Talk:Flamethrower
| This article was nominated for deletion on May 25, 2021.
The result of the discussion was Keep.
|
|||
this article is not funny at all. needs to be redone.
- Redone :)--Witt,
of 
UNion Entertain me* 16:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
From Pee Review[edit]
Hiya, I put this article as a contestant in the PLS for best images, even though it was a rewrite. I worked hard on this article to make as good as possible and I'd like to nominate it for a feature. Can you rate it and tell me if Flamethrower is good and where I can improve?--Witt, 
of 
UNion Entertain me* 07:46, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
| Humour: | 6.5 | Good introduction, but the first two or three headings are a bit thin on jokes. |
| Concept: | 7 | Got to be good comic potential in a method of causing painful death. I like the flamewar references too. |
| Prose and formatting: | 7 | Nice simple structure, nothing wrong with that |
| Images: | 8 | All pretty good, can see why it was nominated for best images. |
| Miscellaneous: | 7.125368912 | marshmallows |
| Final Score: | 35.625368912 | A few more jokes in the early paragraphs would be good. Why not change "flame shield" to "firewall" to continue the internet reference. Quite good overall but not yet ready for VFH |
| Reviewer: | --Kelpan 16:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC) | |
2021 rewrite[edit]
- Originally at User talk:Dark Web, White Hat, who tagged this article with {{Fix}}
I think this article should not be deleted without a vote at VFD. It's been around for 15 years and Witt E, thinks he has a comedy concept (mostly slapstick). Perhaps there is a better version in the page history. Spıke 🎙️21:53 22-May-21
There wasn't. I went in to copy-edit, and about halfway in, ran into a real comedy concept: A Flamethrower article that presents chat-room "flames" as a venerable military weapon. Only, he doesn't stick to it; before long, it's back to manslaughter fan fiction. Spıke 🎙️02:01 23-May-21
Okay, so you were improving the illustrations and I bulled in and rewrote the Intro to try to flesh out that comedy concept, and you went away and did useful stuff. Only, now I am stuck. I know the final part, a section "Flamethrowers today" describing Internet flaming and trolling; subsection "Gamergate" (which I'm nowhere close enough to, to do well). In between, the original authors continue to chug out flamethrower slapstick. Spıke 🎙️00:24 24-May-21
- Okay. This looks saveable. I can try for fake history that ties it together. (talk) 00:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for that addition! But what we have now is a mess, a start and a finish with one comedy concept, and a middle taking flamethrower literally and developing the original concept (fun things you can do with a flamethrower) that I find lacking in comedy (as Sog1970 seemed to, as well, at VFD). Spıke 🎙️11:48 24-May-21
- I spent too much time researching Gamergate and scrapped what I had at the last minute, not doing much more; I did the pictures, but you did most of the saving. Your writing made it coherent, so the middle bit about literal flamethrowers is a brief digression. Nice strategy. (talk) 08:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Your Keep vote is enough to save it, but I'll wait a few hours in case anyone else wants to weigh in. Maybe your research on Gamergate will come in handy. We have had several attempts to give that flame war a "comedy" treatment, none of them quite crossing into funny. If you see a way to create an article, I suspect we'll immediately have to protect it against all edits. Spıke 🎙️10:27 25-May-21
I stand corrected; you found it and so did I, and it's by EStop! Spıke 🎙️11:04 25-May-21
Style discussion[edit]
- Discussion moved to User talk:Brogo13