Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Complex

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit Complex

Ahem, hello. It is me, Ggarfield. I would like one of the more respected members of this community to take a look at this, and tell me if this is ready for VFH. I personally ran through it one last time and think that it is about good to go. However, all harsh comments and merciless editing is welcome. Just know I might cry. --BlueflatcapsigMajor'GUN' Ggarfield, Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 15:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

BlueflatcapsigMajor'GUN' Ggarfield, Le Marquis de Nofu .Complex! 15:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 7 There are some really good bits in this, justit tends to get a bit random. "A guide dog is needed to read this article if you are legally blind' was pretty funny, as well as some of the above, but the captions are pretty poor and don't add anything to the humo(u)r ("woman, eh? is kind of out of style). There are lots of funny ideas, but as a whole the article doesn't give a real impression.
Concept: 5 I'd really prefer the article to have one steady concept. Perhaps it could actually describe complexity, instead of just being complex to read ? Paragraphs 2, 3 ('aha Jlsmith' gave me a laugh but sounds completely random to everyone else) and the 'composite litany' really don't add anything on to it. They're just random. Again, Complex does not mean random. There is very little sense here. Please make the article actually be about something, instead of just being for the sake of being complex. I like the whole test idea, and I think it could be developed a bit more.
Prose and formatting: 8 Pretty good as far as I can see. Two marks deducted for "paragraph 2".
Images: 2 All images are fairly irrelevant. I wouldn't suggest there's anything complicated about the traffic lights; if anything they are more sensible than European ones. The first image you could keep if you add a decent caption. The graph is pretty meaningless, but you could actually plot a graph of "cranial damage" to "test intake" with complicated units. The perverse anime is irrelevant, as is the last picture.
Miscellaneous: 5.5 Averaged.
Final Score: 27.5 This is a good start, but it needs a lot more work to be ready for VFH.
Reviewer: Jlsmith


Ha. I don't honestly know what else I can do with this or how I can modify it without wrexing the rest of it. I disagree about the images. Further, this is a parody somewhat directed at the U.S. government so I think complex and random are related. I also think this is seriously more funny than some of the articles that make it through VFH, just because those articles follow the same formula that has been followed for so long that their order of images and jokes is not at all funny. Plz you people see my humor and forget your humour for a second. I can only bear so much conformity. Also, paragraph 2 is light and funny, and breaks the tension of the other parts, helping encourage a reader to read the whole thing. I don't remember doning women, eh?, but I think it is what it is and it's ok. I am sick of having really good bits but never something someone likes entirely. So honestly, some ideas that I could really implement (defining complexity would really, really wreck the joke here imo), or could the community at large come to embrace a diversity of humor for once. It was this backwards lack of appreciation of different styles that drove me away from here twice already. I have written a number of articles that are supposedly funny enough to live, but not stereotypical enough to be featured. What gives? --67.209.67.220 05:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools
projects