From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< User:Shabidoo
Revision as of 01:48, March 3, 2011 by Shabidoo (talk | contribs)

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


edit Extentions

I gave these guys extentions:

Lyrithya: Because her topic already existed in some way. 2 Hours. MrtheJazz: Because I deleted his entry on one page cause of tentitiveness. 2 hours Mimo&maxus: Because his time Zone (along with Estonia) is the only one in the Eurozone 2 hours ahead of UTC and there was confusion and he insulted me twice in emails., just 1 hour extension. Bahhhhh, okay 2 ... who can argue with a guy with such a helarious signature. --ShabiDOO 01:47, March 3, 2011 (UTC)

edit Concept

Here is how the judging will work. I will pee review all the entires. I divided the competitors between all of you (I dont expect you all to review 15 in total). Thats about 5 each. In addition you will give a score out of 10 for the other 10 or so articles as you like (I suggest you give that score based on creativity and uniqueness and such but its totally up to you and the number isnt explained anywhere, but feel free to add comments on the pee review page per user if you want to somewhere there).

This is the scoring chart: User:Shabidoo/HAPPY MONKEY COMPETITION/scores winter 2011

It will have a list of the articles and the link to the pee reviews for each. For each article you either do a pee review (score out of 40) or give a score out of 10 (no pee review necesary) and Ill put your names and article links just when the competition begins.

I have left the template for the pee review on each page. You DONT have to use it. My template for peer review is going to be a little different. You can use mine or the original one or invent your own (but the score should be out of 40). I need a score out of 40, and as its peer review, it should be constuctive criticism, strict NO DICK. No insults please (unless they are clearly ironic and clearly funny), nothing negative in a very opinionated way. Criticism yes, dick no. And try to point out the good. Especially the funny, creative and crazy. Dont forget the 40 points you give for a pee review goes towards the contestants overall score (out of 100). There is no 5 points for 1st place, 4 points for second place scheme. Its total points.

My peer review will be 10 points humour. 10 points creativity. 10 points images, 5 formatting/links/prose, 5 concept and misc. Again, thats my criteria.

If you dont use my template, make up your own chart or write a paragraph reviewing the article somehow and give a score out of 40.

The judging points for each contestant is then: 40 points (my peer review) + 40 points (one of the judges review) + 10 + 10 (10 points each from the other two judges) also Wilytank will give 10 bonus points per page = 100 points (with a theoretical 110 max with Wilys bonus points. You can start judging as of the close of the competition and post the info on the results page which I will create in a moment and create the subpages for each pee review.

Wilytank is the backup judge if one of you guys fucks up and lets everyone down. Thanks Wilytank, you are the awsomest non-dick dickface I know.

THANKS A MILLION GUYS FOR JUDGING! I will eat your parents as a thank you and vote against everything you write to seal the kiss --ShabiDOO 15:20, February 26, 2011 (UTC)


edit Vandalism


Personal tools