# User talk:Why do I need to provide this?/archive5

 Nominated Uncyclopedian of the MonthThis user has been nominated for Uncyclopedian of the Month—you can vote for them or nominate your favourite users at Uncyclopedia:Uncyclopedian of the Month.
 Nominated Useless Gobshite of the MonthThis user has been nominated for Useless Gobshite of the Month—you can vote for them or nominate your least favourite users at Uncyclopedia:Useless Gobshite of the Month.
(2 Sept. 2009 - 1 Oct. 2009) * (2 Oct. 2009 - 12 Oct. 2009) * (13 Oct. 2009 - 1 Nov. 2009) * (2 Nov. 2009 - 12 Nov. 2009)

# editFather Why do I need to provide this?

## editPremarital Rape

Sorry for ChiefJustice's extremely inappropriate comment. Everyone knows rape comes first. Would you like a cookie, sir? 00:05,13November,2009

And you're right. Sigs look weird on your page. But it's gotta be your page. The sig looks fine everywhere else. Would you like a cookie, sir? 00:09,13November,2009

## editHello

It's very clean here. --ChiefjusticeDS 23:38, November 12, 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and remember, cleanliness is next to Sophianess. It's also not too far from Guildford. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:48, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Forgive me father, for what the heck is up with this schtick?!

"Father" Whyner? Have you found religion? Or has religion found you? Or is this just a ploy to make all the '07s feel irredeemably old? Friday, 02:46, Nov 13 2009

Yes, my son, through the Goddess Sophia I have found salivation. If you would find it too, go to the Church of Uncyclopedia. Sophia can save your soul from potato bugs. Go there now, and sprout. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:43, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

...that you are part of the proofreading service. We need more proofreader's like you to ensure mistake's like this don't end up in our article's. Pup

I'm assuming this is a joke but I'm not getting the punch line. Fill me in, please. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 04:39, November 13, 2009 (UTC)
When you pluralise the word symbol, do you use an apostrophe at all? Pup
Oh, that. "archiving because of some weird code thing going on that's putting little symbol's on my page"--you see what I mean? See how it put the ' symbol there? WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:37, November 13, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Why?

Given your tendency to assume good faith and your affinity with the word "Why?", I'll leave this guy for you to welcome. Personally I think he's only here to write about his hometown. -- 00:05, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

You could have done it, but I welcomed the Why. These guys are popping up like whys flys. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 04:35, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Uncyclopedia Church

Actually, I have made-up commandments both for Wikipedia and Uncyclopedia, also some random scripture quotes, but nothing article-like yet. I was actually thinking of abandoning the Uncyclopedia ones and develop the Wikipedia ones (shame on me!), because Wikipedia is bigger than us, and a lot of people, including me and most of my friends, treat Wikipedia like God. So the satirical elements in the article would be closer to real life behaviour. I also felt that it wouldn't be in good form to write two articles that are kind of parallels. So yea...shame on me...how I've sinned, Father etc. etc. I probably wont start writing until I've finished all the things under my WIP list. Help or collab would be great, definitely, cuz I'm a bit stuck on how to approach it. --~ 07:38, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

Here is how you can be forgiven, my daughter. Simply say three "Hail Sophias," fiddle with your rosaries, and do something special for Father Why? (your choice) and you will be forgiven. (Seriously, that sounds interesting. I'd love to see what you got.) WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 04:33, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Forgive me daddy, for I have signed

FreddIs Great In Bedd 08:08, November 14, 2009 (UTC)

As you got me to laugh, you are forgiven. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 04:33, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

## edit And finally

Your Holiness, just to inform you that I am again being an active member of the uncyclopedia society.--BlueSpiritGuy 09:48, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

Glad to see you back, my son.  Father WHY??? (confessions)  15:27, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

## editHowTo question

A thousand apologies for not getting back to you on this one, I meant to do it the other day and then the VFD image drama arrived at the same time as shift change and I forgot all about it. Anyway I just had a look and it isn't looking too bad at all. As I said in the review the image congestion is mostly towards the bottom of the page and I recommended cutting one of the images out. My choice would be the Before and After image, if one was going to go. Otherwise it's looking pretty good and I would have to delve much deeper into it to find anything of note to complain about, so I'd say it's just about ready for you to do whatever it is you want to do with it. --ChiefjusticeDS 22:15, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

## edit There was a problem with your sig

And I fixed it. Just in case you wonder why another user edited your sig page. -- 03:34, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

What, are you saying I was too tall? Thanks for fixing it, and for the note. Bless you.  Father WHY??? (confessions)  15:29, November 17, 2009 (UTC)

## editThanks for the review

I'm a bit swamped with work, so I can't act on your feedback till the weekend, maybe - since I'll probably be working - but its great feedback. Also, does this mean you read the Madeline books? I used to have a Madeline doll. I wish I still had that, for some grainy snuff style photos. --Puffskein 04:38, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

I don't think I even knew who Madeline was as a kid, but have about a million nieces and nephews so I've seen just about everything. Yeah, grainy pics of the doll would have been cool, but I like what you did with the images. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 04:48, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

I honestly can't tell. Are you trolling me? If so, not bad. If not, you really don't understand how planes work. Also, I was talking to sannse. =D -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:40, 20 Nov

I didn't really think about trolling. I ran into a problem and posted a message on Sannse's talk page seeing if she had a solution. Apparently, she wasn't on, so I kept going there and not doing anything. I saw your post so I responded. As for planes, I am not even close to being an expert. However, one of my best friends is, and I do have a basic understanding of physics. I think a plane that's traveling at the same velocity of the surface it's resting upon is not going to take off, but I could be wrong. I deal more with moving bodies outside of an atmosphere. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:55, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
See my comment on Sannse's talk page. Your question isn't the same as the Mythbuster's episode, but is actually a completely opposite scenario. And even if it was the same, the pilot had been flying for 10 years, so presumably you couldn't say to him "you really don't understand how planes work." Happy editing! WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 08:35, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

## editGod I'm so bored now

Obviously not making progress. And when I try to write or rewrite my own articles I get bored shitless, so I have a suspicion that I am a crap writer. Do you have any cure for this? Is this what people call writer's block? But my GOd. I'm taking so long. Do you think AAN would help? Oh yeah obviously haven't started on any church thing, and very sorry that you're the person that I choose to bug. ~ 12:43, Nov 21, 2009

The best thing I can suggest is to do one of the following:
1. Do a PEEreview. This forces you to think analytically about writing and it tends to make you think of creative ways to improve an article
2. Vote on articles on VFH. Same as above, but covering a broader range but in less depth
3. Rewrite an article. There is a lot of crap on Uncyclopedia. You can help save a crap article fro deletion
4. Write an article in your user space. It doesn't have to be good - it just forces you to write something
5. Read a newspaper. The world is full of stupidity. Find a stupid story, or a story that you can see something stupid about, and do it as an UnNews
6. Play follow the bouncing Wikipedia ball. Go onto Wikipedia and go to a random page. If you can't find something stupid there then click on a random link. Keep going until you find something that you can see stupidity in that you can write up.
7. Click on the things to do page. You can rewrite, proofread, expand stubs, make a requested article, blah blah blah.
I have used all of these to one extent or another to create an article. The first hurdle is to start writing. If you start off with random humour, then you start with random humour, and that means you have started. But you shouldn't be looking at the dreaded block until at least after your first 10,000 words.Pup
Oh thanks, but this is so random, us talking on somebody else's talk page. But I guess that happens a lot in Uncyc huh? What I mean is I'm still rewriting the articles I started before and during Conservation Week, which felt like ages ago. And to think, I might not have internet next week. I always write with one browser on Wikipedia, one on Dictionary or Thesaurus.com and several others on various random sites. And I now know why you never attempted to rewrite the articles on Australian cities, no matter how crappy they are. They're very, very hard to write about. ~ 14:47, Nov 21, 2009
Doing stuff is overrated, films with Morgan Freeman in suggest that we should all just sit and watch the world go by and contemplate things that shine. So add look at a shiny thing to that list. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:47, November 21, 2009 (UTC)
Looking at nudie bits is also a popular way to obtain inspiration. I've scratched the surface of the Australian cities articles before, and I don't find them funny, but by the same token I don't know how to make them funny. If you're doing those you may actually be trying to push shit uphill. Get off topic for a while to try and get the creative juices flowing and then come back to them maybe. And feel free to make them short articles. Pup
Lol thanks Why. But no way I'm doing any more on Aus cities, so its not "those" but "that". I'm sort of 25% into one for CW and it's bad, bad I tell ya. I would feel bad for starting a rewrite and abandoning it though. Sometimes I'm beginning to think that there might be better things to do in my summer holidays than to write articles for Uncyclopedia.{Nerd!) Sometimes I think I really want a VFH. Sometimes writing the articles are fun, but this is not always the case, but It's brilliant when I come up with what I perceive to be a good joke. I just really hope I can complete the things I'm working on in a reasonable amount of time. ~ 18:59, Nov 22, 2009
Better things to do on your summer holiday that edit Uncyclopedia? Blasphemer! Say 12 Hail Sophias while fiddling with your rosaries! (Seriously, do what you want to do here. I'm glad you're here as you show real talent and seem to be a nice person, but it's not like we're getting paid for this.) WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 01:31, November 23, 2009 (UTC)
We aren't? No wonder my pay cheques aren't coming through. User talk:PuppyOnTheRadio

## edit Review template

User:POTR/PEE Let me know what you think of the layout before I throw it into the mix. Pup

I appreciate what you've done. If it puts the reviewer's self introduction or opening comments in the box, that's good (I haven't used it to do a fake review to see what the final results are). As for the rest, there seems to be a place for prose comments and not prose comments. Also I almost always combine comments for Prose and Formatting with Humour because otherwise I end up repeating myself (example: Prose and Formatting: "God if dog spelled backwards!"--should be "is" not "if." Humour: "God if dog spelled backwards"--I don't find this funny). Thus I really wouldn't have to have a separate section for spelling, another for grammar, etc. As I had posted on your talk page, I actually like using what I have here except that I'd like the self-intro part in the box, but that's really not a big deal as I have the intro really big so hopefully they'll see it. Thanks for working on it, though! WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:07, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Also why is the right mouse button disabled on your signature? WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:07, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Disabled? Don't know what you mean. It treats the image as a link though, so that might be what you are talking about, but the truth is left click will take you to my user page, which redirects to my talk-page now, and I have my vanity page elsewhere. And I hope you don't mind, but I took the liberty of adjusting your template slightly. Pup
What I mean is that when I right click on your signature, it doesn't give me the options Open, Open in New Tab, Open in New Window, etc. I wanted to check your Pee page while still keeping this window up so I could make sure my comments were accurate. I did it anyway, but it was a bit more work. As for the template, I'll take a look. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:27, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
It works for me, but it is a little fussy - it seems to only place the link about halfway down the image. I don't know why, as I'm actually just using the template that I found, so I haven't really looked into it. I've added the link the the text on either side now though, so that might make it a little easier. Otherwise I've just done Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Keanu Reeves (author request) so you can see what the final result looks like. I omitted the Fcomment as I usually just repeat what I say in the misc area here anyway. Pup

Puppy, thanks for what you did to my Pee Review Table! WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 08:43, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Hi all. Puppy there is a minor problem with your new PEE table, and that is that it doesn't move the review to the reviewed section when you have completed it. The regular PEE table tends to move stuff between queues when text is entered into any of the fields below, and save is pressed. Your template isn't doing this. I had a look through myself and I can't Identify the problem, could you take another look and see if you can do, for the sake of my poor brain when I start checking stuff. --ChiefjusticeDS 09:21, November 22, 2009 (UTC)
I'll look into it when I get the chance. That is damned annoying though. Pup
There isn't any real rush, I checked it in, and nobody else is likely to review it. Just so you know for the next review you do. --ChiefjusticeDS 11:03, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Uncyclopedia:VFH/HowTo:Be Homeless in America

Done. One thing I ould suggest quickly though is putting a {{-}} at the end of each 2nd level header, as it tidies up the hanging floats and makes the layout a little neater. (It's not a content change so all is good.) Pup

Thanks! But I'm not sure what you're suggesting. Could you put it in nowiki /nowiki so I can see exactly what you mean? Do I type the {{ }} part or what? WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:54, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

By popping a {{-}} on your page I've aligned this below the picture. If you remove the {{-}} and have a look at what it does to the header. It adds a little white space but is a neater layout. Pup

Sorry but I still don't know what you're talking about. I tried putting it after a subheader and got ==Header== just as if I'd put a nowiki command in front of it. When I tried it right before the header it put a whole lot of white space in the article. I tried putting it on the next line and still got the white space. And you suggested it be at the end of a second level header, but your example above puts it before the header. Sorry I'm not getting it (and if you meant adding white space, personally I don't care for it in the article--it puts large breaks in the middle of sections). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 21:29, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
It was the white space thing I was looking for. I avoid white space as much as possible, but I also hate the images hanging into the next section - that looks tacky. Your article, your call. Pup

## edit Hey Whyner

I wrote an article. It's on Pee Review. Could you review it? You'll know which one is mine when you get there. Tuesday, 06:50, Nov 24 2009

I was really wondering why you wouldn't provide the name of the article, and was thinking, 'So he asks me for a favor and then I got to try and figure out what it is?' Then I saw the name of the article...." (By the way, not too long ago MacMania gave me an idea for an article named...well, see it HERE). Why do I need to provide this? 21:47, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for playing along and being surprised. I think Mac's post planted the original idea in my head, but I didn't take the Interweb approach. :/ Tuesday, 22:27, Nov 24 2009
I really was surprised (I got a kick out of seeing the name), and signed up to Pee Review it. Although if I review an article named after me, is that nepotism? WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 23:20, November 24, 2009 (UTC)
So does this mean I should start working on User:POTR/Necropaxx? Pup

## edit Excellent Work, Why

Thanks a lot for your detailed Pee of my (your? our?) article. I completely agree that it reads like a first draft - the thing's only got about 8 edits total. Oh, one more thing: On the talk page of the article I address the "what was the question?" question. Oh, one more one more thing:

 Rejoice, Why do I need to provide this?! You have been entitled to the Golden Shower Award For donating high quality material to the Pee Review.
Cheers! Thursday, 00:08, Nov 26 2009
Glad I could help. And your answer is very funny (actually, I liked it. That's twice you've zinged me with the same article.) WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:39, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Jamie Lynn Spears Preggers Thank

 Miley Spears thanks you for voting For the VFH nominated Jamie Lynn Spears. It was selected as the Feature article for November 19, 2009!
DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 01:40, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Unashamed vote whoring

Hey. You know how you got three in a row on the front page? I'm a signature away from that with stereotype. I'm not asking you to vote for - I'm asking you to consider voting on my article when you have the chance. Pup

I read it a day or two ago, and honestly I wasn't sure how I felt, so didn't vote. Parts of it I thought were funny, but some parts seemed like description without humour, and it took me a while to figure some of it out. I'll look at it again. Also I didn't get three in a row, just two (and one of those was co-written). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:36, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Also why I don't mind you pointing out your articles to me (after all, I did it with you), if an article's been on VFH for more than two days, I've read it. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:41, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

Which is why I was surprised with the lack of ecclesiastical feedback. Makes sense though. Pup

## edit Intelligent Math

Excellent review, as always. I have made the changes you suggested and I've added on one more section. I'm not positive that this last section works though, as it is almost pure mathematics, but actually brings the article to a much stronger conclusion. I have to play with the formatting a little, as the inclusion of this has mucked up the layout, and I have to do something with the book cover. (Honestly I just loved the image, and I was trying to get the concept of intelligent design into people's minds at the start of the article.) But ignoring my ravings, what do you think of the amended ending? (And I am having trouble seeing a fault in logic in it, which is even better.) Pup

Glad I could help. As for the equation, I'm about half asleep right now (I don't know why I come here in that state, but I do), so may be missing something. How did you go from the top step to the next step below:
$e = m * \frac{x^2}{t^2}$
$t^2 = \frac{1}{mx^2}$
If I looked at this when I was awake I could probably figure it out (assuming there's not an error there). But even so, I think you should list an intermediate step or two to show what happens to e. (And no comment about dividing infinity into one or figuring the square root of zero or that I've thought for a long time that the holy but actually fudged equation $E = mc^2 \,\!$ really is slightly off). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:58, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
Also I just noticed this: "...equal to mass times the square of the speed of light ($mc^2$), and speed ($v$)" It looks like speed is c then v (yes, I know there's a difference, but you might want to clear that up). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 07:04, November 28, 2009 (UTC)
I like what you did, essentially still ignoring the difference but covering it up better. Somebody with a decent understanding of algebra will likely be able to follow the logic, and really wonder at the result. Cool. (In case anybody reading this who doesn't get the math joke cares, c is not a variable it's a constant, which was one of the weird things to be show about 100 years ago. And just about any math involving infinity (or one of the infinite number of infinities) gets rather screwy in algebra which is one reason for having calculus, even though I still contend calculus is fudge math). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 02:38, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Shucks!

 Hot diggity, boy!You caught that fish so good that Necropaxx is gonna thank you! "Thank you." ~ Necropaxx 

Sunday, 05:46, Nov 29 2009

And I deserve to be thanked too, dadgummit. Did you know the article is featured today because I went to IRC and said, "Hey, there's no article being featured today? One of you young whippersnapper fancy pants admins better fix that or I'm gonna drop a stick of dynamite down your shorts." That got them moving--works every time. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:50, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
Hey thanks! I would have but the admins have a nasty habit of banning you if it's your article you're whining about. Anyway, thanks again! Sunday, 05:53, Nov 29 2009
You betcha. Now you do something for me and don't send me back to that old folks home. I wanna go to Palm Springs. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:56, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
I already voted for that! And you, a man of the cloth! Oh, the shame! Sunday, 06:24, Nov 29 2009
No, my son, you misunderstood. I knew you had already voted for the only article I have up for VFH--believe me, I checked the thing every day. It's just that with winter coming on, I want to go to Palm Springs and I thought you could get me a ticket. I wasn't whoring for a vote; I was whoring for money. It's perfectly acceptable for a holy man to whore for money. God says so. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 02:18, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
Whoring for money is not just acceptible - it is canon. Speaking of which... Pup
Puppy you sneaky little mongrel. That may be the cleverest way I've seen yet to get your article on VFH. Monday, 03:03, Nov 30 2009
Hasn't worked yet. :( Pup
And Father - does this mean I am the sole IRC holdout? (It's weird calling my nehpew father. Of course, I'm a southerner, so I'm used to it.) Pup

Why do I need to provide this?
for your efforts in improving our world by
PEE reviewing Intelligent Mathematics.
May you treasure your Puppy blessing always

Thanks. So a church father got an award for a Creationist view of Math? Go figure. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 18:17, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
Also I tend to avoid IRC, but am not strictly speaking an IRC virgin anymore. But I only went there because I was hoping to talk to God. Really. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 18:18, November 30, 2009 (UTC)

## editAhem

You are such a whore. All right, I'll be your priestly pimp.  Father WHY??? (confessions)  04:55, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Little Mermaid

I was looking at her talkpage and saw your conversations... that has to be the cutest thing I've seen on Uncyclopedia ever. :D Tuesday, 01:55, Dec 1 2009

Cuteness runs in our family. My Mommy's Miley Spears, you know. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 02:08, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Yes it does! We're all cuties. DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 04:38, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
And I'm... attracted to cute things! Pup
Yeah, well, you're a part of the family. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:20, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Three Articles and All Features

That's my boy! How do you do it? Congratulatory huggies and kissies! DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 04:45, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Mommy! But really it's 2 1/2 out of 2 1/2 as Syndrome co-wrote one. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 04:53, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
But with all the excellent work that you've done here in helping others out you get an honorary 1/2 feature. Pup

## editFor the sake of my sanity

Please do not remove data from the list, ever. I realise what you were doing, but we tend to just leave the end of the month values as they are since nobody really cares who the winners and the slightly less winners were. The table is only there as a reference for voting on RotM and seeing your review statistics. Congrats on the award and I hope to see more PEE from you in the future, but please, exercise a bit of caution with list, especially on the first day of the month when I am trying to archive it and move everything around. I edit conflicted with myself and then your edit caught my attention and I thought I had lost the data somewhere, it was literally the most confusing experience of my life. --ChiefjusticeDS 09:45, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

Whyner! Come on, get it together! Says the user who never once screwed up Cajek's list not even once, no sir... Tuesday, 15:04, Dec 1 2009
Well amusingly, big uncle UU returned and did it properly, in a different way to both of us. But Why was closer, I was just moving things. My main concern was that I thought I had lost a ton of data in a cut and paste move. So Why was doing the right thing, just at the wrong time, as we should all remember that the first day of the month = Chief trying to move stats and tables around, trying to work out what needs changed and trying to remember what he has already changed so he doesn't change it again. So everything is explained. --ChiefjusticeDS 17:25, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
Sorry I created a fright fest. I've been waiting to be able to edit there for a month, and saw how things had been listed in the past so thought I'd help, but maybe jumped the gun. I'll be more cautious in the future. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 17:52, December 1, 2009 (UTC)

## edit The Next Generalization

I'd like to thank you for taking a look at my first full article on here and for many of the suggestions. There are a lot of things to take on board as regards for some improvement (When I get around to it - I have other articles I want to finish first). There are, however, a few comments I feel I need to make on the review.

The formatting on the pictures is a little difficult in some respects. I take it you are not using a widescreen monitor? I ask because, when I try to correct the issue for a squarer screen, there are display problems when viewing in a widescreen mode, and I decided to keep them like this as most new monitors now tend to be widescreen (At least I haven't seen a non-widescreen monitor sold for some time otherwise, I might not have a widescreen now).

More traditional screens are usually at about a 13 to 10 ration, whereas wide-screens are often at somewhere near 16 to 10 ratio. I believe most computers in use still have monitors at 13 to 10. This is part of the reason some users prefer all pics on the right hand side, because it doesn't have as much change from one to the other. But when you place pics close to each other, or one on the left and one on the right, you'll likely have display problems (plus, like I said, a lot of people here don't like it). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:15, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

My spelling on the article is all UK spelling (Programme, whingeing, cousellor with 2 "l"s etc). Realize (as well as generalize) may not look like it if you're not from the UK, but it is the main entry in the Oxford English Dictionary with (also -ise) added, which means that both are acceptable but the use of a z is the most common. (On a side note, when talking about computer coding, "program" is actually the correct spelling in the UK, but not for any other use - yes, we're a bit weird like that).

Ah, my school British English and American English both go back a few years, and because English teachers on both sides of the pond are usually about 20 years behind the times, I may have been mistaken on the range of what's acceptable in current usage. I used to get my spelling corrected at university because I'd forget which side of the pond I was on. Personally, I prefer British usage for British articles and American for American, but that's just me. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:17, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

On the artificial gravity bit, you may have misread the first line, as I actually used the word "whether" not "whenever", which in this context is grammatically acceptable. The ground thing - I may need to clarify that the observer is actually meant to be in a spacecraft (In which case, that confusing bit is technically accurate). The last bit of this section, perhaps you could help me on, I thought it was clear that the greater number of people could go into space because they didnt need the lengthy training, so I'm not sure how to clarify it.

You're right about whether-whenever; I actually wrote it correctly in the first part of my sentence, then somehow changed it. I do suggest, however, that the sentences in this section be shortened, which is probably part of the reason I got lost. When I write a review, I purposely try to avoid much re-reading, because I'm writing a review for an article that most readers are only going to read once. In this case, I'm probably more familiar with the Star Trek universe than most of the people who'll be reading the article, and while I don't claim to be an astrophysicist, I'm probably also more familiar with space travel than most of the readers. If I don't catch it on first reading, they likely won't either. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:18, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

The resounding success bit - I'm not sure is really an inconsistency, as the comment about the long continuous blur was about the period, not the show.

Then I would suggest simply cutting the part about the blur of the period, because to me it doesn't seem to add anything. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:20, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

The 47 season run is there for reason, there were a lot of episodes. The number itself was picked for 2 reasons: 1. It ended with 7, and 2. err.. well, you might want to look up the number 47 on Wikipedia and memory alpha. And then again, who says that there can only be one season in per year.

The network that aired the series does. In America in the last 1980s and early 1990s, television shows had one season per year (actually, that's still generally true). And American series tend to have many more episodes per year than British--the average during the time was about 26 episodes per year, which is what ST:TNG had. The British Red Dwarf, which ran at about the same time (and which I also Pee Reviewed), had 6 or 8 per year, which is common for Britain. Forty-seven seasons means it was on for forty-seven years. Also, is "season" in current use for a year's episodes in Britain now? What was called a "season" in America is what used to be called a "series" in Britain; I thought it still was, but maybe not. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:22, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and the pet thing is only there as a tie in to the Star Trek article, as that part was actually my inspiration for writing this one.

I can appreciate the tie-in, but I also Pee reviewed the Star Trek article, and said there I found the cat joke "mildly amusing," but that was because of the bit about the cat coming for food whether it was called by its full name or not. Just having a pet named "Star Trek: The Next Generation" I didn't find amusing, even if the cat is an iguana. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:23, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

I apologise for seeming a little defensive of certain things, as I am happy with a lot of the suggestions. SuperBario 04:56, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you're fine. There's nothing wrong with defending your position after a Pee Review, as long as you listen to suggestions, which you have, and don't get mean about it, which you haven't. You certainly don't have to agree with me, and as you pointed out, I am capable of errerr. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:25, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

## edit L.A. Kings Pee Review

OK, point taken to provide more detailed reviews. Actually, I'm glad this has changed. In the past people gave 20-word reviews just to get through the backlog. I can see they're way more in-depth than they used to be.

I do normally take these reviews seriously. I've received six Golden Shower awards. In this case, the writer didn't seem to really want a review, but was using Pee Review to solicit more writers to expand the article (it was an I.P., so maybe they didn't understand the purpose of review). That's why I didn't spend much time on it. But today I added some more comments anyway. Sir Roger 19:57, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Weird timing! At the moment you were writing this, I happened to notice the Pee Review had been updated on my watchlist, and was just getting ready to go to your page when I saw something had been posted on my user page. Great, and thanks a lot for the expansion and giving some detailed ideas for improvement! Welcome to Pee Reviews 2009! (Of course, it's almost 2010 now, but I'm not ready for that yet). Good job! WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 20:00, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Ahem

 A Note From the Uncyclopedia Legal Department I see that you would like to become part of the department, due to your unlegal use of the userboxen. Perhaps you'd like to register here and create a unique title? 20:06, 4 December 2009, Head of Department

I had registered in avvenire in accordance with the Laws of the Unglican Church. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 00:03, December 5, 2009 (UTC)
 YOUR REGISTRATION WAS SUCCESSFUL In accordance with the Uncyclopedia Legal Department, I hereby verify your membership. You are now legally official and stuff. Cheers!  22:51, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

## editTrip

I happened to read your discussion on How to: Trip. I have a constructive idea on it - one I got from the one thing that was slightly funny in your article (hunting). Why not scrap the idea people don't see as humoristic (I myself am pretty lenient at that and don't see humour in it as yet) and pick a somewhat easier piece to write: Things not to do when tripping? There might be one already but in case there isn't, I have a clear construction idea and a few details for you to get going. Let me know (here or on my own talk page) if you want to do it and we'll have a go. Otherwise: keep it UnLegal. -- 08:51, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

Actually, my involvement was trying to help out a new user, Stixsmaster, who's the one who's been writing the article. You might want to let Stixmaster know your ideas. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:10, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
Uh, all right, I didn't check the history. Thanks, I will when I have time. -- 06:41, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

## editThanks a you a very mucha

Hi, I just got back from vacation and noticed you nominated me for screw up of the month, I mean noob of the month. Thanks. I'll get back to the articles I've created (see my user page) and put up a couple more, and will prove to the community that your nomination was not in vain (and Mom, I told you I'd visit you in the home at Christmas, and not before, so please don't think this nomination ploy will get me there any sooner. Give my best to that nurse, Kelly, and ask if she's been naughty or nice, you may be surprised at the vixen's answer, ROFCUHLOL. OK, give my love to Dad). Aleister in Chains 19:06, December 6, 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Go forth and be productive, my son. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:11, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Didn't we just

have a conversation where Mordillo said not to undo edits of established editors without talking to them first? Is this the adolescent and rebellious phase of your Uncyclopedia life span? -- 23:43, December 7, 2009 (UTC)

I apologize. This is not an excuse, but recently I've been hit with a lot of pain and a rash of personal tragedy. I guess I've been shooting first and asking questions later. I posted a question about the policy to RAHB here. Thanks for your patience. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 23:48, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, man. Uncyclopedia's not much of a support group, but we do have some funny articles. Reading those might cheer you up a little. -- 23:55, December 7, 2009 (UTC)
Why, that was the last time you pulled such a stunt. I will not be saying that again. Syndrome, unless you have a really, and I mean a really good reason that will make both myself and the said NOTM burst into tears of joy, remove that vote. ~ 00:07, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
Nothing I do has a good reason. My mediocre reason was because he (she?) just voted for himself so I wanted to set the score back to what it was. Yeah, it's not even slightly against the rules to vote for yourself, but sometimes I see noobs get so caught up in the thought of the award that they contribute nothing to the wiki but whoring. So I wanted to put the award out of his mind and discourage him from going down that road. I never intended to leave the vote; I would have changed it as soon as I decided who to vote {{for}} (probably Snowyowl). But I removed already since you asked. -- 00:15, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
Whatever your intention was, it didn't achieve the desired affect. ~ 00:28, December 8, 2009 (UTC)
But it could have under different circumstances. I still claim the benefit of doubt. -- 00:29, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

## editUser page

Have done much work on my user page, and although the offending and grevious to the eye images still dwell there, please take a look and tell me if it has changed enough to pass your muster. Twanks, Aleister in Chains 16:06, December 8, 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you got the warning at the top and the "offensive" pics (which don't offend me in the slightest) at the bottom. The only thing I was concerned about was someone checking your user page at their job and all of a sudden "Wham! Boobies!" and here comes their ultraconservative-nudity-is-from-the-devil-boss. Or their boss isn't there, but has a program installed on the computer that saves everything that appears on their computer screen or at least every link and the boss comes and checks it later (actually, most computers save the history of sites visited by default. I remember one time telling a friend, "you want me to tell you what websites you visited a year ago?" The history was still there, and they had no idea.) WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:17, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Turning hate into humour

Yes, I'm awesome, I know. :p FreddIs Great In Bedd 06:29, December 9, 2009 (UTC)
Truthfully, in my opinion that discussion starts out being one of the worst things I've seen on Uncyclopedia, and turns out being one of the funniest. And it's perhaps my favorite example of averting a possible disaster I've seen on the site. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 06:37, December 9, 2009 (UTC)

## editTurning humour into hate

A great name for an article. I'll have to read what was referenced above. On the noob posting, I had great fun posting it, and would probably sacrifice a win to keep the joke there. But now it's changed, and I don't know if I got a vote because of it or not, and it's now beyond my ethical control to erase or keep it. It's now confused me! Hoisted on my own Captain Piccard. Thanks for the comment though, you keep me on the straight and narrow (user page discussion about the user page and all). Aleister in Chains 01:57, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

You can still vote--although you already did, didn't you? Check the vote count. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 02:00, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
No, didn't vote for myself, just played with the time machine concept which is still making me laugh. The other post was to add the four other articles, thanks for listing three of them (an idea, can you list those four on your list, and then that particular post can be removed) When I do vote I will be objective and look at everyone's history, edits, fun-quotient, etc. Last month I voted for Puffskein using my criteria, she well deserved it. Now time for bed and South Park, I must get off the innernests now. Thanks again, Aleister in Chains 03:05, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
My post was intended to show the articles you had done in your first month. You're up for the award against people who have been here for only a few days in some cases. Personally, I don't find it a fair comparision to vote based on what one user did in a month and a half vs. another in a few days. If you did more than I listed in your first month, I can change my comment. And as you didn't intend your comment to be a vote for, I will fix the count for you. Thanks for your clarification, and happy editing! WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 03:10, December 10, 2009 (UTC)""
All seven of the articles mentioned in the two posts (yours and mine) were started in the first week and worked on for the first two weeks or so. I actually stopped editing for almost three weeks to housesit, for family committments (poor Doris, if's a shame we had to commit her), Thanksgiving, recreational drug use, and vacation time. In the past few days I've touched them up somewhat, and played with other work, and am working off-site on another unnews posting. Twanks for changing the vote count, Aleister in Chains 14:14, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
While I actually started and did most of the work on the seven articles within my first week, in addition to other edits, I must confess a lack of time spent in choosing photographs for some of the articles in that time period. While I have fine tuned the seven-deadly articles since, played with my user page, edited other articles, I've actually spent most of my time helping old ladies at least halfway across the street (one of my favorite hobbies). Aleister in Chains 00:25, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
I changed the comment on my nomination. One of the articles was started as an IP, so I can't officially count that one, but mentioned it. You can remove or cross out your comment on NotM if you like. (Note that, in general, it's better to strikeout comments than to remove them from a public forum, but as I've added your numbers to mine, I don't think there'd be a problem). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 02:11, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Changed my comment to reflect your changes, but changed it from the future so I'm not sure if it stays that way until then. By the way, reporting from the future, health care passes, Brett Favre wins MVP, and Tiger Woods is sexting me incessently. I haven't even met him yet, so that makes me a little nervous. Aleister in Chains 10:43, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Family Ninjastar

You're a good Daddy, son! DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 04:43, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Well, thank you, but actually I think Puffskein did it on her own. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 20:46, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Pedobear Pics

Whyner did you still want to change the pic with the four bears? Cuz really I think the article might be ready. :) DAP Dame Pleb Com. Miley Spears (talk) 04:50, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, sorry I forgot about that. Will try to do something within the next few days. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 20:47, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

## editחג שמח

Thank you. I will treasure it. Sniff, I'm feeling verklempt. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 22:09, December 10, 2009 (UTC)
My eyes hurt. Pup
Oh Puppy, all you have to do is look at it in 11 dimensions. With string theory, all things are easy. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 02:29, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Re: Why You Need To Provide This

 WELCOME TO VORTEX 102The first semester will cover the entire spectrum of human biological vortices, with the first quarter focusing exclusively on the colonic vortex. In this animated simulation, the event horizon (colon) can be clearly distinguished. Unlike the hydraulic, atmospheric and gravitational vortex, the biological vortices aren't open ended systems with dubious conclusions as to where the crap goes in and comes out. Since biological systems are easily identifiable and make for an easy study, we'll be spending a lot of time on them. By understanding the biological vortices, we may glean insight into the larger picture. The foundation of all knowledge starts with the colonic vortex so study this animated gif for no less than an hour a day for the next week.Thank You! Dr S

Without taking and passing this course, we will not provide that. The economics of "this" for "that" constitute the foundations of all civilization and I implore you to reconsider your position. Thank You! --    16:31, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, well, in that case.... WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 20:45, December 10, 2009 (UTC)

## edit Forum:Fuck This: My Final Notes

Forum:Fuck This: My Final Notes -- one of my favorite statements by an admin, or someone being imitated by an admin, here. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 08:03, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

And this is not. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 01:15, December 12, 2009 (UTC)

## editThanks for the review

I will print it out and frame it and look at it every day. Ok I haven't actually finish reading it yet, cuz I hate reading reviews of my own works, but I'm going out to dinner in a few minutes and will try to go through it when I get back. Thanks again. ~ 10:06, Dec 11, 2009

You're welcome and stuff. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 01:16, December 12, 2009 (UTC)