Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Al Franken

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Al Franken

STParker 02:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got this one. --ChiefjusticeDS 15:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 4 As thrilled as I was to be going through Pee Review and find an article on an American political figure, this article does need some work. It seems to me that you are going for a satirical approach in writing the article, if so it is not really enough to say 'He has a big mouth'. Consider it, Al Franken is not a well known figure generally and the only people who will view this page will be people who know about him. So your satire should focus on his politics and career over his physical appearance. Also if satire is your goal then try to be sightly less overt with your punch-lines. Besides that your jokes are ok, but they all seem a bit redundant and each section feels more like the title is written to fit a couple of jokes in, rather than the other way round. The framework of your sections is fine, they just need more substance to them. Have a look at the featured Joe Namath article. Notice how the author writes about the person and the jokes feel like a necessary part of the article but not the total focus. Compare your styles, note, there is no shame in blatantly copying the style the other person has used. It is also always good to have HTBFANJS open as you write, regardless of experience.
Concept: 6 Your concept is fine and you have the makings of a solid article here, however you need to sort your tone and execution. A good article has consistent tone throughout regardless of what it is talking about, have a look at Astronaut to see a good example of consistent tone. To say "Al Franken has a big mouth, he looks like a muppet" is inconsistent and breaks the tone of your article. I would recommend you stick to being encyclopedic and try not to switch to the third person at all. Have a look at the Wikipedia article on Franken for pointers on the appropriate style.
Prose and formatting: 4 Your sections are somewhat disjointed with regard to prose. I touched on making the article longer earlier on, but there is a great deal more material on the man than you are presenting to us here, the sections need far more material to them. Expand it or smack the expand template onto the top and let someone else take a stab at it. Also, if you decide to edit the article yourself proofread it carefully or run it through UN:PS as there are a few spelling and grammar mistakes. Also, despite, the relatively small amount of material, you need at least 2 pictures to break up the article - hmm that Wikipedia article has a couple.... I'm sure they wouldn't mind you re-appropriating them for the good of Uncyclopedia.
Images: 5 You have one image right now, the caption for which makes it quite amusing, but I think you can do better than that. Like I said above, steal from Wikipedia and think carefully about captioning and placement if you decide to expand.
Miscellaneous: 4 My overall grade of the article
Final Score: 23 You have the foundations for a good article here, you just need to put a bit more work in to make it better. I know this hasn't been a very positive review but I implore you not to be discouraged. With the right amount of effort in the right places this article could be very good. Ultimately, extend it (ask for help from others if you like), proofread it (again other people will be happy to help), get your tone right and sort the images. I'm usually around if you want anything else, feel free to leave me a message. Good luck with any work you decide to do.
Reviewer: --ChiefjusticeDS 16:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools