For those who want to be Reviewers of the Month (as the question of resurrecting the contest has arisen recently) but have no idea about how to do the in-depth reviews or simply do not have any suggestions of improvements for the writer, the UnSignpost editors have worked an ideal Pee Review that will work in almost every case. Comments that you should not insert in review (delete them before copying and pasting the table) are in square brackets and the only thing you have to do is to copy the review from User:Anton199/Pee Review and insert your signature at the end.
Spike's user page says he is either a professional writer or a minor-league baseball mascot dog, take your pick. He need not be addressed in ALL CAPITALS, but someone took the user name "Spike" in 2006 and made no contributions, so he could not get it, a sore point that may explain a lot. Spike was a regular at Sparky's Pub, but Uncyclopedia opened, then the pub closed; and working Uncyclopedia, both the music (mostly progressive rock) and the conversation is better, and there are nearly no fistfights. Attained the rank of exile in 2011, and of Admin in 2013. Go figure.
This week's playing with the UnSignpost (while our main editor is absent) gave unexpected results. You might have noticed that its format is different. If you did not, then this means that you do not read our newspaper, even though you are subscribed to it. If you don't like the new style, then leave an angry message on an editor's talk page, as newspapers like communicating with their readers, but we won't change it back. However, any constructive criticism and any suggestions whatsoever are always welcome at the talk page of the person who caused all this mess. The new UnSignpost now looks more like the Wikipedia Signpost and is a hybrid between that one and the USP from the fork.