Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Cows With Guns

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 18:16, December 5, 2008 by Mnbvcxz (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Cows With Guns

Well, after ages and ages, I finally decided to come back and try and work on this article some more. Have I done any better?

Super Llama 18:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Humour: 5.1 Overall:5.5 The article could use a good purging (or fleshing out?) and consistifying. Its as a long, rambling, randomish feel to it, like those "popular" articles that get edited constantly by ips and new users. Granted its not as bad as those, but it still doesn't look good. As a rule, an article needs to tell a story, as it were. For that to work, the article can't contradict itself or introduce an overload of unrelated information. "Throw away" jokes have there place, but an overuse of them ruins the plot flow, and leaves you with a collection of one liners.

By section:

Intro: 4.5 It could use a quote purge, quotes are generally not that funny, and many of quotes are quite random. The intro also has a hint of excess hyperbole, you might want to tone it down.

Origin: 5' This section has some funny lines, but overall, its too random, or more properly, jumping from idea to idea and relying on "deux ex machina". In English, that means your plot relies on an implausible situation, to wit, the retarded farmer. Also, you could use some formatting improvements, try to minimize the use of parenthesis and ellipses, they make your article flow weakly; commas and semi colons are better for separating information. Footnotes are also good for long digressions.

How To Tell If Your Cow Has A Gun & Symptoms: 4 These sections should be merged, with out a subheader. Its the same info in 2 short sections. Likewise, "What To Do If Your Cow Has A Gun" should be reduced to subsection, if not merged. Too many main sections make an article look ugly and rambling.

The Cows With Guns Military Project: 5.5 This has funny parts, but it needs to be moved.

The Cows With Guns Movie: 4.5 This also has some humor; but, it looks too much like it shoehorned into the article because you ran out of other ideas. I'd suggest either creating a section "Cows with Guns in Popular Culture" toward the end of your article, and include other "Cows with Guns" related ideas. Or, you might want to remove this section.

Proposed Solutions for Cows With Guns: 5.5 This is where it should be, and it has its funny part, but it also needs work. Its too biased in favor of cows. Yes, bias is bias even when its random-assed bias. Its basically a tone contradiction, plus excessive hyperbole.

Wait! I have an idea!: 6 You need to drop more hints that this is being written by a cow. For example, striking out words, like in the Gul Dukat article.

Score is average of sections and overall score, with the overall score getting double weight, and rounded to the nearest 10th.
Concept: 6 The article subject is a good idea, however, the article is a bit random. You might want to include a link to the song somewhere higher in the article. For someone who hasn't heard of the song, the article might come across as complete bullocks. This is true of any internet meme.
Prose and formatting: 6 Some of the sections should be reduced to sub sections, having all sections makes your article look bad. Also, might want to add more links to your article, lacking links makes your article look "ugly". When doing so, try to keep from having any red links whatsoever. Some reviewers think a few red links are ok, but they just make your article look unpolished.
Images: 6.1 Overall score: 6.5 The first image is funny, the second doesn't add that much humor, but is probably needed to show the subject matter, the 3rd and 4th ones are too close together.

1st Image: 8 Nothing wrong with it, I'd leave as is unless you come across an even better pic.

Second Image: 7 Its not that funny it itself; however, I'd keep it just to show the subject matter.

3rd and 4th Images: 6, 5.5; but, a 3 point penalty for image upon image in a non crowded article You shouldn't have a image on top of another image, especially when you have so much space above without images. I'd move the 3rd pic up higher. Also, I don't really get the caption for the last one. And as a rule, if a joke needs to be explained, its not funny.
Miscellaneous: 6 Improvablity score. This article has potential, but it will need a lot of consistency.
Final Score: 29.2 INCREASE CONSISTENCY
Reviewer: --Mnbvcxz 18:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects