Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare

I rewrote the Call of duty 4 article (as requested) and adopted it as my own. Please tell me if my child is up to standards or not.

MaxPayne 14:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 6.5 The humor is there, and I actually laughed out loud at several points in the article, but right now it's just kind of sloppy. My initial impression when I first saw the article was that it was going to be an article about an SAS mission (in which case it should have been an UnScript), but then you did a 360 on me and wrote the article from an entirely different perspective. Flipping back and forth between two styles is unique, but it is also inconsistent. You have some good ideas, but they're sort of a jumbled mess.
Concept: 6 Like I said, you've basically got two seperate concepts, one which works very well, and one which sucks eggs. When you put them together, it's kind of uneven, and your article as a whole doesn't deliever. Basically, I think this article would be a lot funnier if you just made it an SAS mission without the Uncyclopedia references- the beginning was pretty funny.
Prose and formatting: 3 Sorry, but i'm really going to have to hit you on this one. It's really hard to do a black backround article because of the way the wiki is set up. 3 things stuck out in particular: first, the backround behind your images is white, which sort of takes away some of the appeal of the article- i'd recommend asking around for help with Uncyclopedia's formatting code, so it looks polished off. Second, I think you should have proofread this- there are a few spelling errors here and there, and you're supposed to put a space between the : and the dialogue with Captain Price and Gaz. For example: "Captain Price:Shut up." should be "Captain Price: Shut up.". Third, in the multiplayer section you have a list. In case you haven't heard the standard lecture I give, lists are tedious and unfunny, so I suggest you rework that section.
Images: 7 The images don't really have any humorous moments in their own right, and are mainly filler for the rest of the article. Also, they look a bit ugly with the white backround, which I got into in the P&F section.
Miscellaneous: 6.5 My overall grade of the article.
Final Score: 29 You've got some decent jokes and overall an OK article, but as a whole it's pretty sloppy. Here are a few things you should do to make it better: first, stick to one concept. Half of this article is first person narration and the other half is an encyclopedic entry. The former has much more potential for hilarity, so if you want dramatic improvement, i'd recommend reworking the entire article to be about an SAS mission. Second, because of the black backround and code, the images and Wikipedia template look sloppy and out of place. You should take a look at I'm coming to get you- it uses a black backround smoothly, so you should be able to fix your article with that in mind. Finally, do a spell check, and fix some formatting errors- you might want to enlist Proofreading Service to help you with that. Overall, good foundation, but pretty sloppy right now; keep working on it. Good luck!=)
Reviewer: Saberwolf116 01:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools