Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/IViking's Explicit Stories
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
|Humour:||3||I'm not sure why this is being submitted for pee review. This article looks like one giant experiment. It looks like an article that was made for the purpose of seeing what all the templates look like. Such an article belongs in userspace, not mainspace. I strongly suggest moving this to User:IViking/IViking's Explicit Stories.
The biggest problem with this article is its randomness. That's not surprising, considering that it uses a lot of random templates, but what's curious is that the content that is not contained in templates is actually more random than the content that is. The templates are just obscenity; that's fairly predictable. The stuff about an unimportant man in the back having his head "A-SPLODE!!!" is thoroughly random. It comes out of nowhere. And sometimes a wild tangent that springs out of nowhere can be funny, but more often, it ruins the article. Here, I guess I'd say it just sort of blends in with the rest of the article.
As for the nine templates that precede the article - well, I just don't know why they're there. I think most people would just scroll past them all. That's another reason that I say this looks like an experiment - like it was meant to be a "List of templates I might someday use in an article" worksheet.
Before starting on another article, it might be advisable to peruse Uncyclopedia:Best of - to see the funniest stuff Uncyclopedia contributors have written - and , especially, HTBFANJS - a guide to being funny, but just as importantly, to not writing things that will drown an entire article in a sea of unfunny.
|Concept:||4||We've all seen this concept before: it's called "Mad Libs." Are Mad Libs funny? The answer is: almost never. I'm sure we've all been on long car rides with our little brothers where we've filled out page after page of Mad Libs and we've found maybe one joke. There just isn't anything funny about "Jack sold his family's only BUTT to the FARTING POOP so he could buy BUTTCRACKS."
In theory, a templated Mad Lib might work a little better, since then you could at least predict (or control) the range of possible responses. But that would require a great deal of forethought and careful planning. Evidence of that level of forethought and careful planning is not apparent here.
Honestly, I don't think even a templated Mad Lib has much promise, and I don't recommend trying it. Even when things are funny because they seem so "random," that's often because someone has put so much thought into them. When you see something happen on Family Guy that just makes you laugh because, holy crap, it's so random, you can be assured that it's because ten guys sat around a table for twenty minutes arguing over which ideas felt more random than others. The final product may appear "random," but it could never have been generated randomly.
|Prose and formatting:||4||I get the feeling that the prose is intentionally awful. Something like "Blah had the rest of the day off and lived happily ever ((EXPLETIVE))!" clearly does not resemble English grammar - expletives are used in certain ways in English, and "randomly tacked on to the end of a sentence" is not one of them. Does the fact that the prose is intentionally awful contribute to the humor value of the article? Not in my opinion.|
|Images:||3||Please direct your attention to the Image page for Exploding-head.gif. You will see that it is linked to hundreds upon hundreds of Uncyclopedia pages. That means that pretty much everyone who has spent more than five minutes on this site has seen it. Certainly, anyone who's been here long enough to navigate to IViking's Explicit Stories has seen it prior to seeing it there. It's never a good idea to use an image completely out of left field and for no discernible reason, but if you feel compelled to do that, at least make it one where there's a chance that some of us might be seeing it for the first time.|
|Final Score:||17.5||Again, I strongly recommend moving this to User:IViking/IViking's Explicit Stories. If you really feel that the "obscene Mad Libs" concept can work, you can work on it there without it being in danger of deletion - because, as it stands right now, it's in extreme danger of deletion.
Not to mention that it really is a vanity page of sorts. I mean, it has your username right up there in the title of the article. Yeah, this is something that belongs in userspace, if anywhere.
|Reviewer:||Hyperbole 00:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)|