Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Blah blah

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit Blah blah

86.132.159.243 10:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Blah blah
is being reviewed by
CajekHi!
Your Source for Fine Scented Pee
And Whatever Else Comes Out Of Him

Okay, what am I stepping into here?   Le Cejak <Mar 30, 2008 [19:33]>

Humour: 3 (not going to average sections) Well, new users will like this. But after they're a "week old" in Uncyc terms, they will have grown out of it. Hey, I've made a page like this myself. I suggest that, because you're a new user, you take a look at User:Cajek/1st (a list of the first pages lots of different users made that got awards) and HTBFANJS. Repetition is okay, but after a while it gets very annoying. Repetition is okay, but after a while it gets very annoying. Repetition is okay, but after a while it gets very annoying.
Concept: 2 The joke is that it's an article that doesn't say anything. For future reference, the more complicated the concept, the better chance you have that it will be higher.
Prose and formatting: 3 Prose of what? blah? blah blah? ...blah blah blah?
Images: 7 The pictures are fine for what's going on, in my opinion.
Miscellaneous: 3.8 {{Pee|3|2|3|7}}
Final Score: 18.8 This is probably the shortest review I've ever written. I don't think there's much in the way of improvement here. I strongly suggest you take a look at a few of the articles in User:Cajek/1st to get a sense of how noobs make good articles. Other than that, one thing you could do, instead of just repeating "blah" all the time, is to make the article, on purpose, excruciatingly boring: like a topic on something really, really serious. At least you weren't too random. If you follow my idea (make the article boring), be sure that it flows well. Repetition = bad. Repertition = bard. Repertion = blard.
Reviewer:   Le Cejak <Mar 30, 2008 [19:43]>
Personal tools
projects