So a minor bit of history. Poo Lit Surprise 2009 I had three articles in three different categories.
- This was my article for the best article category, and became a sub-par "also-ran".
- UnNews:Australia says "You just don't understand our humour!" won the best alt namespace article, and went on to become a featured article.
- Microsoft Knowledge Base did poorly in the best illustrated article category, but then went on to be featured and top ten of the year.
- I wasn't able to enter an article in the best noob category as I'd been here a month or two too long, and didn't finish a rewrite in time for judging.
So as a result this article is the poorest performer out of what I'd entered. I always felt that it had some merit, in that the religious justification to moving from Christianity to what effectively is the central tent of the satanic bible actually makes sense. But I think I wrote it too quickly to hit the deadline, and have written myself into a corner in regards to how to proceed. I want to keep the logic and the apparent rational steps from A to Z, but can't think of a way to re-do this with that idea in mind. (In short, I want to do a full knock-down rebuild, but keep what I think is good.)
The base idea of moving away from a rigid conservative/legalistic theology and becoming a progressive theology, and the logical steps I want to keep. The rest can be removed, but not sure what frame to put this all in. Any advice would be appreciated. The previous edit was by PuppyOnTheRadio (Talk). 02:28, December 31, 2016 (UTC)
|
|
Added 02:28, December 31, 2016 (UTC)
|
[[Template:Review request/{{#time: ymd|02:28, December 31, 2016 (UTC)]]
| Introduction to your reviewerI like to start my reviews by stating how unqualified I am. You know me, so don't need to introduce myself. I helped a little on God and was IC head for the recreation of Creationism. so that makes me an expert. Ha. (Also I have a lot of churchy background, Sunday school teacher, director, administrative board, and janitor)--but have only attended Roman Catholic services three or four times. And it's been a long time since I did one of these Pee Review thingies. Note I'm putting some suggested changes in (). For example, "dogs (comma) cats...." would mean I'd suggest adding a comma between dogs and cats.
|
| Concept:
|
9
|
A Catholic religious order works to increase membership, popular appeal, and fun at the expense of old-fashioned religious rules.
|
| Prose and Formatting:
|
9
|
I'll put my comments on Humour here with the rest, but will score them seperately.
Title
- Got me wondering, "What on Earth is this?" which is of course good. Like the ™, and Jesus Lite/Jesus Light of the world. Do wonder, though, why Lites and not Lite? I think I'd prefer Jesus Lite, unless there's a reason for the plural I'm missing.
The Church of Jesus Lites™ (box)
- I like this, Number of employees = number of members in the article; I never actually thought of monks as employees. Revenue undisclosed. And jesuswaswaycool.
Intro
- Like the Latin. "...as of January 2009," I'd change to "as of January," so it will remain more current. I'd cut Citation needed--might see a reason for them lying about have a currently huge order, but not about how many they started with. The church should have a Bible Lite™
- "The Church of Jesus...Catholic religious order of clerks regular...." I suspect a lot of people reading this would think, "Clerks, a group of bookkeepers or something?" I would make it very clear this is a monastic order, i.e, has monks for those who won't know what a monastic order is.
Foundation
- In 1986...I'd changed "classed as sin" to "classified as sin." Maybe capitalize hell, but don't know--lower case might foreshadow the end of the article. While there
wewere dissident voices...." sentence is long, I think could be cut into two.
- "However, in order to...." again, really long sentence I'd cut into two or three.
- "He founded the church with a core base of 24 members" Bob + 24 = 25, or add triumvirate means Bob + 24 + 3 = 28, but beginning says 27 original members--I'd clarify this. I do like "backs of 12 disciples" so 24 is better.
- "I have a weakness for inside-joke Latin and and humorous initials, so yes.
Doctrine
- I like the Pope quote. I realize you're probably wanting to say the Pope didn't say this, but I would cut "Citation needed because this has to be complete bull shit." down to "citation needed." I think that will get the point across this is b.s. without having to spell it out.
- As per the Lumen gentium...." L.g. could be in italics, but apparently that's inconsistent in the real world. I really liked the Gregory/11 days footnote; a lot of people won't get the calendar reference, but I think it still works even if they don't.
- The first argument
- "As a result of this excess with very little to show as a result (comma)...lack of progress (period). He sent...."
- "The Jews of the time...unclean(liness)...." I like how a religiously scholarly and scientific argument ends up as "
Ppizza (make lower case maybe) delivery. I would suggest you clarify the unleavened = flat wafers, leavened = raised dough--not every reader will know that.
- I like the real Corinthians footnote. But with these and others, maybe use a Catholic Bible instead of the mostly Protestant KJV. Or maybe that doesn't matter. Actually, a modern translation might work for Jesus Lites.
- "This was taken back to the Holy Father...." I like this section, especially how you keep the serious tone in the humor.
- The second argument
- Dude, you've done your homework! I think this will work for the lay person and for someone who knows this stuff (I know most of it, but admit I looked up "ampelos").
- The only thing I'd change is the sudden jump in tone from ending one part with "transforms into the blood of Christ" to the next. I'd like to see a little transition in tone. So maybe have the next paragraph start with, "So let us forget this whole thing...."
- Side note but the Acts Chapter 2 reference of sharing all things in common would confound a lot of Diehard Capitalist Christians. I've used that one myself.
- "And forget this whole thing....clothes, beds, and women(, men, whoever!)!
- "The Holy Father...They (would) have the funding...."
- Throughout, I like using the Coca Cola logo.
- The third argument
- I don't often lol when I'd doing a review, but transitioning from the doctrine of sin to Aleister Crowley's philosophy really had me laughing. The thing that made it funnier to me was that it sounded real; I've heard arguments made by big-name TV preachers that didn't sound this logical.
Marketing and the future of the church
- "With the support...the church
es's marketing department...." "[Citation needed and any photos or video. Or an invitation. Please!]"--this citation needed with description works for me.
- "The death of Pope...church
es's future...." Peyo has been rumoured...death of (the) current pontiff.
- Footnote 6--I find this OK, but the priest-altar boy thing to me has been done a lot.
|
| Humo(u)r:
|
8
|
Specifics described above, but rated separately. Most of this I didn't find lol funny (with one major exception), but I don't think that's needed here; this seems more of a topic for amusing humor. I like that this feels like a real report that goes a little screwy.
|
| Images:
|
7
|
:That otherwise overused happy Jesus photo works perfectly here.
- Like the pope and caption.
- Leaven--again, don't know if everyone will know what leaven means. Also to the reader leavened bread is probably boring as well, so maybe a pic with different bread products--including pizza.
- Coca Cola--like pic and caption.
- Meat pic--frankly, don't care for the pic, and don't think the caption will be understood by a causual reader. I'd prefer a "sin" pic that goes beyond meat; if you want to be churchy, maybe Bosch's "The Garden of Earthly Delights"--the middle of the three sections, the one with all the naked people partying.
|
| Miscellaneous:
|
6.75
|
Average of above - 1.75. (-1.75 explained below).
|
| Final Score:
|
39.75
|
I cut 1.75 points off just because 40 to me means feature candidate, and I'd like to see some edits first. I really don't seen major rewriting being necessary; this article simply won't appeal to everyone, but someone like me who knows some of the background may really enjoy it. Let me know if and when you redo this.
|
| Reviewer:
|
 King of the Internet Alden Loveshade??? (royal court) 05:52, June 8, 2018 (UTC)
|