Shabidoo reviewed the main page, this time I'd like reviews of the talk and the hidden rewrite that Milton doesn't care whether you read or not, too. Thank ya kindly! --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 00:36, March 13, 2011 (UTC)
Georgie did a fine positive review of this, but I'm still looking for something in-depth. Like, really in-depth. Like dig your stilettos into there deep. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 20:45, March 13, 2011 (UTC)
If this in-depth review is proving elusive it can only be due to the quality of the article(s). All three of the pages are probably featureable in my opinion (although the main one might face some difficulty on VFH). I would happily nominate the "tasteful rewrite" myself. With this in mind, would you still want a review? --BlackFlamingo 20:53, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
If you think it's that good, then go ahead and nominate it, that's great. But I'm also looking for a big-picture review of how each article does in relation to each other, and stuff, you know? Yeah. --TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 23:41, March 24, 2011 (UTC)
I laughed so hard that I puked. Thanks, now I have to clean up my puke!!
It definitely has a concept. Good job!
Prose and formatting:
I have raised this score from what I would have actually put, because I assume that the terrible prose and formatting are part of the concept.
Could really use more pictures. Perhaps a picture of Milton Babbitt? That's a good idea, feel free to use it.
I liked the length of the article. Not too long, but just long enough that I didn't read it.