User talk:Jabberwock/Standard Uncyclopedian

Scoring for Happy Monkey 2021 Competition

(see full scores here)

Scores and review from Shabidoo

Originality:	3/10	While the article itself isn't particularly original (there isn't even a real concept) there are still some original ideas like throwing in AAAAAAAAAA, linking the brain to writing articles and the infinite loop. It's a pity you didn't develop them more as it would have been funny and original.
Creativity:	3/10	Short article means fewer points. Referencing other articles is creative though you might not want to overdo that.
Humour:	4/10	There are a few pretty funny moments but because the article was only 1/3 written I can only give you so many points. Funny moments include: A computer keyboard with only the Ctrl, C and V keys works best for plagiarizing Wikipedia articles. Statistics show that 97% of Uncyclopedians have a brain If you don't have a penis, a dildo also works. Manny n00bs and foreigers thnik that mispellings or tpyos don't mater at al.
Final Score:	11/30
Suggestions:	You have the basis for a really good article but you haven't really developed anything. For example the plagiarism section could be expanded into something very funny and interesting. You could document the process where people just copy and paste a wikipedia article into an uncyclopedia one and vandalise it or add a couple stupid jokes (describing it in detail in the dry way you wrote the article could be fun). 1. Open the wikipedia article. Hit ctrl-a to select the entire text of the article and ctrl-c to copy the entire text. Start a new page on uncyclopedia and type ctrl-v to paste the article. Randomly add swear words like "shit" and "fuck" here and there. Go to image.google.com and do an image search of "dog poop". Download the grossest image you find and upload it on uncyclopedia. Add the image in the most disruptive section of the article. Randomly add "YOU MOM BLOWS GOATS" in several sections. Save the article and nominate it for feature. That kind of overly detailed explanation on how to do everything could be pretty funny, especially if you bring the jokes to an even higher level taking it somewhere truly unexpected (like getting the article nominated for a Pulitzer prize etc or having the article save the world somehow). You didn't really give us much of a list of tools uncyclopedians use outside of technology. There are many other tools you could have mentioned. Like a 2 litre bottle of diet coke and a 12 pack of ramen noodles to consume over the weekend while you write the articles. You could also include things like porn magazines to pleasure yourself while you take breaks in-between writing. Overall I really really liked your style, the concept and most of the text you wrote. It's a bummer you didn't write more because it could have been a real contender for a winning article for the competition. I hope you continue writing it as I believe it could easily be a featurable article.

Scores and review from Sarah_Baldewijns

Originality 7/10

Creativity 7/10

Humour 8/10

Total= 23/30

Comment: some very funny elements in this article, the spelling paragraph and the eight penises made me laugh. I like how you listed all the super logical parts one needs to get on Uncyclopedia

Scores and review from JJPMaster

Originality 5/10

Creativity 7/10

Humour 6.5/10

Total= 18.5/30

Comment: This one is quite cool. I honestly still don't know what the topic is (is it Standard Uncyclopedian or "List of Equipment of the average Uncyclopedian editor"), so that's interesting. The humor itself is pretty good as well.

Scores and review from Cassie

Originality 4/10

Comment: It is difficult to achieve originality on Uncyclopedia with an article about Uncyclopedia; this article is no exception to the aforementioned rule. This article kind of falls on the "not original enough" side of the equation, mainly because of how any experienced Uncyclopedia editor would know all of the things mentioned. Maybe having something else that's totally unexpected would help? (I mean, Penis may count as one, but that's, well, a very unoriginal joke.)

Creativity 8/10

Comment Despite the (lack of) originality previously established in my review of this article, the way the article is "built up" definitely shows proof of creativity. It abuses classical elements of Uncyclopedia and smashes them all into one single article. As such, I think Jabberwock's brain is probably 99% DHMO.

Humour 7/10

"The classics always make you laugh." Comment:

Total= 19/30

General Comment: I'm conflicted on whether the addition of typos outside of the "Spelling" section of the article is a purposeful design choice or a sign of Uncyclopedia editor laziness.

Total Score: 69.5/120