Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Giant panda (2nd Review)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Giant panda

I'm letting ChiefJusticeds do this one--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 05:22, March 16, 2010 (UTC) Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 05:22, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

OK, since Chief is taking a Pee hiatus, I'd like to do this one. Is that OK? (I'm actually not starting until I get the OK)

Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!! CUN Icons-flag-us NOTM 17:26, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

That'll be ok. I made changes since Chief's last review. You can take a Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Giant panda look if you like--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 17:43, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
Awesome. 24-36 hours.Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!! CUN Icons-flag-us NOTM 18:27, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

Anyone can review this now. --ChiefjusticeDS 19:27, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I should learn to shut up when I'm busy.Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!! CUN Icons-flag-us NOTM 19:36, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Happens to me a lot--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 19:43, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Hi there! Today, your reviewer is HELPME. He was noob of the month February 2010. He graduated the adoption program from Why do I need to provide this? this month. He's currently on UN:FFS. Other than that, not much is to be said about HELPME.
Concept: 4 OK, so your concept was not bad. But your execution (and concept, for that matter) seem(s) sort of...all over the place. And the consistent parts weren't great, really. See the longer sections for more info, as I see no real way to not combine humor and concept.
Prose and Formatting: 3 I'll be blunt: there were a lot of mistakes. You really need a proofread, or to run this through Microsoft spellcheck. Spelling wasn't really your problem, grammar was much worse. Here's a section-by-section, with all of the errors I could see:
"The appearance of the Giant Panda is considered by many to be adorable, with one man quoting "The Giant Panda is sooooo cute and cuddly; it would make you want to pet it, give it a hug, and take it home." " After cuddly, there should be a semicolon, not a comma.
"They are medium size animals" Medium sized.
"Scientist have often question" Scientists have often questioned is the correct way to say this.
"always been like that or a result" Or as a. Actually, I would rephrase that sentence. I think "Scientists have always asked "Has the giant panda's fur always looked like that, or is it a result of crossbreeding?" sounds better.
"One theory states that the giant panda use to be all brown like grizzly bears," Used to.
"where the oceans where also frozed up" 1) Ice Age isn't a place, it's a time period. You should say when. 2) Frozed isn't a word, frozen is better. 3) The second where is also incorrect, were is the correct spelling.
"and causing them to mate" "And mated with" would be correct usage. Also, this sentence is a big run-on. Maybe you could split it into multiple sentences. All of the commas make for some pretty tedious reading.
"However, there's one thing that the panda doesn't have that the polar bear and black bear does have that make these two theories look impossible; a violent nature towards humans who get too close." Major rephrasing needed. Does it sound right when you repeat that sentence back to yourself? "Polar and Black bears" sounds better than "Polar bear and Black bear". (By the way, Polar bears and Black bears are species names and should have the first word capitalized. The same goes for Giant panda.)
"One theory by a guy with no appearant degree in science, wild life or possibly the real world that during the American Civil War, states that the Panda didn't want to be on either side of the conflict and dyed their hairs black and white to say that the love both whites and blacks." Same as above. You should rephrase this joke in a much shorter way; it seems as if you have too many words and not enough jokes, which, in short, is bad.
"except in zoo's, but they didnt exist back then" Didn't is a contraction, and requires an apostrophe. A second apostrophe error: NEVER USE AN APOSTROPHE TO PLURALIZE A WORD. GAH. Sorry, that's just a pet peeve of mine.
"Chinese decent" Descent > decent.
"the the fact" Extra the...
"are of Chinese decent, the the fact that Civil War being about the fight between the North and the South and not between blacks and whites" Yeah, another rephrasing deal. See the stuff above.
"this theory can be considered irrelevant" How is it irrelevant? It has to do with giant pandas. A different word could be needed, maybe just get rid of this line. The garbage stuff gets the point across.
Another concern is that this paragraph seems to be two giant run-on sentences. HTBFANJS states that short sentences are better, and run-on sentences make grammar Nazis such as myself angry, anyway. Remember that in an article, instead of one sentence with a bunch of commas, several short sentences are better.
"complete garbage like the guy who made it up". 1)The period should be in the quote. 2) Complete should be capitalized, because it is the beginning of a quote.
"Panda's are" apostrophe abuse.
"and soccer as well as drinking Coca-cola" and soccer, as well as drinking Coca-Cola.
"So it is suggested" So, it is suggested.
"by causing to blow up" by causing it to blow up.
"so its" So it's.
"very unwise to make fun" You need to add "of them."
"Why they like to eat bamboo is unknown; scientists believe that it tastes good even though some tried it and threw up, or maybe its because its easier to get than any other food" Try "Why they like to eat bamboo is unknown; scientists believe it tastes good. However, when they tried it, they threw up. Another possibility is that it may be easier to get it than it is any other food." That creates shorter sentences, and it sounds better.
"scrubs" Do you mean shrubs? :S
"and Twix and Reese's" A comma after Twix, and then "and Reese's".
"and rarely kittens" "And rarely, even kittens" sounds a bit better to me. Also, another run-on is the last sentence of this paragraph.
Kung fu
"mocked at." Just mocked is fine, no need for at. Also, two formatting complaints here. You did [Jesus]] on accident. Also, that image on the left messes the paragraphs up a little. Unfortunately, I don't know how to fix such things. You could ask DrStrange, Spang, Puppy, etc. for stuff like that.
"There're"-Should be they're

Endangered species

"Unfortunately, despite masters of kung fu,"- Despite being.
"that people with no value for animal life" Er, I didn't understand this. Try "People who have no remorse for animal's lives" Actually, mine isn't great, so try experimenting with different wording and repeating it back to yourself to see what works best.
"whether its"- Whether it's
"Communist Chinese Soldiers killed panda mistaken for non Communist Chinese Soldiers" Try "Communist Chinese soldiers killed pandas they mistook for non-Communist Chinese soldiers."
"so bad" so badly
"Watch for Panda's" pandas- lowercase and no apostrophe
"Also in China" Also, in China, blah blah etc
Notable Pandas
"One Notable Panda is from Kung Fu Panda named Po" Try "One notable panda is Po, the panda in Kung Fu Panda."
"alot"- a lot
"Although fat and big and always hungry" Try "Although fat, big, and always hungry, (insert rest of sentence)"
"to both learn"- to learn both
So if you wonder why your P+F score is so low, just look above. That is a whole lot of errors, sorry.
Humo(u)r: 4.5 I apologize deeply for the low score, but I just didn't like it much. There were funny points where I got the joke, and I'm very glad for those, but like Chief said in your last review, they're not common. It seemed a bit strange, and some of the humor was pretty random. Here's a section-by-section overview:
The first paragraph
No big issues here, except that you appear to attempt two different styles by mentioning kung fu. At first it seemed like they were cute, but now you're mentioning kung fu, which seems tough. Just a simple well-placed "however" could be a huge help. (For example: "[stuff about cuteness]. However, they are also known to be masters of kung fu." This would require you to move the bamboo thing somewhere else, but you can do it!)
This was one of the better ones, but I found the run-on sentences to mess with the humor a bit. Look at P+F for stuff like that.
The consistency seemed to flap here. First you say that anyone who thinks they are dangerous is crazy, and then you're talking about their kung fu? I would put the kung fu stuff in the kung fu section, as it seems to not belong. Take that and put it somewhere else, and you're good to go.
I have to make a comment about the first sentence: You said "To no one's surprise, bamboo." Well, when writing an encyclopedic article, you should assume the reader knows NOTHING about the subject. This helps avoid being "snarky" and annoying the reader, which no one wants. Other than that, fine section.
Kung fu
One of the worse ones. Generally, Chuck Norris shouldn't be mentioned. Ever. Please, remove that. Also, this sort of messes with the consistency of "Pandas are cute and harmless." Is there any way you could rephrase this to make pandas still sound non-threatening? It would help the consistency.
Endangered species
The butt-rape makes the article sound less cutesy. The other parts don't mess it up as much as that. I would seriously recommend you replace that with something better. Even "kick their ass" sounds better. (Don't use that though, you could think of something better) With the "Chinese government" thing- that doesn't seem to work. That doesn't really have much to do with Giant Pandas. It would be possible to keep this type of reference, but I would recommend you be more subtle about it.
Notable Pandas
The first paragraph- that seems to make fun of the movie more than the panda itself. Remember to stick to your topic, and not get too far astray. The only real joke I can actually see in this paragraph is one the movie already established. Try not to do that, it's generally better when you think of most of the jokes on your own.
The second bullet seems to be more a description of a TV show character- theredon't seem to be any jokes. It's good that you stuck to the character, but it's important that you figure out how to input something funny there. Or, you could remove it. Your choice, really.
Images: 6 The images were good overall, however, their grammar issues dragged them down. Great images don't need a wonderful caption, (Although it would be nice if they had one!) but average images, like yours, do. Grammar problems are an especially big problem in captions, because people's eyes are drawn to them. Therefore, the grammar errors are easier to spot. In better detail:
The first image and caption would have been fine, except it was grammatically incorrect. "that the Panda is way more cute and cuddly than kittens" Try "That the panda is way cuter and more cuddly than a kitten" And then "And are very unlikely to scratch up the furniture" Try "And is much less likely to scratch up the furniture." Also, you didn't use punctuation on any of the captions, which bothered me a little. The second and fourth images are just informational, so no comments are needed for those. (Except the above punctuation! Grr! Also, in the fourth image ((the Po one)) you need a comma after Po, so it reads "Po, from Kung Fu Panda") The third image was not great, again due to grammar. I'll look at it:
"Are very depress"- Yeah, depressed.
"Maybe because" should be "Maybe it's because"
"Or this is" I think "Or it may be" sounds better.
Miscellaneous: 4.4 Yes, averaging and the like.
Final Score: 21.9 Really, the only three things your article needs are grammar errors, consistency problems, and word usage issues. The problem is, it needs them badly. Seriously, if you had used better grammar, the ratings would be much higher, but that's because I'm an anally retentive grammar Nazi. With consistency, you made the panda sound scary and powerful in some points and only cute and cuddly in most. And word usage, the cases varied, but it was mostly words that made the article difficult to understand. Oh yeah, and run-on sentences. I hope you don't think this review is too harsh. I do like your article in general, but I think it needs some fixing. Sorry again about harshness. You can yell about it on my talk page. I also hope I didn't miss the point, because then I would have spent hours writing this just so I could look like a stupid dick. Well, anyway, good luck with the article.
Reviewer: Sir ¬_¬ | Banter HOMOPHOBE!!! CUN Icons-flag-us NOTM 01:59, March 27, 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools