of deleting it never crossed my mind because I had a great time writing it (and photographing it as well). Last but not least, VFD should be used as a testing ground. What if will get deleted? What did you achieve by it? Your article will be removed and you will be pissed off even further. ~ 11:23, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Well, when it was up for vfh, two users voted delete, so yeah, I wanted to see how many others thought that way. But, I was totally sure that it'll get way more than three keep votes, so I didn't have to worry about it getting deleted. Also, you're right; vfd should not a testing ground, vfh is not the pinnacle of funny, and I really enjoyed writing this particular one. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME • 15:31 • Monday, 14-12-2009

I did voice my opinion over that voting style. And by the end of the day - you enjoyed writing it, why VFDing it? ~ 16:50, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

I was high on kittens at that time. SIRE FREDDMOOSHA AMUSE ME • 17:17 • Monday, 14-12-2009

I thought I'd just chip in with my opinion. Whilst it may not be of the right style for a featured article, it is still an amusing piece of work (It made me laugh a couple of times). I think the article could be better, but I would rather have it left in its current form than deleted - not all articles can be featured, and some probably ought to be left alone rather than pander to the strict stlye of the "featured article". SuperBario 19:02, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Pee Review maintenance lesson please

Chiefster, I noticed that on User:Cajek/Pee under Maintenance that some reviews have a link for Override and some don't. I'm curious how that works. Thanks. King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  02:35, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Those are my own reviews that I have checked myself. The override link is both so that UU, in his infinite wisdom, may quickly change a judgement on one of my reviews and secondly so that new reviewers do not feel that there is no way my reviews could be deemed not in-depth, it is a question of fairness and no user, except UU, having free reign over PEE maintenance. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:02, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Graduate your noob

Just a suggestion as it's of course your decision, but your noob has now won NotM, been here just short of three months, and just got that first article featured. You think it's time for graduation from noob status? King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court)  06:02, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

Newb Proposal

UN:LEGAL Legal Department Has happily summoned you to review "The Proposal". “Crede Quia Absurdum Est.” ~ Oscar Wilde

I, User:Happytimes, have been giving this new-fangled Unlegal department some of my best thoughts lately. Some things have come to mind... (Lawyers speak in third person right?) Ahem, ~H~ *CA* lack of organization, *CA* no legal dictionary set-up yet, *CA* lack of significant pay for ~H~. See summons if it be to please you.

Cajek's List

Ok, I never knew this existed until a few minutes ago. I never expected to see you hiding in my toilet and watching me pee (and passing judgment on my posture). You could have told me, you know, that my review was too harsh or not detailed enough, instead of commenting about it on a page that I never even knew existed. But now that I know it exists, you don't have to tell me anymore. I've always known I tend to be a bit harsh, though, mostly because I didn't think I need to edit and reword my tone in a review like I need to in an article. So, yeah, in the end this post doesn't really have a point. I just want to express my shock and awe at what you guys do in PEE (it's not an acronym, why is it all capitalized anyway?). ~ 10:10, Dec 15, 2009

My apologies, I tend only to take my criticisms to your talk page should you repeatedly give out poor reviews, for the most part you are doing OK and I thought there was no reason to risk alienating you by coming to your talk page and announcing that I knew best. My criticisms tend to be on the basis of experience, I have had several nasty backlashes from reviews that people felt were too harsh on their work and I find that an encouraging tone that expresses confidence rather than cynicism is the best way to work. As for PEE it is the start of the full acronym which is PEEING (People for the Evaluation of Excrement and Influencing Nominations for Greatness. Hope this makes things a bit clearer. --ChiefjusticeDS 13:17, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Comrad

Thanks to your vote Julius Malema is one step closer to becoming President of South Africa. Nice going. What a wonderful thing democracy is. Now surrender your property to the government and move along. Nothing to see here. Except the featured article on 14 Dec 2009

I'm not even going to start thanking you for all the help, 'cause we'll be here all day. Just know that I am supremely thankful.--BlueSpiritGuy 10:29, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Review

First off, thank you for your glowing review of my article, which I moved to the mainspace. As for the reason for the inconsistent tone and lack of conclusion, I tried to mirror the tone of the Associated Press to the T, and their fact check articles often lack a true conclusion. I will make additional minor changes as you suggested. One question- Do you think this will hold up well on VFH? Again, thanks!--You know what the music means... Our time is up. 01:00, December 17, 2009 (UTC)

Over 9000, Mudkips, and Every other internet meme.

Now that I got your attention, I was wondering if you could give me some advice on my first article. The Jerk Store Feel No Remorse 20:34, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Sure, what exactly are you having difficulties with? --ChiefjusticeDS 15:30, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Cut me some slack, I'm lazy busy

Thanks! ~Formerly Annoying Crap 20:26, 18 December 2009

Thank you again thank you

And also for the review :) ~Formerly Annoying Crap 19:13, 18 December 2009

aiyyo

sorry about being a bit of a dick to you on that vfh vote man, I was just a bit pissed at all the dipshittery that was going down when you happened to vote. apologiezzz —talk 18:10, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

It's no problem at all, my choice of words was not as polite as it could have been, so my apologies for that. Hope to see you round the wiki a bit more in future. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:15, December 19, 2009 (UTC)

For Christ's sake, archive this talk page!!!

But more importantly:

Rejoice, ChiefjusticeDS! You have been entitled to the
Golden Shower Award

For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.

---

Excellent review of Surgeon General's Warning, thanks very much. -RAHB 08:23, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

I obey, also thanks very much. --ChiefjusticeDS 17:52, December 20, 2009 (UTC)