User talk:WhySoSerious
Welcome![edit source]
Hello WhySoSerious and Welcome to Uncyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
Useful guides and references for your contributions:
I hope you enjoy the site and being an Uncyclopedian. Always remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or use the "sign" button (
) above the edit box. This will automatically produce your name and the date.
If you want to start an article of your own it is usually best to start it within your namespace, for example, User:Skid 40145/Article about stuff. If you do this you can edit it at your leisure and move it over into the mainspace when it’s done. To start an article in the mainspace attach this template - {{construction}} to your work, so other Users will know you'll be back to finish it.
Should you need any help, do not hesitate to ask me on my talk page or ask at the Village Dump Forum. You can also add the following: {{help}} to this page along with a message and someone will come along and help you if they can. Additionally, the Uncyclopedian Adopt-a-Noob program is there to bring experienced writers straight to you. Simply put {{adoptme}} on your Userpage to join. Once again welcome to the site. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Pee review[edit source]
I didn't actually request the pee review for Happy Thoughts. I put it up because the author couldn't figure out how to do it herself. However, having read your review, I feel I should tell you that it wasn't sufficiently detailed. I'm very aware that reviewing can be hard, but if you do it you should give more than a sentence of explanation for each section. If you compare what you wrote, to my recent review of a different article, you'll see how much more explanation is needed.
Don't worry about it, though. I wouldn't expect new users to write reviews until they've got at least two or three months' uncyc experience behind them.
One last thing. The normal routine for talk pages is to respond where the first comment was written. I've made an exception here, since you requested otherwise, but in future, when you write on someone's talk page, add it to your watchlist as they are likely to respond there. -- 15Mickey20 (talk to Mickey) 19:19, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
pee review, again[edit source]
hey there WSS. you now have three reviews under your belt, and it seems you're not quite giving the level of detail that the authors of the articles have requested. also, in your latest review, you come off as rather harsh towards the author. for your next review, i suggest trying your hand at one of the requests in the queue marked with a (quick) at the end, since those generally require less detail. that should help you get the hang of doing reviews. also, in the future, keep in mind that pee review is a forum for constructive criticism, rather than unnecessary rudeness. thanks! 15:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Nomination[edit source]
A little while back you asked me if you could nom my Why?:Isn't there a toilet in the woods article for feature. Just thought I'd stop by to tell you it's actually on VFH right now, so feel free to go vote if you wish. --Mr. Monkey 
Pant-hoot here. 17:57, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
KND[edit source]
hey WSS, i noticed you put in another review request for Codename: Kids Next Door. i think if you want another opinion you should get it, it would certainly help. however, you really haven't changed enough for me to review the article again. i do think you've improved it (see my talk page), but i also think you have some more work to do. so, i recommend removing the part of the review stating 'this is just for gerry', since i'd be hard-pressed to add anything other than what i've already said, and get another reviewer's perspective. 21:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Response to my review is on my talk page ~PAtkinson (word up, kids!) 23:09, Nov 24