Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Bin Crimes

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Bin Crimes 20:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Concept: 2.5 The article doesn't flow well at all, and hops around. I would also call it border-line incoherent. You're trying to makes absurdly hyperbolic jokes about too many unrelated things. You need to both tone down the absurd hyperbole/nonsense and focus more on the subject matter. Much of the article doesn't have anything to do with bin crimes at all, these sections should probably be removed and replaced with better sections. Other parts are about bin crimes, but are often too hyperbolic and don't "flow" well.

"Flow" is basically how easy it is for the reader to follow your article. Right now, I'd suggest working on improving the base material before dealing with flow issues. You really can't do much to organize material until you prune and fix what your already have.

You might want to start with a deadpan entry to explain what bin crimes are. It is a British term, and most Americans don't know much about it. I generally favor deadpan entries; they generally prevent the problem of coming on too strong, and the breaking of the deadpan early on is generally funny, and starts the article off on the right foot. However, deadpan entry generally doesn't mesh well with header quotes.
Prose and Formatting: 4.5 You have the following formatting errors:

Don't start with a header section. The title is your first header. It should go top quotes &/or templates, intro text, then first section.

you should use the {{q}} template for quotes, or at least another quote template. Unformatted quotes look ugly.

You have one paragraph for section. That might just be how it worked out on this article, but that generally isn't good. Some of your paragraphs are probably too long, and should be divided.

You should probably add a see also section at the end for related links.

You have too much white space in places. Generally, you don't need any more than one blank line to separate items.

Finally, you have some wiki code and formatting errors.
Images: 0 No images. Every article should have an image. Even if you think the article doesn't need one, the reader will expect an image, imageless articles just look wrong.
Humour: 2.5 Basically, what I said in the comments section. I can see some good jokes in there, but they are overwhelmed by hoping from one idea to another and unrelated material.
Improvability Score: 4 This article is probably improvable, but you need to satirize the subject coherently. It will need a major re-write, which will require a good bit of work, but you may have some good base material, and I do see some hints of underlying flow in your article.
Final Score: 13.5 I think this article is fixable. Good luck. The really low score is mostly due to the lack of images.
Reviewer: --Mnbvcxz 01:08, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools