Talk:Microsoft Word Paperclip

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 15:29, September 3, 2010 by Poiz (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search



Crash merge The contents of Clippit were merged into Microsoft Word Paperclip and they now redirect here. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history.



edit NRV

I think the NRV can be taken off now. Judgement 08:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can remove an NRV if a page has been rewritten. Feel free. —rc (t) 08:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

edit Thanks!

I'm very appreciative of the work you did for my article! :)--Occono 11:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

edit From Pee Review

Not my first article for Uncyclopedia, but my first full-length one. I wrote it at 2 am, so be brutal (within bounds of reason, of course). - Judgement

Looks like a pretty good effort (read: I'm too much of a n00b to think of specific suggestions, but I'm still being as sincere as I can in my compliment). I'll change the redirect page Clippy to point there. Pentium5dot1 07:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Humour: 8 Most of the jokes come from the theme and context-based on the juxtaposition of an imaginary paper clip into the real world, which means that, at times, the humor sort of slows down. Overall, it's very funny but it could maybe use a few extra jokes here and there, towards the middle and end. Don't add them at the risk of breaking up the flow or ruining the message, but maybe slide some jabs in there. It has to be a very delicate balance. I think the humor sort of slows down near the end of the article, though, as you move away from his life into a more direct satire on the actual Office Paperclip.
Concept: 9 A great use of anthropomorphism, reminding me a bit of Fire hydrant, which is a good thing. Very absurdist, which is also good. I like serious articles that don't take themselves too seriously.
Prose and formatting: 7 Consistently well-written, but perhaps a little barren in terms of Wikikinks. Also a few red links present. Maybe add some bold or italics to make the article a little less bland looking. You could also try moving a picture over to the other side to break up the monotony of the blocks of text. Just mess around some and I think you could get a more aesthetically appealing article.
Images: 7 No amazing Photoshop work, but the images fill the needs nicely and work well in the context of the article. I don't really vote based on 'quality' of image, I vote on how funny they are.
Miscellaneous: 8 I really, really liked this article, and I'm someone who can read the vast majority of Uncyc articles without breaking a smile. Good work. I don't know if this is quite VFH quality, but it's close. I would probably vote for it, but I don't know if others would.
Final Score: 39 A very funny piece that reminds me a bit of my own foray into Microsoft bashing, Total Fucking Asshole Server 2006. What your article has in subtlety, mine has in vulgarity.
Reviewer: --Sir ENeGMA (talk) GUN WotM PLS 14:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


edit Red Links

Removed or fixed all of the red links in the article. - - - Atom Silly Angel AtomSpeak Atom Contribs Atom 22:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

edit Yay!

My article (although the content is all entirely other's work and it turns out there was already an article about "Clippit"....) is still here, and is kinda cool! Love the Clippet PNG that follows you down the page! That's all :) --Occono 22:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects