Talk:George Carlin

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs to be expanded. I was thinking of adding a list of his HBO specials, and maybe a list of some of his most funniest quotes from them. What does everyone else think? Aizmov 12:04, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

edit Welcome!

Sexy girls

I'm sure you will like it here!

Hello, George Carlin, and welcome to Uncyclopedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If not, the door's right over there... no, a little more to your left... yeah. You seem to have a sense of humor, but to be sure that it corresponds to the kind of humor that is accepted on this site, I suggest checking out the following links:

  • Beginner's Guide - A massive guide about how to be the best you can be at Uncyclopedia. I've honestly never read the whole thing in one sitting myself, but it is very useful if you're looking for help on a specific issue.
  • How to be funny and not just stupid - Our flagship link. This will tell you how to not get booed off the metaphorical stage that is Uncyclopedia. I STRONGLY suggest reading the entire thing through, perhaps more than once.
  • Our Vanity Policies - This page details why we don't care about your friends, your school, your gay fourth period math teacher, or the homework he has you do, and in-jokes. DO NOT violate this policy.
  • Uncyclopedia:Best of - For a bit of inspiration. These are our featured articles. This is the kind of stuff we like to read around here.

Now that that's out of the way, just look down and you'll notice some more links. These ones are about help in general:

At Uncyclopedia, writing articles is not a requirement, but I do recommend it, it can be quite enjoyable, and it's a good chance to let others take notice of your writing. To write an article, it's recommended that you start it in your userspace (for example, User:George Carlin/Article about stuff) so you can edit it at your leisure. If you decide to create it in the cold world of mainspace, make sure it is in accordance with the policies laid out above, and if you're not done put the "Work-In-Progress" template - {{construction}} - onto it as well.

If you need help, ask me on my talk page, ask at the Dump, or ask an administrator on their talk page. Additionally, the Uncyclopedian Adopt-a-Noob program is there to bring experienced editors straight to you. Simply leave a message on an adopter's talkpage to join. I hope you enjoy editing here and being an Uncyclopedian, and remember: Have fun with it. We're all here to have a good time and a good laugh. Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) or use the "sign" button (button_sig.png) above the edit box. Again, welcome!

Wow, I'm way off. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 12:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

edit RE:

Yes, I added some of the quotes but I don't believe the "legacy" part does justice to his attitude on religion quite well... Added the Malfunction part trying to give him some credit on his holy work against yuppies and overprotected brats --Unholyfart 07:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

edit Pee Review

Humour: 6 Let met start this section by saying that I am a huge fan of George Carlin and am pretty familiar with his life story and his comedy. It was for this reason that I chose to Pee Review this article. And given that he was a comedian himself, with a particularly dark sense of misanthropic humor, I think George Carlin is ripe for satire on Uncyclopedia. But that is where I have an issue with this article. As an homage to the brilliance of George Carlin, it works great. As comedy or satire, however, it falls a little flat. Why? Because almost everything in the article is so true and accurate, that the comedic spin and twisting of the truth that makes for excellent comedy is missing. One example is how George Carlin got himself discharged from the military as an under-performer. True, true, true. But where is the twist that makes it funny? The same is true of the description of the Las Vegas incident. It really happened, almost exactly like described in the article. Where is the twist? I love George Carlin's humor and agree with many of his viewpoints, but I think this article could be taken to the next level by having more of a critique or "devil's advocate" type of bent. Perhaps a faux interview where Carlin says he regrets "Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure" and calls himself a "sell-out." Or perhaps taking some of his famous routines and elevating them to the absurd (for example, he has a bit where he contrasts baseball (pastoral/peaceful) with football (militaristic/violent) - maybe that could be twisted into the ridiculous by making it a comparison of baseball and Ultimate Fighting. In my humble opinion, biographical articles on Uncyclopedia work best when they mix the mundane and the true parts of a person's life/career, with outrageous and clearly false fabrications. On the positive side, the "infobox" section is great and has the kind of exaggeration that could really take this article to the next level if applied throughout the text.
Concept: 9 As stated above, George Carlin is ripe for biographical treatment, and his over-the-top brooding sense of humor is a comedic goldmine waiting to be exploited. So I think the concept is great and it is just the execution that could be improved.
Prose and formatting: 7 I am not sure about what to think of the the prose and voice of the article. I expected it to be categorized as an article written in the style of the person speaking, but it is not. It seems written in a way that serves as a direct conduit for George Carlin's own voice and opinions - really edgy, caustic, dark, insulting - and if that is the goal, it works great. On the other hand, if the goal is a more "clean" biography of George Carlin written in the style of an encyclopedia article, then the article needs some work, particularly with spelling and grammar ("Tunkin" and "Viet-Nam" might be the way Carlin referred to the battle and the war, but these are not the ways in which an encyclopedic author would do so). If the article is intended to be written in the way George Carlin himself would write his biography, I think that point needs to be made a littler clearer.
Images: 7 The images themselves (with the exception of the image in the Info Box) are average, but the captions help. Again, the images would be a good place to spice things up. Perhaps add some photoshopped images of Carlin, or have a picture of him from Bill and Ted's looking like he's trying to be bad-ass, but clearly failing because he is in a cheesy '80s flick. I have not looked for sillier pictures, but again, like the text of the article, the photos generally pay homage to Carlin without taking things to the next level with humor or satire. As a fan of Carlin, I sympathize; but as a reader of Uncyclopedia, I am looking for more satiric twist and humor.
Miscellaneous: 7.3 I used the averaging Pee Review function for this score.
Final Score: 36.3 I think I've hit what I see to be the biggest points. I give high praise for fidelity to the subject matter and for the clear heart that went into writing an article about someone the author truly respects and almost seems to worship. More people should be open about who they look up to or appreciate.
Reviewer: --Sir NoNamesLeft (GUN) WotM NotM 23:01, July 5, 2011 (UTC)
Snowflake mini Mattsnow 06:53, July 6, 2011 (UTC)

edit This article sucks

It was written by a fan boy and doesn't fit the with the nature of this site.

Isn't it mildly ironic that George Carlin fans are un-farkin-funny as hell, whose shitty articles one wouldn't want to read if promised 70 virgins in the afterlife but make one want to join a radical Islam sect instead???

We're glad you feel that way, now sod off. --Tophat headless 02:05, October 20, 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools