From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Halloween (holiday) article.
Thats just plain ugly --Nytrospawn 19:36, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The picture I mean --Nytrospawn 19:36, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
edit From Pee Review
|Concept:||4||not that much info, but nice|
|Prose and formatting:||not avaliable because the reviewer does not know what a prose is|
|Images:||5||like the samahain, the dancers, all very nice.|
|Miscellaneous:||9||like the satan thing on top|
|Final Score:||20||nice overall!|
|Reviewer:||--184.108.40.206 01:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)|
The article as it stands is slightly schizophrenic. The first two sections are kind of about All Harlot's Eve, a reasonably satirical concept which could be made sharper. The prose here is awful but not so awful that it's clear that it's intentionally bad: "Pilgrim mothers everywhere would dress up their daughters as filthy skanks in short black skirts, copious amounts of bad makeup that went around the neighbourhood begging for tricks and treats." This sounds like there are disembodied copious amount of makeup going around the neighborhood.
The second section is a modified fundamentalist Christian rant against Halloween. The rant was added by 220.127.116.11 and in the history appears to be completely serious and non-satirical. It's based on nonsense from a Jack Chick tract. (Interestingly, the article claims that Druids scored a death in every house every Halloween -- either by getting a sacrifice victim or by marking the house for a supernatural retaliatory death. One doesn't have to be a mathematician to figure out that would wipe out the population pretty quickly.)
So this is really two articles trying to occupy the same pair of knickers. In my lousy opinion, anyway. ----OEJ 14:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Funny pic: Maybe try to include it somewhere? Or at the very least save it to your desktop cos it is pretty fucking hilarious.