Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Foreign Accent Syndrome

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 08:55, August 9, 2010 by Skinfan13 (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Foreign Accent Syndrome

I am finally done with this article. I know that pee review is seriously backlogged, so I don't think anyone will review this anytime soon.--M'su Carencro - Talk - Contributions - Blag 16:26, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

This might sound stupid, but is it dry enough?--M'su Carencro - Talk - Contributions - Blag 13:46, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

Hello.--M'su Carencro - Talk - Contributions - Blag 14:10, July 29, 2010 (UTC)


Vmiflag ¡Hola! This valiant VMI cadet is here
to guard this article while
it is reviewed by:

-- Sf13 Upsilonsigmasigmacrest

If he hasn't reviewed it
within 24 hours since
03:21 EST 9 Aug, remove this
tag and shout at him.



Humour: 6.5 The way I review, I generally put the majority of my comments and suggestions in the humor section. This allows me to be lazy keep all of my thoughts organized. I'll give you my first impressions after one read through and then go in section by section for a more detailed look.

Initial Impressions

A fairly entertaining article. I got a few chuckles out of it, but there was no defining LOL moment. This article is, besides a few proof-reading errors, a very well-written piece of high quality. I've noticed that even if some users aren't too keen on your subtle sense of humor over at VFH, you are an exceptionally good writer in terms of readability (West Timor comes to mind. Speaking of, I would suggest adding references to your 'west' article to the East Timor page). At any rate, there were some parts that struck me as out-of-place and the article left me with a feeling of being incomplete.

Section by Section

Introduction

The introduction is pretty solid actually. You clearly define your concept and establish what the article is going to encompass. The first problem that occurs in the article though is where you start talking about the Lithuanian example, particularly about the sister. In order to better follow the tone and flow you've established, I would say "their sister" rather than "his sister" as it sounds more encyclopedic to do it that way. Plus, that would also match the overall tone.

Secondly, and I'll address this at length under the concept section, you need to think more about treatment. It's all fine and dandy to say there are no treatments of any kind and then talk about government programs, but later on you barely touch on this. I see articles on subjects like this as a sort of sandwich. The intro is the top bun, the symptoms and causes are the meat and fillings, and the treatment and conclusion are the bottom bun. You need to either ditch the government program thing and make up a treatment, or you need to really elaborate on the government program. Anyways, more on that under concept.

History

The introduction bit is fairly good, but it gets a little awkward at the end. This sentence actually, "Amelia's parents did not initially accept the mysterious changes happening to her, and were shocked to learn that she used British English instead of American English" is the source of the awkwardness. This is because you essentially say the same thing earlier in this very section (and you do it much better early on). You need to find a way to say the second part about basil pronunciation (as that is pretty funny) without having to repeat yourself awkwardly.

Monrad-Krohn

The reason that Krohn is in this Kentucky town, and the work he performs is a little odd and doesn't really add much except the sort-of funny joke about being a shaman. We get that Kentucky is backwards, this is almost an unstated given and we don't need to be reminded again after the "hit with a stick" joke. It would be better (and make more sense that a Norwegian immigrant is in Kentucky) to have her parents call in Krohn instead of having him be the town neurologist/shaman. Everything else is entertaining and fine.

Early Researchers

This section needs to be retitled "Early Research" since 'researchers' implies that the section is entirely about the men (maybe women) who did the research instead of what they researched. This section is home to my favorite joke in the article, that Krohn stayed at a Hawaiian beach house while his colleagues died around the world looking for FAS patients and then they finally find one in Kentucky again. hilarious, but you need to sell the Hawaiian beach house part a little more. I figured it out, but you need to make it more ironic that he was at a beach house in order to sell the joke right away and make it funnier altogether. keep the bit about finding the man in Kentucky exactly the way it is, that is the proper amount of subtle situational irony. "Impromptu dissections" made me laugh a bit. From there though I think the bit about icepicks and jailtime is a little bit too much, I would get rid of all that as I believe it detracts from what you're trying to do overall.

Modern Times

I would say something like "than we did previously" instead of what you have, "than ever before," as that implies that a TON of new info exists, whereas the content of your article does not imply so. I love footnote #3, I think it's the best one. The joke about 93 centavos is a little bit cliched and lame, especially since Brazil is now one of the best economies in the southern hemisphere. I think this section needs to focus more on modern research rather than government funding of that research. Again, this will tie into my comments under 'concept' on the subject of government programs.

Description

You mention the difficulty of trained ears in detecting FAS, but you don't indicate how they go about doing this. You need to come up with some way in which "trained ears" differentiate FAS patients from true foriegners, not out of necessity, but rather because I feel it would really compliment the flow and be a good addition to your article. I would completely cut out the African accent bit, it doesn't fit well at all. replace it with nothing and your article will be elevated a notch. Keep the prognosis bit though, that's entertaining.

Signs and Symptoms

Nothing really to report here. reexamine this: "and therefore not able to talk" as it really feels awkward when read.

Causes

Again, a pretty solid section. I particularly liked "the puzzle that is FAS remains unsolved, and likely will remain unsolved until funding to continue invasive, open brain experiments on victims resumes." That could be one of the funniest parts of the article, it catches you so off-guard. That's a really good thing I think as it adds to the humor of that sentence.

Assimilation

This is by far the weakest section of your article. I'm not too hot on the focus of government relocation programs as that sort of departs from the realist edge you've chosen for the rest of the article. What's worse though is that you mention this extensively and don't really elaborate that much. Again, see concept.

Final Humor Comments

All in all, this article tickles my funny bone, but it doesn't have a ton of defining funny moments. The concept itself lends more to the humor than an abundance of jokes. This is actually a plus given the tone of the article.

Concept: 8 I like the initial concept you've chosen here, and you've given the entire article a certain degree of plausibility (I would add a {{wikipedia} tag somewhere in the article so that folks know that this isn't entirely fictional). But let's get down to the nitty-gritty: I am not a fan of the government relocation part of your article. I mentioned the sandwich earlier. Articles about diseases or medical conditions need three things: an effective intro, a listing and description of symptoms, a listing of treatments and prognosis, and a conclusion. Since you opted out of both the treatment and conclusion, you need to make the replacement (gov't program) all the more strong to make up for that absence. What you currently have on the government programs is pretty weak. It leaves the article feeling incomplete. Personally, I would seriously downplay the government angle and focus more on continued research and ridiculous treatments being widely accepted (for humors sake since a realistic treatment would be boring). That's just me though, if you feel that the government relocation thing is more humorous I would seriously expand that.
Prose and formatting: 7.5 This is a very well-written article in terms of readability. However, you do have some very glaring spelling, syntax, and grammar issues throughout that could have easily been spotted with a thorough proofreading. You should go back through and do a good spellcheck and read over trouble spots and see if you can come up with smoother ways of saying what you want to get across. You do a splendid job of making this a highly readable article, but the few places where there are problems really put a crimp into enjoying the entire ride, so to speak. Here's a short list of the things that immediately stood out to me, and by all means this is not a comprehensive list:
  • In the History section in the intro, in the sentence "many of her relatives were confused of her tendency" the word of needs to become 'by' so that it reads "confused by her tendency."
  • In the Monrad Krohn section, your past tense use of "lie" is pretty awkward. I would find a way to reword that sentence. In the sentence "in Bristol that they don't like to talk about" 'don't' needs to become past-tense since this entire section is in past-tense.
  • In the Early Researchers section, Syndrome needs to be lowercase. You need to find synonyms for the word 'research' as that is used quite a bit. Studies, lab tests, are two that immediately come to mind. Hypothermia should be lowercase too.
  • In the Modern Times section you need synonyms for 'researchers' as that is used very frequently in proximity.
  • In Signs and Symptoms - caus needs an 'e'
  • In Causes you have grammar issues in third paragraph.
  • In Assimilation you have numerous grammar issues. This section is the only poorly written one in the article. My recommendation is to get rid of it and put the most important parts in other sections, but since you'll probably keep this angle, just rewrite and expand this section.
Images: 7.5 I think this article could use an extra image. The first two are really average too, the last one with the swastikas is clever. I love the captions though. I'll go through and give comments on each image and caption:
  • first image: pretty straightforward. The caption is priceless though, a very good use of non-sequitur slightly sarcastic humor, a particular favorite of mine.
  • second image: again, very average. The caption for this is riotous though, A very good way to take an average image and make it funny by again employing non-sequitur sarcasm.
  • third image: visually interesting and the caption, while not quite as funny as the first two captions, is still interesting and amusing.

I would probably consider adding a fourth image to the article as it is just at that length where you can have a full screen of text and not have an entire picture visible onscreen. Employing non-sequitur sarcastic humor is always a good way to go with any future captions.

Miscellaneous: 5 I enjoyed reading this article, and I usually go off of my level of enjoyment when doing the misc. score, but I felt that the article's score was higher overall than I intended, so this score reflects how I feel the total score should be.
Final Score: 34.5 A pretty good and solid start. I would focus on proofreading and deciding what to do with the conclusion. Those are the two issues that most stick out to me. This article still needs a bit of work before its VFH material, but this is still pretty good, very readable too. As always, if you have any questions about this review, hit me up at my talk page.

P.S. sorry for the delay!

Reviewer: -- SirSf13 (Talk) Upsilonsigmasigmacrest CUN RotM FBotM VFH SK Maj. ΥΣΣ 04:55 EST 9 Aug, 2010
Personal tools
projects