Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Battleship Potemkin second review

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Battleship Potemkin

It had a superb first review- which I have worked on. Zombiebaron made a great image and I'm thinking there could be feature here despite the very dense content. I'm looking for a way to raise the standard of this one and hopefully be step closer to the hall of shame. Thanks for your time:)--— Sir Sycamore (talk) 20:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Battleship Potemkin
is being reviewed by
Your Source for Fine Scented Pee
And Whatever Else Comes Out Of Him
Humour: 6 avg of each seckshun
  • Intro -6- Okay, kinda rambling (but short) intro. Note 1: "The historical events were recorded by Sergei Eisenstein (later known as "Gorgeous George") in his legendary film." Tell us the name of his legendary film, or at least parody it. Gorgeous George?? So is this a parody of postmodernism or is it just supposed to be postmodern? Get out your smoking jackets, people, we're in for a wild ride! Honestly, I'm just confused right now.
  • The Ship -7- Note 1: You need more commas. This section is lacking grammar-to-the-max, and some sentences in there are run-ons. There were some funny parts in there, but mostly it was just random to me. Meat was served, even though they were all vegetarian... the only thing that pops up into my mind is, why are they all vegetarian? Also, sex jokes = meh.
  • Ideology (The lack thereof) -6- Not a bad section, but not particularly funny, either. There doesn't seem to be much happening, now that you started talking about post-production things like advertising. (funny pic with the T-shirt, btw).
  • The intervention Andy Warhol -5- Note: You need some commas there, buddy. Sentences without commas are more difficult to read, because you don't know which part of a sentence a phrase within that sentence refers to. I can't think of an example, but this article needs some proofreading. Slightly random about Andy Warhol, there. Why him? He wasn't born until, like, the forties or something! Probably thirty years after anybody cared about the Potemkin. To be a parody, it needs to be consistent with something real: random people can't just appear.
  • Paradise Lost -6- I don't understand the quote, but that's just me. Weak ending, in retrospect.
Concept: 7 I'm surprised that we didn't have this article, already! However, the point of the article itself is lost to me. Is it a movie? Is it a real boat? Now I'm so confused that I can't even remember what the actual history is...
Prose and formatting: 6 You need to go over the article itself. Something's not quite right with the grammar, I think. It makes the article, in my eyes at least, kinda confusing.
Images: 7 I like the pictures, but the captions were nothing special. Captions are what matters, really, not the pictures. The pictures could be utter crap, but if the captions are good people won't care.
Miscellaneous: 6.5 {{Pee|6|7|6|7}}
Final Score: 32.5 I'm sorry it took so long, Sycamore! I just had finals, so... But anyways, get working on the article! Maybe you improved it since I started this review, but I didn't check. Anyway, this is my honest opinion, and although the article needs some work, I'm sure that it can be improved.
Reviewer:   Le Cejak <May 14, 2008 [0:23]>
Personal tools