Did some changes and want a second look now to finish it up. In-depth please! Thanks 09:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, hi Tagstit! I am going to review your article soon! How do you like my Pee Template? You can answer here or on my Talk Page. Thanks! :) -- 22:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Looks good bud! A bit rude but if it works for you than keep it ! -- 00:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Don't worry I thought about it last night and I think I am going to change it. :) -- 17:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Okay, I changed it to something a lot better! Hope you like it! :) -- 17:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Be Emo? (2nd Review)
|
| rdfs:comment
| - Did some changes and want a second look now to finish it up. In-depth please! Thanks 09:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, hi Tagstit! I am going to review your article soon! How do you like my Pee Template? You can answer here or on my Talk Page. Thanks! :) -- 22:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Looks good bud! A bit rude but if it works for you than keep it ! -- 00:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Don't worry I thought about it last night and I think I am going to change it. :) -- 17:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Okay, I changed it to something a lot better! Hope you like it! :) -- 17:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| Mcomment
| - This is the average rating of this article. This article could get a ten for this score if the prose comment was accounted for.
|
| Pcomment
| - There were no grammar or spelling mistakes in this article and everything was laid out in an excellent manner, making the article appear more encyclopedia uncyclopedic. The last paragraph, ”Miscellaneous things, the miscellaneous things of the emos,” is well, miscellaneous. This could be left there like that, but you could also put some of those ”facts” in new categories, or you could modify your existing categories so they could be placed in there. This is not a great flaw, but if this was fixed, the score for prose would be perfect!
|
| Icomment
| - The images were great, even though they were not super colorful , and the captions were hilarious. One example of the hilarious captioning was: I found this hilarious and I don’t think anything regarding the images should be changed.
|
| Pscore
| |
| Ccomment
| - This has a good concept to write about especially for a Why:? article. This area also could not be critiqued.
|
| Cscore
| |
| Mscore
| |
| Hcomment
| - The humor in this article is very good, even though the article was also written in a sad way. One example of the good humor in this article is : Also, when you end some of the sentences with ...ha...ha...oh sadness..., it actually does make the article funnier. I could not find much to critique in this area.
|
| Iscore
| |
| Hscore
| |
| Fcomment
| - This is a good article, because I enjoyed this article even though I not really into ”How To” or ”Why?” articles, although I am now!
:P.S. Sorry this review came in so late! I got sick and stayed sick for a couple days. I feel better now, so I finally got the chance to get this review written.
|
| dbkwik:uncyclopedi...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| Signature
| |
| abstract
| - Did some changes and want a second look now to finish it up. In-depth please! Thanks 09:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Oh, hi Tagstit! I am going to review your article soon! How do you like my Pee Template? You can answer here or on my Talk Page. Thanks! :) -- 22:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC) Looks good bud! A bit rude but if it works for you than keep it ! -- 00:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Don't worry I thought about it last night and I think I am going to change it. :) -- 17:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Okay, I changed it to something a lot better! Hope you like it! :) -- 17:54, 4 February 2009 (UTC) I do like it! It moves :) always a plus 23:40, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks! :D -- 01:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)