Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Adam Carolla

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Adam Carolla

teflongone001 14:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

This article is under review by
Gerry Cheevers.

Sayeth Gerry: shotgun!!
Humour: 3.6 average of all scores.
  • intro: 4

pretty weak stuff here. the intro to an article is meant to grab the reader's attention, making them want to read the rest of the article. basically all you do is state carolla's current projects, then call him gay and dumb. you have to come up with beter dilivery; for example, instead of saying 'the biggest racist since mel gibson', you could say 'he makes mel gibson's passion of the christ look like a hannukah special'.

  • early years:5

slightly better, but again, your jokes need more subtlety. instead of saying 'he is an over-rated comedian', you could say 'oftentimes it has been said that carolla's stand-up acts ellicit more laughs than root canals, knifepoint muggings, and viewings of schindler's list.

  • life before: 4

you seem to devolve furthest into the pure hating of carolla here, you basically just list his traits/accomplishments and then put them down. instead of sounding bitter, try making light of it: 'carolla and kimmel started the man show, which was a forum talk-show for males seeking to share cooking recipes, discuss relationship problems, and share their feelings with one another.' staying close to the truth (it is a talk-show of sorts, exclusively for men) is funnier than random nonsense, but putting it down this way is much cleverer than simply saying it made fun of frat boys and midgets.

  • with teresa: 6

this section is slightly better. however, you fall into the same pattern of simply abusing carolla and his cohorts, which, to put it simply, isn't funny. you need to find a way to put him down in a way that is amusing to your audience. the hitler line was good, but try saying that carolla's racial views waffle between someone who is known for tolerance and hitler, then saying he usually hangs around the hitler end of the spectrum.

  • self-hating: 3

this sections wasn't even remotely funny. instead of spitting venom all over the truth, use the truth to your advantage. take the position of carolla loving hawaiians: wearing hawaiian shirts, signing off his show with 'mahalo', carrying a pineapple around wherever he goes, etc. this is funnier because it has a shade of truth (carolla has an opinion on hawaiians) while skewering any integrity in the truth. people reading the wikipedia article to find out carolla's true feelings on hawaiians will be pleasently suprised.

  • religious beliefs: 3

this reads more like a wikipedia entry: just facts. poke fun at carolla's atheism, throw in some fake quotes from him. go with 'it is rumored that carolla tried to become a member of the jewish faith at one point, but he could not pass the basic reading test (he also flunked the bagel-making portion of the exam).

  • does not work well with others: 5

better, good ending. run with the guitar analogy; the no-fingers line was good but unclear. i'm not sure if the bonaduce quote was real or not, try making it more ridiculous.

  • quotes and dialect: 0

this section brings nothing to the table. incorporate a quote or two into the main article if you feel the need, then get rid of it.

Concept: 5 5/5 points for the subject being a well-known celebrity that merits an uncyclopedia entry. 0/5 points for execution of article. see final comments for ways to improve.
Prose and formatting: 9 as far as i saw, your prose and spelling were excellent, and your article has the face-on appearance of a proper encyclopdeic entry. mazeltov.
Images: 7 the opening image is good, with a decent caption. second image, same. the asianweek image could use a better caption, something like 'asianweek featured carolla's insightful views on the asian community'. the atheism pic can probably go. the bonaduce image was pretty good. overall they contribute to the article, but they aren't anything special. try getting something from crank yankers or the man show.
Miscellaneous: 6.2 average of all scores
Final Score: 30.8 overall, this is not an article that merits deletion. we have many, many article on uncyclopedia that are way, way, way more offensive. however, it does need some work. the preview button tells me that my/your score is around 30, barealy reaching the 'nearly adequate' section on the spectrum. this is mainly due to the excellent formatting, meaning that the rest of your article needs work. i suggest the following: first, read HTBFANJS. over and over. the best writers on the site read it at least once a week. i then recommend thinking of a celebrity that you do like, then rewriting this article in the tone that you would have when describing that celebrity. if your tone makes it seem like you're praising carolla, but your words put him down, then that's parody. i also suggest reading some featured articles, and finding some that user the same technique (such as Royal Pointless Military Things Tournament, which glorifies the competition yet illustrates its absurdity.) i suggest the same thing with your other articles, which seem to be written in a similar vein (i hate this person they are dumb). in my experience, the approach of 'this person is awesome, if you ignore (bad qualities), and excuse him for (ridiculous actions), and attribute him saying (stupid quote) to his (distraction. for this one i recommend something i just thought of: the dentist! you say carolla has big teeth; claim that he needs to visit the dentist every three days instead of every six months like a normal person. that would certainly explain why he's so grouchy all the time). overall, your article is borderline worthy, but with some improvments i feel as though it could become a solid addition to our hallowed halls. as always, if you need anything at all, you can reach me on the Gerryphone. don't be shy! good luck!
Reviewer: SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 13:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools