Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Win a Darwin Award

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 21:10, November 15, 2008 by BlueYonder (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit HowTo:Win a Darwin Award

Made a couple changes to the article since I last attempted to get it peed on (a whole year and a half ago), and figure that I would like to give this another shot. Have at me! OOOOOBBBBBAAAAAMMMMMMMMMAAAAAAAAOBAMA  •  SONIC80 -- ( Praise  •  Masterpieces  •  Contributions ) (Thar be-eth a timestamp --> 23:44, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Got ya covered. BlueYonder GalaxyIcon - CONTACT
Humour: 5 I'm writing this section last, so I won't say too much for fear of overlapping; however, what I will say is that the humour in the article is marred rather severly by the problem I will go further into in the next section; that the article goes on too long about this single method of winning a Darwin Award. The article, and thus the humour, consequently begins to feel rather repetitive, and the article ages quickly. It's harder to laugh at something that goes on too long.

In addition, some of the jokes in this article are, unfortunatley, rather...well, stale. "...which wouldn't be very long, seeing as it is a Darwin Award...", for instance, is rather flat and predictable, while "Also, once you bought the car, run over the salesman." is random and feels out of place...in a way that doesn't work. Flat jokes don't have to be consistent to puncture an article's humour...it only takes a few to deflate it and make us sceptical of the rest of it.

Concept: 5 Well, I suppose my main complaint here is that the article just doesn’t span nearly as much of the subject as it could. Or, to put it more bluntly, it could list more ways of winning a Darwin Award. But the whole thing only spans one method, and, unfortunately, it’s not that interesting a method. Thus, the article starts to feel repetitive and gets old quicker than it needs to. I really think it would have been better if several methods had been listed, and less time and space had been given to each. It would have been more interesting, an easier read, and would actually have lengthened the article. In the good way, I mean.

In addition, the article says very little about the Darwin Awards themselves. Sure, it’s more about getting one that about the things themselves, but I really think you could have lengthened the stuff about the Darwin Awards in the introductory paragraph and made it a little more amusing; as it is, the article, as it moves forward, starts to feel a little cut off from its subject matter.

Prose and formatting: 5.5 Hmm...well, I can't find much in the way of spelling or grammar complaints other than a rather persistant absence of commas that should be present ("So you made it to the big prize, huh?"; "Now that you have the car, you must drive it to your house", etc.)- a small problem that nonetheless makes the prose somewhat bumpy. And the formatting's fine as well...the pictures, text and tip box fit nicely together.

The prose, on the other hand...well, this is tough to put in words, really, but I think it's too simplistic...too straightforward and predictable, with too little personality. If it had, for instance, been given a scathing tone related to the fact that it's addressing someone who's "removing themselves from the gene pool", wonders could have been worked. HowTos have a great potential for working up a unique tone based on their target audience. That needs to be worked on.

Images: 5 My main complaint here is linked to that of the concept; I like the idea, but there could be more of it. What there is isn’t bad; the picture of the baby is appropriate (although I’m sure you could have come up with a funnier/subtler caption), and the pictures of the rocket in the car link well with the article’s content, but, as with the concept, the pictures really could have been more about what the article is about; Darwin Awards. I’m sure you could have found plenty of pictures related to Darwin Awards, and I’m just as sure you could have come up with great captions for them. But you haven’t. So, unfortunately, I have to say the same thing here as I did about concept: not bad, but so much more could have been done.
Miscellaneous: 5.1 Averaged, as always.
Final Score: 25.6 Well, I think you see my complaint; the article is greatly weakened by the fact that it doesn’t do half of what it could. It was a good idea you set out with, but it hasn’t really worked out, and I’m sure you’re capable of improving it.
Reviewer: BlueYonder GalaxyIcon - CONTACT
Personal tools
projects