Thank you for what was, in most parts, an unexceptionable (in the sense of 'taking exception to') and helpful piece of reviewing. However, I must say that the line about Wikipedia is not weird in the slightest - 1) Every one makes gags about Wikipedia's inaccuracy 2) The Pulitzer Prize is about fiction. 3) Uncyclopedia is a parody of Wikipedia.
'I guess, even if it understands the award as the "Poo Lit Suprise". The article nonetheless barely holds it's own against the Poo Lit, I know what I'd prefer as a parody to the real life journalistic award, but this article is commendable in some ways' - This sentence is baffling:: The first clause praises the concept, the second clause is an unsubstantiated insult against the article which is not explained (as it was close to winning a prize for the Poo Lit) the third clause has you saying you know what you'd prefer as a parody, but then do you tell me what this would be? No, strangely. Then the fourth clause is a commendation. I am more than a little confused with this section...so some clarification would be helpful--Knucmo2 17:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)