Talk:Necrophilia

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Revision as of 00:48, October 12, 2011 by 70.80.162.230 (talk)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

edit From Pee Review

This is retarded, the whole thing is seriously stupid, nothing more. What else to expect form Uncyclopedia ... :)

Humour: 5 Eh, it's kinda blah. Not horrible, but not hilarious either. It has its moments (like the quote at the top).
Concept: 5 Again, not bad, kinda blah. I was somewhat disappointed that there were no "Philistine" jokes.
Prose and formatting: 8 Solid writing. Sections are a little short at times, but it's well-written on the whole.
Images: 3 A weak point. Nothing impressive here. Not horrifically bad, but needs to be better.
Miscellaneous: 3 This article didn't really impress me. It has so much potential for humor, and doesn't really capitalize on it.
Final Score: 24 This is a topic about having sex with dead people. That should be funny without any help. Maybe this article could work if it's about dead people named Phil, or Philanthropists, or Dr. Phil, but as it is now, it's hard to read all the way through, even though it's decently written, because it gets boring. It's sadly not as funny as it should have been, in my opinion. You may need more throw-away jokes or funny one-liners, or to edit it down to remove non-funny stuff, I'm not sure.
Reviewer: --<<Bradmonogram.png>> 17:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


edit Bugs are necrophiles too!

this bug is a necrophile, is anyone here smart enough to write anything about it? *fap fap fap* What?

Personal tools
projects