Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Dr Spock's “The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care”

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Dr Spock's “The Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care”

Lots of fairly obvious Trekkie references Sog1970 22:36, January 2, 2010 (UTC)

As I possess both Star Trek memorabilia and an edition of Dr. Spock's book, I believe common sense dictates I take care of reviewing this article within the time it takes light to travel 173 Astronomical Units while changing 288 diapers. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:57, January 3, 2010 (UTC)
Introduction to your reviewer

It's me, blah blah. I will tell you that, while not a Star Trek fanatic, I do know trekkie stuff like Spock's blood type and I've seen Gene Roddenbury and all the original cast in person. On the other page, I have one of the revisions of Dr. Spock's book and am fairly familiar with it.

Concept: 5 The reason my version of the Pee Review table puts the concept first is that this often seems to be the key for improving an article. The basic concept seems to be "Mr. Spock and Dr. Spock--same unusual name, so let's bring them together." It's not a new concept, of course, but I think it can work. The reason I only scored it a five is because I don't think that the article went beyond this very often. In areas where Mr. Spock and Dr. Spock are very tightly linked, the concept seems to work very well. I think bringing them together so that most of what's written about this fictional Dr. Spock would apply to both Mr. Spock and the real Dr. Spock would strengthen the concept and the article a great deal.
Prose and Formatting: 8 I put Humour comments in with P & Formatting to avoid repeating myself, but do score them separately.

All in all, I think the writing is quite good. However, I think it could be strengthened, per suggestions below (although you'll likely see most of these have to do with my belief that the article could use a stronger concept, more direct tie-ins between the two Spocks).

Your intro

I like The DaVinci Code reference, which I found subtly humorous.

The Author

"The man who was to become Dr(period) Spock..."--missing period (based on what seems to be his own usage. Same note applies to the title.)...was born in 1913...."--why 1913 when he was born in 1903? After this, the article starts gets "spacy," if I may pardoned for the pun. It seems to travel far afield from the author of a book on baby and child care.
Some of the references are likely going to be obscure, even to many Star Trek fans. Unless they've seen the episode of the animated series, they may not know what a le-matya is, or that Spock had a pet Sehlat who died saving him in an alternate timeline. Personally, even though I know the references I didn't find this section particularly funny, except for the humorously ironic "confirmed the need to buy larger pets with bigger teeth." I also don't get his mother as drinking and looking for lonely aliens, as it seems to have no relationship to either Mr. or (as far as I know) Dr. Spock's mother. I did like the subtle "Metalwork" joke (Vulcan, anyone?), and Death Grippe. I can't help thinking that the article could use a reference to Spock's ears looking the way they do because of an accident involving... http://www.fanpop.com/spots/james-t-kirk/videos/8404986/title/kirk-spock-city-on-edge-forever-rice-picker.
"...Sarek’s earlier conviction...."--the article says Sarek was not convicted; also pediatrics and pedophile sound very different, which also weakens the joke. "Pedophiliac" sounds a little more like pediatrics, but it still something of a stretch for a joke. I do like how the article ties the two Spocks in with each other with "War is illogical."

The Book

"...infant betrothal and fighting poisonous animals to graduate from adolescence were quietly dropped...."--like this. "...tolerance to alcohol by adding gin to baby formula...."--the alcohol references doesn't seem to fit; maybe you could connect it to what comes before better.
"Spock encouraged parents...."--I'd make this a new paragraph. And I like the tribbles bit. "...unless they felt the need to fire Photon torpedoes...."--this doesn't seem to fit parents in the nursery.
"His (book's) famous first line, “You know more than you think you do, despite that being an irrational species”--needs the word "book's", and could I think be better worded with your instead of "that"--"despite that (your) being an irrational species." "...stern and uncompromising with Klingon aggression...."--this didn't seem to me to fit.
"...promoting the madness of the plak tow mating ritual before parenthood....dangerous levels of stimulants...."--did something earlier in the article lead up to this? A number of the Star Trek references seem to pop into the article without a clear relation to what came earlier in the article and/or the topic of a book about parenting. References such as "a layer of aluminium foil at the bottom of a cot would block harmful Tachyon emissions" seem random to me.

Other Interests

I like the tie-in of a de-militarised zone with the neutral zone--this fits both Dr. and Mr. Spock. I'd like to see more of this kind of direct connection. But Borg and Viet Cong doesn't to fit. Perhaps this could be rewritten to reflect the fear of people being assimilated by the Borg and the fear of people being assimilated by the Communists--that would tie the real-world explanation for the Vietnam War which Dr. Spock protested against with Star Trek.
"In 1962 Spock joined 'The Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy'"--I think the Prime Directive reference works, but again, does this fit Dr. Spock? The article's Spock wants only the US to have nuclear weapons, whereas Dr. Spock wanted nuclear disarmament.
"...it was possible to set up conference-calling using nothing more complicated than black and white televisions and a Starfleet Tricorder."--like this; this ties Dr. Spock ("five had never met in the same room") with Spock's gadgeteering, plus I like the irony of "nothing more...than...a Startfleet Tricorder." There are a couple problems, though--Star Fleet (earlier spelling in the article) vs. Starfleet, and the fact Starfleet isn't described in the article (I think a very brief description would be enough of whatever the article will describe as "Starfleet").
"...not least due to King's assassination."--I like this. The questioning of Scotty seems like a Star Trek insidey joke (yes, I think most readers will get it), and I didn't find it funny.
'increased old age pensions, universal medical insurance and free trade under the slogan “Live long and prosper”'--good; another tie in between Mr. and Dr. Spock. Like to see more of these.
"politics of his nation (comma) Spock returned...." Eventually, however (comma) his public spirit...."
"the Romulan Empire with the Vulcans...."--this section seems to fit Star Trek, but not Dr. Spock.
Humo(u)r: 5 Some parts I found very funny, as described above. Again, I noticed that most of these are when the two Spocks are brought together.
Images: 8 I'm guessing the book cover is small here because the picture of the baby Spock doesn't look as good enlarged; I would prefer a clearer, larger version of the image, but do really like the cover. Love the rat photo, although a slightly altered version with the fingers shaped a litle more like the Vulcan sign would be a little better (I can probably do a minor variation, if you want--ah, I don't know, maybe it's fine as is). Like the baby Vulcan sign--this is a great tie-in for the two Spocks. I like the young Spock getting his ear pulled, but would like the caption to tie in more to the article; maybe how the photo reflects the treatment children had before Spock's book. While I love the Spock SS photo (probably better than I liked that episode), it doesn't seem to fit the article. Maybe if the article said something, even a very brief reference, that would hint at this.
Miscellaneous: 6.5 Average of above
Final Score: 32.5 I think this article has a strong potential, and could be very good. But again, I think it could use a lot more tie-in between the two Spocks. Please let me know on my talk page if you edit this.
Reviewer: WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:19, January 4, 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools