Uncyclopedia:Pee Review

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (thing)
m (this is very important)
Line 15: Line 15:
 
If you don't have anything constructive to say, don't say anything at all. An in-depth review is always better than one that is all score and no comment. The best reviews explain ''why'' scores are given and provide specific ideas, concepts, and suggestions for improvement.
 
If you don't have anything constructive to say, don't say anything at all. An in-depth review is always better than one that is all score and no comment. The best reviews explain ''why'' scores are given and provide specific ideas, concepts, and suggestions for improvement.
   
<font color="red">''If you put a tag on a review or otherwise promise to review it, please only do so '''when you start the review'''. Any persistent offenders who "book" a review and then don't complete it within 24 hours without further comment to explain why will earn themselves a free ban''. Additionally, remember these booking tags should not stop other people contributing to the review if they want to.</font>
+
<font color="red">''If you put a tag on a review or otherwise promise to review it, please only do so '''when you start the review'''. Any persistent offenders who "book" a review and then don't complete it '''within 24 hours without further comment to explain why will earn themselves a free ban'''''. Additionally, remember these booking tags should not stop other people contributing to the review if they want to.</font>
   
 
==[[Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Current Pees|Articles that need Reviewing]]==
 
==[[Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Current Pees|Articles that need Reviewing]]==

Revision as of 10:10, September 15, 2011


Main

FAQ


What is Pee Review?

ThinkerToilet

Pee Review is a mechanism created by R Kelly for requesting writing help, feedback and tips to make articles better.

It is useful for anything from bringing a doomed article back from the brink of damnation to improving upon a completed article written by Jesus himself. It is an author's job to improve the article based on the feedback given. Please don't make a Pee Review request solely to show off your work with no intention of changing it. If you are not going to take the criticism to heart one way or the other, don't bother requesting it. If you request a review, you can add the {{PeeReview}} template to the article to make sure nothing happens to it until the review is finished.

Reviewers are provided with a table to fill out that focuses on the important areas of a good Uncyclopedia article. When a new pee review request is made, one pre-made table will be put on the page allowing reviewers to fill out the table as appropriate providing a "Full" review.

Alternatively reviewers can make brief comments on the page above the table, providing suggestions on improvement or useful advice. Adding brief comments will keep the review in the queue of waiting reviews so that other people can still see it. If you wish to do a full review (using the table) please make sure that you have thoroughly read the the Guidelines. Please don't fill out the table unless you have. When a full review has been given the review will be removed from the queue.

If you don't have anything constructive to say, don't say anything at all. An in-depth review is always better than one that is all score and no comment. The best reviews explain why scores are given and provide specific ideas, concepts, and suggestions for improvement.

If you put a tag on a review or otherwise promise to review it, please only do so when you start the review. Any persistent offenders who "book" a review and then don't complete it within 24 hours without further comment to explain why will earn themselves a free ban. Additionally, remember these booking tags should not stop other people contributing to the review if they want to.

Articles that need Reviewing

PageLast Edit
User:LuMontyZ/Fire Emblem: Abridged by LuMontyZ06:06, January 16, 2014 by LuMontyZ
User:P e r f e c t A t h l e t i c i s m/Carolina by P e r f e c t A t h l e t i c i s m18:54, March 9, 2014 by P e r f e c t A t h l e t i c i s m
UnScripts:A Number by Anton19916:38, May 15, 2014 by Anton199

New Pee Review Requests

PageLast Edit
UnNews:Diagnosticians turn attention to undiagnosable diseases by FeatherPluma15:21, August 28, 2014 by Anton199
User:Maniac1075/Short Circuit by Maniac107516:44, August 23, 2014 by Maniac1075
User:SecondChanceForMe/Eiki Shiki, Yamaxanadu by SecondChanceForMe08:25, August 15, 2014 by SecondChanceForMe
Danny Alexander by Anton19922:56, May 30, 2014 by Anton199
User:Thetruemariozplaze/ROBLOX (Quick) by Thetruemariozplaze17:18, May 27, 2014 by Anton199

New Entry

It would be nice if you review someone else's article when you post yours. We do live in a civilized world after all, and Pee Review works best when people suck as well as blow.

For dynamic review of an article on you might try asking in our IRC channel. However, don't forget that this is an open public IRC channel, so don't be surprised if when you encounter a room full of inebriated monkeys who are less than helpful.

Create a new subpage by entering the name of your article in the box below and Click "Create entry". If you would like to get your review more quickly put "(quick)" after the article's name. Although you may get your review faster, it might be in less depth.

Personal tools
projects