Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Blexicans (quick)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Liebz638 00:30, October 5, 2010 (UTC)
This should be reviewed shortly. In that I'm working on it. Yeah.-- 20101111 - 15:30 (UTC)
|Concept:||4||Unfortunately, I don't really see much of an overall concept behind this article - just a muddle of somewhat confusing and disordered ideas. Without a basis, some sort of overall point, a funny angle from which to approach the topic, articles will simply fall flat.
Calling Blexico a country is a start, but that in of itself isn't enough. Taking the stereotypes and applying them to this made-up country and following it through in a tone of utmost seriousness as if it was entirely true and mixing in further ridiculousness, that would be funny. But that's not the only way you could take it, of course - you could just use the country and stick to it and find something amusing about the whole thing, and use that. You could even talk about the blexicans as if they are the displaced people of said country, or who know what else, but whatever you do, make your point clear and stick to it. You can also look at Uncyclopedia's supposed best for examples; they did, after all, manage to get through VFH and get featured.
As it is, however, your article is mostly about the country itself, merely focusing on the people. Subsequently, unless you take it in a different direction, I'd suggest moving the page to Blexico and just leaving Blexicans as a redirect, as that'd make more sense.
|Humour:||5||Mmm, overall, the humour is kind of lost on me, since I'm not rightly sure what a Blexican even is without looking it up, which kind of ruins it, let alone what may or may not be funny about them. This may, in fact, have something to do with the complete lack of an introduction - use the first part of the article to introduce, to explain what it is, how it relates, why it is funny, though that last bit is usually more subtle... thus the rest of the article and the rest of the humour should build off that.
|Prose and formatting:||3||In general, you'll want to make this more of an encyclopaedic piece. Subsequently, I have copied and pasted the ICU 'encyclopedic' sub here:
Uncyclopedia is a parody of a Wikipedia-style Encyclopedia and should be written accordingly:
Well, the relevant parts, anyway. You have most of the wikiformatting itself down, although you really shouldn't be using first level headers (=header=) for your sections; use second level ones instead (==header==), and for your subsections, third (===header===) or even fourth level if you feel like. No reason why you cannot skip levels...
Also, your ideas don't entirely flow from one to the next overly well - each section should lead to the one following it, be it with similar ideas, comparative prose, or some other sort of affective transition. Likewise, the sentences, paragraphs and subsections should also flow logically. If you are talking about myths, go from one to the next. Then, perhaps, compare them to something else and discuss that, that kind of thing.
And in the same vein, for each new idea or topic, start a new paragraph, unless it is a part of the current topic, perhaps supporting your idea. Even then, it may well merit its own paragraph, however, as if you have more than a sentence to say about it, why not?
Lastly, ye olde message to proofread, or send to the proofreading service if need be, but that comes later, after you have sorted out the rest of it.
|Images:||4||You only have one image; not really a good place to be - you'll want to add more, probably. Use them to support your points, make additional jokes, and generally make the article more pleasant to look at.
What you have, however... eh, it does fit. Clichéd and arguably stupid, it does support the joke about the incognito ones, and what stupidity it has emphasises the inherent silliness of the section, so... yes. You're on the right track.
|Miscellaneous:||4||Gut feeling, general impression, etc.|
|Final Score:||20||Figure out where you are trying to go with this, unify the concept and thus the article, and then you may well have something. As it stands, I hope this helps, wish you luck, and if you have any questions, you know where to find me. I know this may be a disconcerting review, but if you keep at it, you will be able to take this somewhere. I am certain of it.|
|Reviewer:||-- 20101111 - 17:40 (UTC)|