Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/First!!!! (Final Review, Hopefully)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
This will hopefully be the last review of First!!!!! Thing about this article is It is my first article ever along with Brute, and I have had it peed on three times, and nominated alot, with those nominations always failing. Please be as indepth as possible. Also, no new users can review this. Sorry but when new users do it they are rarely good, no offense. Thanks! DirectorWILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 03:43, January 22, 2010 (UTC)
I'll...review this, although there will be some other comments I need to make too. Sequence 01:37, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
|Humour:||3||Well, right off the bat I knew this was going to be full of memes. This is usually not a goood thing. Now, I'm trying to be mean here, I'm just trying to do what is best for your article.
Overall: This article wasn't funny. Now, I'm not trying to be mean, I'm giving you the straight facts and I want you to improve based on those. The most important thing is that you keep your ideas the same throughout the whole article, remove profanity, and add jokes that actually make Uncyc users, NOT outube users laugh.
|Concept:||4||The main idea in this article to me was sort of meme-ish. Personally, I don't like things in that area, namely Chuck Norris, Text speak, etc. Also, I'm not an active Youtube user, so this idea doesn't really strike me as funny or creative, making it hard to work with. Also, the way you approached it was very unorganized. As I stressed above, you had several different times where you kept conflicting ideas. Unless your article is conversation-based, you definitely do not want to do this. The only way you can manage is by putting a "Debate/Controversy" section where you could put the postivie uses of First!. However, In this case I don't really recommend it, I think you should focus on the idea of the noob thing. You just have to mae sure to remove/change all of the conflicting ideas, and make it less profane.|
|Prose and formatting:||6||I didn't find any rea problems here. however, you did have many cases in whic you confused "it's" and "its". This was a mistake that bugged me, because I'm stupid and grammar mistakes bug me like that. Also, as for formatting, your paragrpahs were large and clumped together. You need to separate them for ease of reading and to make it flwo better. I recommend that you split them up where you trnsition to other ideas, just for the sake of sense. Apart from that, the FAQ was good, and the pictures were well spaced (except for one. see image section). However, I noticed a lack of blue links, it is best to keep a decent amount of blue links in your article. Becasue of these factors, I knocked off your score from the average 7 to a six, which is that big of a difference.|
|Images:||7||The images were fine. The first one did well, and the second was realted to the subject. However, That one with the pop-up was random and unecessary. I seem to have noticed you have an incredible fetish for those images, since I see them everywhere in your articles. However, this one wasn't funy, and it completely threw off the flow of the article. I suggest removal, don't worry about thumbing it or anything. Removing it is the best solution here, because you don't need that image in your article. I know the last five sentences or so had the exact same point in different words, but I have to make this look in-depth.|
|Miscellaneous:||5||You have some work to do with this article. Follow the steps below to work it out:
You have quite a bit of work ahead of you, but if you do it all you will have a nice article to be proud of. Good luck!
|Final Score:||25||When you said that it had been reviewed a lot and yet constantly failed VFH it sent up warning flares. After checking over the previous iterations of the article, and the previous pee-reviews that have been done it appears that you haven't taken the advice you've been given previously. After reading the version of the article that Staircase reviewed and the current one, the only changes that have been made have been the addition of two quotes and some additions to the FAQ. You acted on none of the advice that he gave you, which makes the whole point of reviewing it meaningless. Read through the advice he has given you again. It's right there above this comment. Make the changes. A couple of minor additions here and there are not going to change the score that you get from a review. Now it may well be that I get scolded for copy and pasting a review that wasn't my own, but all things considered I don't think it unreasonable. If you aren't going to act on the advice you are given before then there is no point me spending my time to make comments and suggestions that may never be considered or acted upon either. As Staircase said before, if you work on improving this article you can turn it into a real gem. A lot of time has passed since you first wrote this article and you will doubtlessly have improved as a writer because of it. Read through articles that have already been featured to see what works and how you can make this article look more like them. I hope you take these words to heart. If you want to discuss this in more detail please feel free to comment on my talk page.|
|Reviewer:||Sequence 01:54, January 30, 2010 (UTC)|