Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/General Joseph Brady Colton

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit General Joseph Brady Colton

General Joseph Brady Colton What do you guys think, funny/not-funny, too random? I could use some other editors helping that just me to. 19:37, May 10, 2012 (UTC)

Never heard of the guy. You claim he's G.I. Joe? I don't know about the Chuck Norris references, though. Usually when a n00b inserts Chuck Norris or Hitler references into their article or writes something in the article claiming that Wikipedia is evil, that's a sign that he/she/it is trying too hard. --Qzekrom sig trans Sir CuteGiratinaOnTheRadio [CUNPBJ'12PLS(0)] 00:18, June 25, 2012 (UTC)
Humour: 2.5 I'm sorry, but this article simply is not funny. I'm not exactly sure what you're going for here, but the biggest problem in your article by far is the lack of consistency. You start off with a biography (a decent approach if you do it right), but your article degenerates into randomness starting in the second section. With a few exceptions, randomness usually isn't very funny in an article-you need a consistent theme to guide it. If you're choosing to write a biography, you can't just blatantly contradict yourself (he's POTUS in another world but he's really JFK and he's also Chuck Norris? What?). If you haven't ready it already, HTBFANJS is a great guide to start with. Also: NEVER use Chuck Norris in an article; it's been done a million different times to the point where it's just tiresome.
Concept: 4 Well, like I said, the biggest problem with this article's concept is that it's really several different concepts in one. He's a soldier, and President of the United States in an alternate reality, and really JFK, and also Chuck Norris...it gets really, really disorienting. If you're going to do a biography on a (fictional) person, you need to pick an approach and stick with it. Introducing alternate realities usually doesn't to anything unless it's about Doctor Who. I suggest you stick with the facts and distort them in an amusing way. Look up the Wikipedia article on him and go from there.
Prose and formatting: 5 No major complaints here. The prose in the article is decent, as is the formatting.
Images: 4.5 Not sure what to say here. Why Bruce Willis? I get that he's a badass, but it seems like something of a non-sequitur. My suggestion would be to find out if G.I. Joe has ever been adapted into a feature film, and use the picture from there.
Miscellaneous: 3 My overall grade of the article.
Final Score: 19 To summarize, you've got an article that's all over the place with a bunch of competing concepts mashed into one. Cut off the fat from some of the lower section (Ax the zombie and Chuck Norris parts at the very least) and overall give your article a rehash. If you're sticking with the biography approach and are portraying him as a real person, use info from the G.I. Joe comics and TV shows. Good luck!
Reviewer: Saberwolf116 (talk) 03:19, July 6, 2012 (UTC)
Personal tools