Wikipedia:Peer review/Uncyclopedia/archive2

Uncyclopedia[edit]

I didn't write this page, but I'd like it to achieve featured article status, admittedly as part of my grand scheme to publicise the site. :] Well, I do care about the quality of the article as well, so a peer review would be appreciated whether it leads to FA or not. Have at it, criticise anything and everything. --Keitei (talk) 16:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest adding references? Tarret 23:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, just remember I haven't responded yet. I've been trying... it's a difficult topic to reference, outside of the site itself. There are lots of references to where in the site it says certain things (interwiki links), but outside of that... I can try! --Keitei (talk) 02:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a pretty decent article. ~~It could use some Oscar Wilde Quotes, maybe a thing or two about kitten huffing, and a Worst 100 list here or there.~~ Otherwise, I'm not really sure how this could be a featured article.--

talk to me crimes against humanity23:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is way too listy is likely to get killed at FAC - suggest turning some of the lists into prose. RN 09:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The kitschyness of the "claims the reverse" thing gets old fast. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 11:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]