Forum:Frequent urination? Excessive supply of PEE? Help is available.
There are several hundred entries on the current Pee Review list.
Authors — If there are any articles on the list that you have already received sufficient feedback on, please put {{Thanks!|~~~}} at the bottom of the Pee page, cut 'n' copy the Pee comments to your article's talk page, and remove the P/R template from your page (unless you've already done so, or just never bothered to add it in the first place).
Lit. Critics — Many of these articles have received little or no feedback. Say something, even if it's only, "This needs more jokes, but I don't have any suggestions." or "I like it, but I'm not sure it's good enough for VFH yet." Or edit the articles. Add jokes, do spelling and grammar checks. People are finally posting their work there, but this won't continue if they are ignored.
Thanks for your attention, unless you aren't paying this the least bit of attention, in which case chew my root.
~ T. (talk) 14:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- NO ROOT CHEWING IN PUBLIC! But yass, one of the only damn ways an author knows if his work is working for anybody other than himself is by getting feedback. Part I is to get people aware that a critique is available; part II is to provide that critique. I join with Todd in
chewing my Grammarencouraging people to donate pee.----OEJ 15:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Any reason to not list the articles in reverse order? That is, the oldest first, so that not just the new ones get looked at? This might trim the list, as older authors decide that either A) "it's not worth continuing", or B) "wee, I got some help" or C) "good enough". I mean, is Hinoa still looking for help on Holy Order of Ramen? Additionally, having the earliest first might encourage authors to help review others, to clear off the pile and get theirs to the top. 
Sir Famine, Gun ♣ Petition » 11/10 19:32
Broken?
- Is the template supposed to put your sig there? I think it's borked. Could someone who knows what they are doing tinker? I blatantly don't.
- At the moment you get:
Thanks for the help!
- At the moment you get:
But I don't need any more pee.
{{{1}}}
- Hmmm... lessee here...
But I don't need any more pee.
T. (talk)
- ...works for me. (Unless someone fixed it in response to your post). ~ T. (talk) 17:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I get:
But I don't need any more pee.
no, yuo
chat Which, to me, doesn't display right. - What is going on? --no, yuo chat 07:52, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- yes i had the same problem. let me try -
But I don't need any more pee.
mowgli
nah! there's a problem with the code alright. no wonder so many entries haven't been wrapped up yet. one time i tried it i had to manually type my name. --
mowgli 18:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
But I don't need any more pee.
herr doktor needsAV2
[scream!] In sum, it just does not work. Admins, please? herr doktor needsAV2 [scream!] 20:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Note: I've just subst'd these to remove the category, and it works when you subst it; so try that in the future. :] --KATIE!! 19:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Pyramid Scheme
Well, the problem persists. So I suggest a pyramid scheme solution. As I am starting, I will review five random non-pissed articles. This grants me the right to whore my own pees that still need some reviewing. Next one reviews mine and posts his/her own articles. The next reviews the previous user's articles and so forth. Of course, everybody can and is invited to review any article as their wish. Okay, bellow there's my own articles still active in pee review:
Now let's start giving to the pee bank. herr doktor needsAV2 [scream!] 18:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
I like this idea, so I've reviewed your four articles. I have two on pee review.
Don't feel that you need to give big ideas for improvement on everything (although fresh ideas are of course welcome). I'll be happy just to be told if they're any good. - 15Mickey20 17:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)