UnBooks talk:Pulp Novel, the case of the dashing dame

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 12:34, September 9, 2007 by Modusoperandi (talk | contribs)

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

edit Pee review

I've gone mad. I'm pretty sure that I have, anyway. I've started calling people "palooka" and "dame".--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 05:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, you definitely nailed the pulpish style well. First things first - That template thing on the left is, as some of my peers would say, "hella long". Integrate it into the article better, shorten it, organize it, something. -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 05:35, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
You mean the right, right? The left bit is the "real" story. Yes, normally the book/character template (on the right) is dead short. Sigh. That the template thingy that explains characters and whatnot is a tale that's almost as long as the "real" story is my favourite part. The story's good too. Odd, but melikes. I'll sit on it for awhile...and come back to it when I stop calling the guy at the 7/11 a big lug...--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 06:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I mooshed some of the "story" paragraphs together. I was writing it as I was saying it, see? Saying it like a hardnosed, down on his luck writer who's tryin' to make a page. The extra paragraphs added punch. Punch like a flyweight boxer punchdrunk from going mano a mano with the champ. Ten rounds of glory, then darkness. Fuck, I'm still doing it...--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 06:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I squished the template text to emphasize the "story" (or de-ephasize the book description a bit). Is the template text too small? The grotesquely overwrought text of the template is still my favourite bit. It juxtaposes nicely with the moderately overwrought text of the "story", which is also my favourite bit. The lollipop on the book cover is my favourite bit too. Of course, I am quite mad.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 07:09, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

edit V1.1

I swapped the "template" text down to footnotes. I don't much like the look, but it makes it much easier to read.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 07:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Also, I want to say that some of the thumbnail images are overlapping each other, which always bugs me. Like I said before, the major problem with this page is formatting, and not actual content (which is great). You may want to make the footnotes into a couple sections/sub-sections. And if you could do me a favor and look at this for me... -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 07:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Formatting is hard. They're un-overlapped as best I could. I'm sitting on it for now (the "template" text as footnotes is growing on me). I'll take a look at your page.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 07:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay, this "sitting on it" thing wasn't working, so I messed with it some more. I'm guessing that soon, I will mess with it some more...and more...and more...--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 11:50, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, at this point I think it's about as readable as it will get. I think that it's ready to don the UnBooks namespace. If you have any personal tweaks/additions you want to add, go ahead, but I stand for the masses when I say: The masses like it. -- §. | WotM | PLS | T | C | A 20:11, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm setting it aside for a few days (serious this time!). I'll come back to it when I speak modern english again. Then, if I find no commas to move, delete, or add, I'll release it on an unprepared and unprotected mainspace.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 22:56, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

edit Argh!

I had to let this one go. It was fun to write...for awhile, but I'm a "method writer", so everyone I know thinks I've lost my mind (what with me talking like the protagonist in a pulp novel for the last couple of weeks and all). I'm fairly certain they'll ask for a "sample" at work, too. It probably doesn't help that the same thing has happened before.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 23:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

edit nice

I massaged your prose a little, tried to introduce more 50's slang. Your sentences were good, but too many periods, too broken up. Part of the joy of those old noir books and movies was the fast pace of the dialogue - bon mots would whip past buried in the banter and only the sharpest ears wold catch them all. You can only have one punchline and it plays better when the thoughts preceding it are continuous. Great work though, nice characterization of the dick. Very Leslie Nielson.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Super90 (talk • contribs)

It was me, pretty much. I'm like that. But taller. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 14:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

edit also

whenever I could, I cut out soft consonant sounds in favor of K's, T's, and D's. Even the word "detective "is a symphony of hard consonants. Really, that's noir dialog in a nutshell.The preceding unsigned comment was added by Super90 (talk • contribs)

Cool, and thanks for the tweaks.--Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 13:46, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

edit Useless praise and no constructive nothing

This is wonderful. Whoever wrote this, it's brilliant. I want more of it. I imagine a whole fucking novel in this style. I'd eat it right up, like you eat up a dame when she's actually made from ham. --Bringa 16:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and Super90 thanks you too. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 17:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

edit Congrats

I really like Pulp Fictions, altough it is hard to find here in my country. I really enjoyed your writing and humour, it reminded me of that noir Steve Martin movie (can't quite remember the name, and I'm lazy enough not to search for it right now). Anyways, congratulations, you achieved one more happy reader (well, wasn't that your point?). Eh, and sorry for the mispellings and poor english, is not my native language.--FoxyBabe 19:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

"Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid", I think...and thanks. --Sir Modusoperandi Boinc! 19:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects