Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Alien

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Alien

Why have I not submitted this for review?! This badly needs one. MacManiasig.png MacManiasig-cheerios.png MacManiasig-holmes.png MacManiasig-starwars.png MacManiasig-firefly.png MacManiasig-pixar.png MacManiasig-oregon.png MacManiasig-lesmiz.png MacManiasig-doctor.png 16px-HalLogo.png Portal16px.png UncycLensFlare16px.pngDalek16px.png 16px-ChekhovSig.png16px-JapanSig.png Sir MacMania GUN 23:43, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm here.--ChiefjusticeDS 18:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 6 There are some very promising jokes in this article and I agree it badly needs some help. The main difficulty that I see is that the article veers very strongly towards being based in lists. Now, don't get me wrong, lists have plenty to offer humour in general, however in this context lists are dull unless they are very sporadic. You have come up with some excellent ideas which could be far better if ground in prose. For example "One such theory is that one such alien created the world in six days. This is often referred to as Christianity" is superb, whereas nearly the entire "Drake equation" section feels as though it is begging for something more.

Also you should look to expand into having a running joke in the article. As I started reading I thought that right here among us. could be a good one. You could simply restate this at various times in the article in varying different contexts to give the impression that the narrator is obsessed with the idea. This would work with the conspiracy theory template that you have in action currently. Also you could reconsider the Oscar Wilde quote, as someone who read "The Importance of Being Earnest" and "Phrases and Philosophies for the Use of the Young" (oh yes I did) I tend to be a bit harsh on Wilde quotes, what I would do if I was you is to make sure that it at least sounds like him.

Concept: 9 The idea here is excellent, indeed the article is a veritable vein of good ideas. The execution and tone does need some work. I'm not sure if I have said this to you before but ideally you should have only one tone in your article. Here you appear to veer between the encyclopaedic third person and the colloquial first person. Try to iron out these difficulties. Saying something like "Yes, we could talk about immigrants, but that would be boring, so let's get on with it." is unprofessional and breaks the tone, it would be better to say something above like "Whoops. Maybe you were looking for Immigrants" This makes the same point but in a more encyclopaedic fashion.
Prose and formatting: 6 Your spelling and grammar is reasonable, as I have come to expect of your work. However, because I love beating this dead horse in every review, proofread it after all your edits. What you should try and do is sort the formatting. The lists are reasonably formatted though they have a tendency to give the article an untidy feel. You might want to push the images to the right hand side completely if you are going to retain them. Speaking of the images, there are enough of them for your article though the final one could do with being a bit smaller as it tends to draw the eye prematurely to that section.
Images: 9 The images are pretty good, however, I would urge you to reconsider the first caption, the tone issue reoccurs here but, also you could simply remove all the text besides "RIGHT HERE AMONG US" and it would still be very amusing. Otherwise the images are OK and will be perfect following a bit of quick formatting.
Miscellaneous: 7 My overall grade of the article.
Final Score: 37 Your article oozes potential (yum) and you should definitely continue work on this one. It contains several excellent jokes which, with some careful work, could make this article brilliant. If you have any questions or comments about the points I have raised here, then feel free to drop by my hip pad and let me know. All comments are greatly appreciated and bad ones are just as important as good ones. Good luck with any editing.
Reviewer: --ChiefjusticeDS 19:50, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools