Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Early Music Ensemble (game)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 16:46, January 6, 2009 by Mnbvcxz (talk | contribs)

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


edit Early Music Ensemble (game)

Hello. Tell me what you think. Like the article says, if you're going to review this deal, I'll be a happy boy if you give me in-depth comments rather than just scores. Thanks! YouFang 21:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to get this tomorrow. --Mnbvcxz 06:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Concept: 7 This has potential, but I just have the feeling that the humor isn't coming across as good as it could be. I think its basically being to blunt. The article is a bit of a one trick pony, and it comes across sort of like a good but not great unNews article. I'm not saying your article is bad, but its not VFH quality.

I would suggest you try to "hide" the fact that the game is merely a collection of archaic instruments until later in the article. Gradually revealing that fact might be more funny, sort of like an escalation of outlandishness. I think the fact that you reveal its just a collection of instruments early adds to the feeling of bluntness I mention in the humor section. Also, some turn of phrases or footnotes might help your article.

Don't try to expand this article for the mere sake of expansion. This article does have a fairly narrow focus, and you might wind up rambling if you make it larger than it needs to be.
Prose and Formatting: 7 No major formatting problems. But, I would suggest you get a see also section at the end. Also, the litigation header might look better as a sub header. Block quotes might work better in the "Reception" section, but the might not if they result in several one-line paragraphs.
Images: 8 Images are good an appropriate. I especially like the first one. However, the last 3 images are mostly filler, and you might (or not) be able to find a more funny pic to replace one of those. I would probably keep at least one of the last 3, probably the last one if you only keep one of them, as a picture of the subject matter.
Humour: 6 The humor could use some work, but I can't quite put my finger on what's wrong. I think part of it is the occasional bluntness. You might be able to improve that by not outright "telling" the reader that the system sucks. You do avoid mentioning it outright, but you do get a bit attacky at times. If you can explain what it does clearly and humorously, you generally don't need to mention outright how much it sucks.

The litigation section might come off as a bit crass, and a possible tone ruin-er. That needs some re-work. Try to avoid vulgar words in that section, like "de-cocked". Also, castrato generally only had their testicles removed. Some mention of hospitalization might also make it come across as less vulgar.

Finally, the tone in some of the quotes is a bit off. Especially in the pretentious magazine quote. Making the speech more pretentious and convoluted might help; in other words, use big words and long sentences; needlessly splicing together sentences with semi-colons might also help.
Improvability Score: 6 This article is good, but I think its a bit one-trick pony. It might be VFH quality with some work.
Final Score: 34 your main issue is a bit too much bluntness.
Reviewer: --Mnbvcxz 16:46, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools