Yeah i'll get to this just as soon as i can, OK? and don't worry i'll be fair.--Have fun!Orian57|Chat|Chuckle|look!| 14:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
i thought it was quite good. it was slightly too listish though and over all a bit too short (ways of expanding i'll explain in a bit). your etemology section was a bit shaky in the laugh department too: "Berg also had a sister named Glay Cher." why not put something like "Glay "see her!" Berg"? (makes more sense really) and then explain that the term got shortened out of convenience and was repeatedly miss-spelt by the french, "be serious about silly things" remember.
also in the trivia section, never say that something on uncyclopedia is actually not true (we know) besides how can you trust something is not true if it says so?
the tone in your table needs a bit of work i think, it's a bit jumbled. for ease i'll redo the table here and hope you implement it in your article and also allows me to annotate: see below review table.
some good ideas, like eating the ships with intent was quite funny. but i think you could have mentioned global warming more, you know, how it's increasing the iceberg population but paradoxically decreasing their effect, then start a mock petition for "DESTROY THE ICEBERGS: burn a cat!" or talk about 'extremist' groups that do this. something like that.
Prose and formatting:
quite fugly in all honesty. firstly your "life" section is too broken up with massive ugly headings and nearly nothing in between. with this i'd take out the headings and make it more of a story so it looks nicer and flows better and is all one section, other wise your extending the contents more than nescessary and makes things look all crap. i sugest you try and make the tone of that bit more sofisticated, like a nature documentiary but still retain the ideas.
also just for niceties have the wikipedia template either above the main template or at the bottom of the article as in the middle is distracting. but i did like the bit at the bottom " The strengths and weaknesses of the iceberg" as it looked liek a news cutting, though I think the lists could maybe made shorter and funnier. the order of your sections was a bit off too, i'd put the "trivia" towards the bottom as that helps round the article off better that the strength and weakness bit (do keep "see also" at the very bottom). also swap around the overview and history sections.
not really fantastic in all honesty, although i did like the "sneeky bastard" one, it was good and relevent. but the ship one wasn't great, you already explain several times that icebergs eat ships reiterating it with an unfunny picture doesn't do the article any favours. why not try getting a picture of an iceberg actually eating a ship? put in an image request for something like that. as for the other two they only serve a perfunctionary purpose that was neither bad nor good but if you can think of some funnier images to use that'd be a plus.
get rid of the oscar wilde quote! i'm starting a war against people using in jokes, as it really doens't help articles any more, it's just dull. grues too.
this article does have alot of potential, just follow some of my advice and it'll be more than acceptable. do read HTBFANJS if you havent already (if you have; read it again). Also on an unrelated note, do you fancy getting back to me on the Jerry Falwell talk page? just curious about what you think is all.