Talk:Rule of Three
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
The Chinese Democracy joke is the first time I've laughed out-loud on Uncyclopedia in literally years. Ooggbboo
- Yeah XD, the name is strangely ironic... but not so ironic for Axl Rose's bank account. -- 14:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
edit Pee Reviews
|Humour:||8||Very, very funny. Articles written in the style of the subject are probably the only self-referencing ones that actually work, and it works fantastically well here. Keeping the article brief was a good move, becuase it stops the joke from going stale.|
|Concept:||8||A universal topic that has been well-mined for humour. The Rule might be a little obscure (and unlikely to ever have its parody searched for), but it's easily understood anyway.|
|Prose and formatting:||10||Well-written piece, as befitting an article on a language technique. No complaints!|
|Images:||5||Bit light on pictures, though that is probably best given how short the article is. Lesbian picture is extremely irrelevant, but that's Uncyclopedia. That makes it qualify for NSFW though.|
|Miscellaneous:||7.8||Averaged your score.|
|Final Score:||38.8||Only needs work on the images, they could be better chosen in my opinion. You may wish to at least add a third to fit the rule! (not counting the Wikipedia template) If you're keeping the lesbian pic, tag the article as NSFW.|
|Reviewer:||BlackHarrier32 15:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)|
|Humour:||3||I really enjoyed this. I stumbled across it a while back and hadn't realised it was on pee review.
I also like how you've referenced the inadequacies of the article, with the "stale, stagnant and hilarious" and "pirate ninja" lines. However, there are some points where, in your desperation to get a funny threesome, in you fall into randomness, such as with Axl rose. Also, the wikibox repeats the same joke twice, the second of which would be much funnier on its own.
|Concept:||3||I love the idea and its very well done. The attention to detail is impressive. There's three of everything.|
|Prose and formatting:||3||I couldn't find any spelling or grammar errors.
I had trouble reading this sentence: "In this case the pattern is not properly set up and the punchline comes prematurely; a problem shared by fans of Uncyclopedia, Encyclopædia Dramatica or My Chemical Romance." Occasionally the rules of three make the sentences overly long and don't flow as well as they could. I'll try to improve a few of these.
I'm not so sure if the "Are you paying too much for your car insurance" section is a good idea. I understand that it makes for a good contents box joke, but if you don't bother to read that, it comes across as a bit weird.
|Images:||3||This is one of the main weaknesses of the article. I like the first image, although I think it's better suited to being placed second.
The movie titles one should probably go. It's not of a very good quality and it's not a rule of three joke. There's no pattern established and it's only funny when the three films are combined as one. Not every picture has to be hilarious. You could just replace it with a picture of the number three and put that one first.
Finally, the lesbian image. It necessitates the ugly nsfw template, which is annoying, but at the same time it's a pretty good punchline to the three images. I'd suggest including a similar image, but with three lesbians. Then it would at least tie back into the article.
|Miscellaneous:||3||There's a lot of British humour in this. While I like the Sugarbabes and QI references, I'd suggest you change the Two Ronnies joke to one that non-Brits would understand. Perhaps, you could pick a failed sequel that wasn't funny. Men In Black 2? You might be able to think of a better example.|
|Final Score:||15||With a few alterations, I'd like to put this up on VFH. I hope you've noticed that the low scores are purely there for comedic purposes.|
|Reviewer:||--14:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)|
edit Yay Feature
Ironically this was my third nommed article, the other two failed, this succeeded! --ScottBurnan 07:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)