Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/A Guide to Trolls
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
- Alright, I'll review this today, as promised on my talk page. -
22:34, September 16, 2011 (UTC)
- Alright, now I'll review this. Everything's easier when I'm listening to Ozric Tentacles. - 22:42, September 19, 2011 (UTC)
|Humour:||2||Okay, well, let's start with the beginning. There isn't one. There also isn't a middle, and there's also distinct lack of an end. What you've essentially got here is a list. So what we've got to work on first is actually making this an article, and not a list. First, you should decide exactly what it is you're trying to do here. Is this an instructional manual? Is this a warning? Is this purely informational? And then, is it perhaps an UnBook or a HowTo? What is the point you're trying to convey here? What technique are you going to use to make the reader laugh? It seems from what you've got that it's in the "observational" vein, which I guess could be alright, but just making a list of obvious things that everyone already knows does not constitute satire. What you need is an angle. One I can think of off the top of my head is an UnBook about how to be a troll, in a style-parody of self-help books, some of the irony coming in the fact that the book's author would make no attempt to tone down his hatred of trolls, but the troll-to-be obviously not noticing because he wants to be a troll so badly. You may have other ideas, which would probably be better than that one. The point is though that there's no angle or point, or even sincere attempt to get the reader interested in what's on the page here.
Now, when you've got an idea for the angle, the actual examples could stand to be notched up. These are all things that we already know trolls do, and as is they pretty much sound like somebody who got trolled, whining about the trolls who trolled him. Throw in something original, something troll-like that a troll has obviously never done, because there's hardly ever an opportunity for it, like a troll making fun of your garden gnomes, or laughing at you because he knows you got runner up in the 3rd National Chili Cookoff or something. I don't know, that part is also obviously off the top of my head, but the point is that we, the reader, know that trolls are trolls, and what they do. To keep the reader interested, and hopefully laughing, there needs to be some deviation in the analysis of the typical troll fare. And, when all else fails, maybe an old overcoat or two will help.
Finally, there's the issue of "content." In other words, actual stuff there on the page. A good article is typically anywhere between 8 and 15 megabytes, or more, and yours is currently 2.5, which includes the construction template. You need to be sure that you're able to expound upon this idea, either in detail, or if you're like me, just be able to ramble incoherently in a way that sounds like you know what you're talking about. This can kill two birds with one stone, as it would also be a good angle for the article.
|Concept:||5||Not much to say about the concept, really. Trolls are a common topic on the internet, and we have a great deal of articles on them already. However, the instructional idea could be very flexible should you choose to expand it.|
|Prose and formatting:||5||Your sentence structure is fine, but the two main problems are that first of all, there really isn't anything there, and second of all, all the prose falls into a bullet-pointed list. This is part of the content thing: Paragraphs, man. Take a look at the featured article on any given day and nine times out of ten you'll notice an interesting pattern. The articles are written in paragraphs, with sentences, and sections, like an actual article. Lists are very rarely used effectively, and when they are they're kept short and to the point, only to enhance the humor of the rest of the article's ideas, not to be the blunt force applying the traum-edy themselves. That's definitely a thing your article should have, paragraphs.
The other thing is excessive use of the censoring template. You know that you don't need to use that, right? You're allowed to curse here, in fact that's probably another thing you'll find in seven out of ten featured article, flat out cursing. Some of them even have graphic images of cocks in them :/
|Images:||0||There aren't any images. Normally I'd give you advice on which ones to try to use, but I think the overall concept of the article should be plotted out and written before getting to that point so that the images can be made relevant at the time.|
|Miscellaneous:||3||Averaged the other scores together.|
|Final Score:||15||Now, don't let this review discourage you. Unfortunately, comedy is hard, and it takes a lot of effort and work. If you put some of those things into it, I'm sure you can develop a great article. But you need to set your mind to it and actually get the thing going. I'd be glad to offer up my services to help you in the process of writing the article, but please know that I'll only consult with you and help bounce ideas around, and maybe fix some prose if you need it. The actual writing of the article is going to be up to you. I wish you good luck on it.|
|Reviewer:||-23:17, September 19, 2011 (UTC)|