Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Coors Light Presents: The American Man

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 02:55, August 1, 2008 by SysRq (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit User:SysRq/Coors Light Presents: The American Man

Holy shit, SysRq just wrote an article! PEEING members only, please. sirErr.gifsysrq @ 18:29 Jul 31

Cheevers99
This article is under review by
Gerry Cheevers.

Sayeth Gerry: shotgun!!
Humour: 7.5 average of humor scores.
  • intro: 8

pretty solid stuff. i like the blatant repetitive advertising. maybe don't put down the American Man by calling his friends 'dumbasses', it seems like you're trying to glorify him, so do that.

  • about our sponsor: 9

i thought this section would be lame, but it got a chuckle out of me. nicely done.

  • friends: 8

very good again. the translation bit caught me by surprise. the gay entry in the list didn't do much for me, though. but the list itself was good.

  • possessions: 6

the middle of this section is pretty weak. but the beginning and the end are good. maybe add the vehicles section to the end of the gadgets section?

  • what men want: 7

hmmm...good, but you've already used the 'excess of 100 degrees' line. try throwing another curveball.

  • why coors light: 7

a pretty good ending line, but the rest really didn't do it for me.

  • final humor comments:

i think this could be an extremely funny article, if you made some tweaks. i think the 'misdirection' technique (see HTBFANJS) would work well throughout the article, in the same way you used it in the translation context. you seem to get repetitive after a while with just saying 'coors light is awesome', maybe try some different praises (some escalation throughout the article perhaps?).

Concept: 8 5/5 points for a relevant, well-known subject. i proudly drink coors light and have rarely felt manlier.

3/5 points for execution. i think you could present everything overall a bit better, and make eveything seem more like the beginning, but without repeating yourself too exactly.

Prose and formatting: 7 that table of contents is big and ugly. try __NOTOC__ to get rid of it. your article is broken up a lot, try to merge sections or add some content to the shorter ones. your images seem kind of added in after the fact, try to integrate them into relevant sections that are of the appropriate length to avoid further whitespace. the random use of bold, caps, and large text was good, but it might draw some readers to read that first and miss the buildup. just a thought. spelling and grammar looked good. try to put more links in, you were a tad short on those.
Images: 7 the first one was decent, the second one was good (especially with the caption). the third one was appropriate. the last one kinda weirded me out. you should have a picture of the american man, at the very least.
Miscellaneous: 7.4 averaged
Final Score: 36.9 my preview button tells me that your final score is 36.9, placing you slightly above 'adequate'. i would say your main concerns would be to add a few lines to each section and fiddle with the images. after doing that, you could try some of the suggestions at the end of the humor section.
Reviewer: SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 02:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

this is my first attempt at an in-depth-ish review since the fiasco at the dump, and i've tried to change my reviewing style to less of a 'insert-joke-here' to more of a 'what works and what doesn't'. in that vein, i'd appreciate some brief feedback on this review (given that you're a RotM yourself). i also wish you good luck with this article. also, maybe you could take a look here? you don't have to go into too much detail, it's just been in the queue for far too long. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 02:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let's briefly review the review! Seemed borderline in-depth. I'll give it to you, even though mine own reviews (and most other SKs) are considerably lengthier and I usually spend upwards of 1 to 2 hours on my reviews. Also, I tend to be a "grammar guy" myself, so your lack of capitalization makes me ever so slightly doubt your expertise. Of course, I know you as the one, the only, the Gerry, but people who don't know your reputation may be skeptical of your authority. But those are my only criticisms. You touched on all of my areas of concern without me even telling you, and you have great insight. Because I have the authority to do so, (but so rarely have the motivation), I'll put this up on the review board. Thanks for the review, it was quite helpful. I think there may be a tasty treat on your talk page, as well. sirErr.gifsysrq @ 02:43 Aug 1
thanks. yea i was hesitant to go into too much detail, especially on my first new review. but i think i'll get the hang of it again. haha yea, the no-caps thing is kinda my 'style' i guess, i'm not really sure how it started, but i'm a stubborn asshole so it's unlikely to change anytime soon. cheers! SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 02:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Never be afraid to bore the author with long-ass reviews. In fact, we encourage you to do so. Go ahead. Make my day. sirIgnignokt.gifsysrq @ 02:55 Aug 1
Personal tools
projects