Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Driving in Bucharest

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Driving in Bucharest

So, yeah, PLS entry. Did better than I thought it would, personally. I know the ending's a little flat, but I wanted to keep something from the superior original for posterity's sake. Also, I think this "Not reviewed" thing could use a bit of touching up, personally. Looks a bit off. ―― Sir Heerenveen, KUN [UotM RotM VFH FFS SK CM NS OME™] (talk), 17/08 17:35

This article is under review by
Gerry Cheevers.

Sayeth Gerry: shotgun!!
Humour: 7.3 *intro: 7.5

okay, a solid start, and you've got my attention. some problems with the wording and such took away from the humor, but we'll get to that later.

  • in town: 8

you successfully relay the awesomeness that is driving in bucharest. you use the word 'swearing' a lot in a short time; try throwing in 'cursing' or 'cussing' to make it flow better. i'd also like to see a more encyclopedic tone. i understand the first person/second person interaction, and it sounds like some kind of brochure or infomercial, but things like parentheses don't add to that illusion. try to make it conform to the style of an informational brochure if that's what you're going for, with slightly more official-sounding wording.

  • sweet sweeping roads: 7

the use of the math formulat thing really breaks up this section, i think that '30.01' should suffice. again, you're a little too confrontational for an informational article; try to point out the failings of the west (rather than make fun of them) and follow that with examples of bucharest's superiority.

  • mountain paths: 6

i really can't find any specific problems with this section that i haven't mentioned already, but it just didn't sparkle. i'd like to hear a detailed account of whipping around mountain paths like james bond, statistics of people flying off them, etc.

  • regulations: 7

i like this section, but i don't like a lot of the wording. 'mach 0.005' might be a little confusing to some people, as would 'measured in powers'.

  • disputes: 8

i like this section except for the atom bomb line, it seems out of place. i rather like the ending as it is, but i'm not sure how well 'engraved, embossed' does the trick. maybe exchange them with some other words that might mean unflinchingly rigid?

Concept: 7 5/5 points for a well-known subject. driving in foreign lands, no speed limit, everyone's swearing...fun!

2/5 points for execution. this sounds like a random romanian describing driving in bucharest. i think it would work much better as a message from the romanian government inviting westerners to come drive the beautiful streets of bucharest. don't put down the reader for their inferior driving enjoyment; instead, point out how much more fun they could have. make it sound very official, without vulgarity or conversation-y lines like 'Not that our other roads aren't already brilliant (they are. Yes, they are. Really.)'

Prose and formatting: 7 i'm not sure how much of your prose is intentional, but i'll hold off on proofreading it in case it is. if you would like a proofread, i'd be happy to give it a once-over. sentences like 'Basically everyone on the road that you get red mist for with the greatest of frequencies.' are confusing; i'm not even sure what that means. try clarifying your prose. switch that second image over to the left, for symmetry's sake. maybe try __NOTOC__ at the top to remove that unsightly whitespace.
Images: 7 two images, both good, relevant, good captions. you might be able to fit one more, but i think these two are fine if you don't feel like adding another. that second image is awfully big...
Miscellaneous: 7.1 averagetastic!
Final Score: 35.4 my preview button tells me that your score is 35.4, placing your article right in the 'adequate; the average article' wheelhouse. i think that with a better tone and approach you could improve greatly. i suggest DOHS Anti-Terrorism Regulations, which i wrote as the department of homeland security issuing warnings to americans about terrorists. you can see how the tone is very formal and gets to the point. i'm sure there are other similar articles with official tones; check out UN:BEST to see. if you're looking for VFH, i think that a better tone would greatly help, along with just a bit more content and another image. good luck!
Reviewer: SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 17:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools