Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Insulin Shock

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Insulin Shock

This is the second article that I have made. My first one (PZ Myers), to be frank, sucked a lot. I hope I make you laugh, hypothetical reviewer--CluelessPedestrian 01:44, February 27, 2010 (UTC)

Just getting this straight, this is not a real band, right? Anyway, I think I'll review this. ~Scriptsiggy.JPGTelephonesig Star Starsig Kidneysig05:17, Feb 28, 2010
CluelessPedestrian, don't be discouraged! Like I told you in the review I did for PZ Myers, you have the potential to make the article good. Reviewing is meant to be a tool to help you improve what you have, not to be judgmental of a 'final' product. I reviewed your article because I wanted to see you improve it. --Sir Skinfan13 Talk {< CUN RotM FBotM VFH ΥΣΣ Maj. SK >} 13:30 EST 28 Feb, 2010
I haven't given up on the PZ Myers article just yet.--CluelessPedestrian 23:45, February 28, 2010 (UTC)
Humour: 6.5 General Comments

The tone is pretty good and you seem to be on the right track. The only parts that I laughed at are parts that dealt with diabetes, but the prose in the rest of the article left me with a general good feeling. My main suggestion would be to amp up the satire in other parts of the article that are lacking in humour. Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to write a good band article and it has been done many times before. I feel that if you keep working on this it would have a lot of potential. It would also be very important for you to get your "angle" straight, and I will do this review part by part and point out where you have inconsistencies in your angle or narration.
It would be good to do this in the way of a Wikipedia band article and I see that it's what you're trying to do at the start. It would be good to read a couple and pay attention to how they deal with things like structure and NPOV. Because in your lead, the first thing that you emphasise is the "controversy", which is not what people do if they are trying to write an encyclopedic article about a band. Remember that your lead is the most important section in your article because it should introduce the subject and set the tone and context. Normal things to include in the lead are things like band members, state or country, early style and later style, commercial success, awards won, influenced and influenced by. (They're in your infobox but people normally repeat the information in the lead). This is called "playing the straight man". Controversy should be in there too but it's usually in the second paragraph of the lead, and less in-depth. Your current second paragraph is too in-depth, and should be moved to the "obligatory drug scandal" section.
High School Years
I did not find the "get some fine ass" parts and the fellatio parts funny. Basically I would like it if they were more subtle, and repeated less often. I hope that you can point the direction of your article towards a satire of popular pop rock bands, and I imagine that it could be very funny. One thing I would consider mentioning here is how Mathew came up with the name. Something like "I've always had Type one diabetes, man. And I think turning this into a source of, like, creative energy is just so cool, ya know. The songs in my album, Type one fun, are like, all about empowerment and stuff." (sorry if it's bad) I would also like to mention that here, you take on a somewhat negative view of the band, but towards the end of the article the tone becomes overly positive. I suggest you stay consistent.
Road to success
I feel like I'm missing something here, because I don't understand if the death of Sarah was meant to satirise something, or if it's just something random. I think if it doesn't have a purpose, you should just get rid of it, or work it into the theme of the article. Basically, to make your article sound professional, bias-y stuff shouldn't be just in the text. It would be better if instead of saying "in truth, Sarah had to perform yet another act of fellatio to coax the agent", you say "In an interview the founder of the band Mathew Poole expressed his grief by saying, "Yeah, we're all pretty shaken up over what happened, but the truth is girls can't front rock bands. Sarah, may her soul rest in peace, was only good for fellating talent agents and record producers." You don't have to use that, but what you should do is to carefully go through your article and look for areas where you "drop" in tone and consider how you could remedy them. Another example of a "drop": "Wanting to get rid of Sarah for a long time but without any means to do so" - how would you know he wanted to get rid of Sarah?
Type one fun
Here the tone shifts from negative to positive. It seems to start to approve of the band. You should pick one and stick with it, and it would be better if you try to be as NPOV as possible, but maybe let some subtle bias seep through. Those song names are awesome, though.
I think this is by far my favourite part of the article, but again, things like "The Evil ADA Attacks!" shows that you approve of the band. I really like the lyrics, but I didn't like the "reply". The reason is a lot of articles degenerate into "call now and send us money" cliche, and even though yours doesn't, this line reminded me of them. The reply was not bad, but after the lyrics, it became sort of a let down. I think here you should also insert quotes of people who support the band as well, which is a good chance to make fun of those preteen fangirls. A lot of this section focuses on making fun of the ADA, which you should only do if the POV of your article approves of the band throughout.
Drug Scandal
I didn't find anything wrong with this section, but then again I also didn't find it especially funny. The only thing I can suggest is to maybe increase the satirical elements here. You could perhaps hint at the publicity benefits that this scandal got the band, or something.
Today and the Future
I also didn't find this section especially funny. It's a bit sudden, and a bit different from the tone and theme in the rest of your article. The Baghdad, Iraq joke gave me a thought: what if you could somehow expand on that, and contrast the band ideals with that of the suffering children? Also, what's Insulin shock's effect on contemporary music? I think that's another point you could expand on.

Concept: 7.5 I thought the naming was bordering on genius. "Insulin shock" sounds just like a band name, and yet still medical enough to be satirical and a bit silly. "Type one fun" is not only diabetic, it also sort of rhymes! It's also slightly outrageous, and conveys the irreverent attitude the band has to political correctness. I later discovered that "Insulin shock" is actually a some sort of indie band, but I couldn't find anymore information beyond that, but at any rate they don't sound anything like the band that you wrote about.

I suggest making this article more of a satire on teen pop rockers, and make it more obvious. Keep the concept in your mind when you reread the article and see if you can rewrite parts to fit it. Try to pin down aspects of the teen pop rock genre that you want to satirise and work them into the article. Aspects like, commercialism, no real skill, good looks, crazy fangirls, etc, etc.

Prose and formatting: 7.5 I spotted one mistake: "for any place they". Spelling and grammar were not that big of a problem but what I didn't like was your tone, which was inconsistent. Also pay attention to your sentence length and choice of vocabulary, as they can become a bit casual and informal at times. My advice is to read it out loud to yourself, many times, and/or get someone to proofread it.
Images: 4 You only have two, and they're not that good. The first one is pretty standard, and most Wikipedia band articles have their first image like that, so I guess it's fine. My reaction to the second one is: But the hairy man doesn't even look like he's in a band... So anyway, you definitely need more pictures. Pictures of each member, for starters, would be nice. Or pictures of their album covers.
Miscellaneous: 6.4 Averaged.
Final Score: 31.9 I've been trying to keep my scoring less arbitrary, but it's not perfect. If you are in need of anything, you're welcome to ask me on my talk page.
Reviewer: ~Scriptsiggy.JPGTelephonesig Star Starsig Kidneysig 08:00, Mar 1, 2010
Personal tools