Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Hybrid Cars
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Kind out ran out of ideas towards the end so I'm looking for some input on if it needs to be longer and if so, how to do it. Also want some criticism on what I have written. --—John Lydon 13:09, July 16, 2010 (UTC) —John Lydon 13:09, July 16, 2010 (UTC)
- Guess I'll give this a gander... you shall have your review
eventuallyin one earth day. Give or take a time zone. -- 20100720 - 18:36 (UTC)
- I found the article to be a great start, but you could draw out a few jokes. The most notable culprit is the speech technology with Ford- try making some jokes about lonely people falling in love with the car's voice/ having sexual relations with it. Also, I think the hippy factor could be expanded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 22.214.171.124 (talk • contribs)
Seriously, though, I'd rate this as a whole as fairly humorous with a side of missing some stuff. Not what one would necessarily expect upon an article about hybrid cars... but it's the actual content that's the funny part, really.
On that note, though, perhaps you might want to explain why they're actually called 'hybrid' cars instead of something like 'smart' cars (or perhaps 'stupid' cars, considering the average ai)... what are the hybrids of, exactly? The usual hybrid cars are hybrids of gas and electric, so these would be between controller and computer intelligence, perhaps?
|Concept:||6||Reading through it, I kept forgetting what hybrid cars are in the context of the article and thus had to go back and look. You may want to reinforce the idea more for those of us who are slow in the head.
This doesn't seem so much a main article on hybrid cars as a main article on the history of hybrid cars. I think maybe the problem is unless you actually want it to be just a history one, you need other, not history sections besides the controversy one? Perhaps something on driving them versus driving normal cars, or something specifically about their appearances in and/or influences on the media, as you already have some mention of Disney and whatnot... maybe even a section of the difficulties of getting them serviced, although that might have too much reality behind it to be overly amusing.
Anyhow, I forgot what I was going to say. Whatever it was probably ended up in the humour section, though.
|Prose and formatting:||7||Check the consistency your sentence structures in some places, especially the introduction. For the most part it's not really an issue, but it would still probably help if you varied it up a mite. The tone in general seems okay, though, so I won't even try to pester you on that.
Also, if using multiple acronyms, introduce them in a consistent manner. Just make the format of FLAG's introduction match NUTSAHK and HERB and KITT, I guess.
In other news, it could probably use a proofreading. I noticed an grammar error, but when I went to try to find it I couldn't. So it's still there, and there are probably others lurking as well, probably just waiting to jump out and slay us all...
|Images:||7||The KITT pictured... I have to wonder. Did it survive that?
Anyhow, the end needs something. I don't know what, can't think of anything either, but perhaps if you add more sections or more to a section it will lend itself better to bring in an image. What you have at least is good, decent images, relevant captions that, while not overly funny, concretely tie in the funny images.
|Miscellaneous:||7||My impeccable mathematical skills tell me that is the average, even though they're probably wrong. Still, it seems reasonable, I guess...|
|Final Score:||34||Hopefully, this helps. If not, feel free to come by and ask me what the hell I'm talking about or to just drive-by shoot me if you prefer.|
|Reviewer:||-- 20100721 - 17:57 (UTC)|