Why? talk:Give Up

link	score /50	user	lowest score	date	comment
Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Give Up	45.5	MaddMax	concept: 8	12/21
Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Give Up	45	Unknown user	images: 8	12/22
Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Give Up	46.3	Necropaxx	humor: 8	12/22
avg = 45.6 --- lowest = 8

Humour:	9	Good humor. I like the tone of the article a lot. I also think that the velociraptors are cool, and that the content is pretty solid. I would, however, like to see more sex (and why you should give up cause your not going to get any) in this article. Okay? Also, there should be some references to why Jesus wants you to give up (Jesus will still love you), a Russian reversal, and maybe an Oscar Wilde quote. Those are important.
Concept:	8	I guess this is a good concept. It is pretty fair, funny, and such. It's not as funny as the cat and toast and flipping upside article, but it's good.
Prose and formatting:	10	You must know what prose is. Also, it is formatted well enough.
Images:	9.5	Good images. I especially like how the puppy is cute, and your kind of thinking, "hey, i'm cute!" and then you see the raptor and your like "Shit, I'm dinner". Charlie Brown is good, but not as funny.
Miscellaneous:	9	This article is fun, smart, and humorous. I guess it doesn't need to much work. Good job.
Final Score:	45.5	Word. You told me to give up, but I ain't that dull. your article rocks, but I ain't no cull. You emit super rays, but I've got a hard skull. In terms of grammar errors your meter was null!
Reviewer:	--MaddMax 21:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Well considering i started it, i might as well review your work-- Sir Unknown User ^{(Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN)} 02:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Humour:	9	You really aced this part!!-I couldn't come close to making nearly as many great punchlines in one sections as you did! But here are the parts I was going to include if you had let me write it (key points in bold: Needs more negativity in the tone, needs to FEEL like the author wants to give up. An interesting thing I was going to do is make it into a tale of personal failure and the eventual giving up by the author. I want to see more rebuttals to the Why?:Don't Give Up point of view those "warm and fuzzy never give up" kind. Do a section telling the true story of that frog caught in the bird's throat, and how bad it's life was because it refused to give up. Essentially, rebut every positive benefit of going on with life without going into promoting suicide cause that would ruin the article. Charlie Brown should be reverted to his true situation in which he never gave up instead of yours where he gave up. That way you can use Charlie as a better example for the futility of not giving up. You really fucked 'er up guuud man RRRREAL FUCKIN GOOD (and makes me depressed that you can write any article I write better) so I give you full credit for writing it. I still want a quasi award for being the biological father.
Concept:	10	Sweet jesus on a fuckin stick!!!! This needed to be done. And done right, I guess, which you did almost perfectly. Seriously why hasn't anyone ever written about this topic before?? This was one of those topics that you would see as an article you would expect an expert to have written 2 years ago and have already been featured multiple times. Wow. I was sooooo close to having written it. So fuckin bloody close. You did awesome.
Prose and formatting:	9	I would have written it as a personal memoir in a scholarly tone, but you don't have to do that if you don't want to. Make it seem like Herman Melville is there writing an article full of his "subtle, yet blatant use of symbolism" (I did that for my Melville essay). I agree with maddmax: You know what you need to do.
Images:	8	Loved the raptors!! And the PUPPIEZZ!! But it needs that picture of that frog in the bird to really complete it. Maybe someone can chop it so that the frog ends up dying "because he didn't give up".
Miscellaneous:	9	Freakn' awesome. Avged it.
Final Score:	45	You really killed this one!!! YOU FUCKIN' KILLED IT!!! In a good way, though! Soo close to writing it...so many ideas...soo close....
Reviewer:	-- Sir Unknown User (Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN) 02:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Humour:	8	Good humor. I like the tone. However, I feel that the humor is sorta pread out there a bit. It's there, but it's not there. In other words, it's a little scattered. But good job.
Concept:	9.5	I like the concept. A valuable addition to the site. The only reason that I didn't give a 10 is that this article was bound to show up, whether you wrote it or not. Just a little too expected. But good job.
Prose and formatting:	9.8	Very well formatted. I noticed 1 or 2 mistakes with your/you're, but other than that, good job.
Images:	10	Very nicely done. My favorite is the cat hanging on to the string. That was gold. Good job.
Miscellaneous:	9	This article is fun, smart, and humorous. Just organize your funnies. But good job.
Final Score:	46.3	...I gave up.
Reviewer:	• • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 20:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Lets do this as a co-op, aight?-- Sir Unknown User ^{(Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN)} 01:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, what ideas you gots, uu?   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 20 / 01:28)

Comment. So far, so good. • • • Necropaxx (T) {~} 02:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

YAY! That article's 95% Cajek, right there.   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 20 / 02:26)

You bastard, you were supposed to let ME write it! Now "I" have to remove all the crap I don't like! JK. Good job. Now save some for me! And fix my sig!-- Sir Unknown User ^{(Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN)} 02:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't give up on this article. The joke is in the fact that no matter how much the article tells you to give up the article does not, kinda like in Do Not Read. At the end, whack 'em with a classic clincher, such as this article has given up, or simply put, "I give up" near wherever you want the end to be (after we expand it first) right smack dab in the middle of a sentence. It should go like....you know....damn!...oh I give up on explaining it to you.-- Sir Unknown User ^{(Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN)} 03:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea! I'll keep working.   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 20 / 03:29)

This was supposed to be a co-op...I'll finish it and put it on pee. Please do not pee review it yourself, as that would be extremely weird considering you wrote 75% of the article. If it does well on pee, and it gets vfhed, we'll both take credit (since I was the person who started it). M'kay?-- Sir Unknown User ^{(Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN)} 22:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Unknown, you got the outlet article, let me have this one... pweeeze?   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 20 / 23:38)

Excuse me? I wasn't kidding when I said let's do a co-op. And my response to your request:

NUTS!

"I" started the outlet article, and "I" started this one. Fine, you can have 50% ownership. But if it magically makes article of the century, I want half of your trophy. I want half of everything this article makes. I refuse to give in to your monopolizing spree! "We're not gonna take it. No! we're not gonna take it. We're not gonna take it any more...-- Sir Unknown User ^{(Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN)} 00:09, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

...well, that's very unfair ...and kinda crazy   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 21 / 00:19)

I know! How 'bout UU gets 51 percent, Cajek gets 51 percent, and I take the remaining i percent. That way, you both get more than half, yet neither has an unfair share over the other. Savvy? --YeOldeLuke 08:25, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Can't we both have 200%?   Le Cejak • <-> (Dec 24 / 13:45)

Sure. Then I'll take the remaining ¼ i percent. Sounds good!--YeOldeLuke 23:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC)