Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Intelligent Falling
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
|Humour:||5.76||Ok I don’t normally do this but I think I’ll break this down a little.
Introduction:  Good use of the Kansas state template. Oscar Wilde never said that – or anything about anything ever. Please remove him and the comment David Icke, whoever he is/was never had anything to say about Oscar Wilde. Seriously it’s just a huge turn off when Oscar Wilde says something at the top of an article. The blond quote is tolerable. As for the prose it was very good! Not exactly laugh out loud funny but it set up the tone of the article nicely and set up the tone of the article, but saying “Shit being attracted to shit” kinda throws it off a little as it’s attraction not falling. Also, and I may mention this again, I think it’d be a good idea to keep the language less profane – insulting yes – but less profane. Good use of teh strikethrough aswell.
1.1:  Disturbingly convincing actually, and even more disturbing is that if an intelligent designer were to read this s/he may believe you.
2.  eek! What were you thinking? That huge brick isn’t a song it’s a ramble say it came from a science book, try and keep things slightly more realistic (in a surreal way if you know what I mean); either write a song with the lyrics or just say it came from a respectable scientists paper. And you spelt secular wrong, (seriously changing words to have naughty words in them is just annoying). Again with the profanity at the end, make it sound more like something a Christian would say. Or actually remove that part as it doesn’t make much sense. “Critics ask, "how is poking holes in gravity evidence of IF?", to which I respond by asking them calmly if they like their soul or should they just sell it satan now and suffer his eternal torment. Besides, we don't need evidence. We have The Four Proofs.”
2.1  sorta listish, really. You could definitely expand these ideas, though they are reasonably funny by themselves. You could get a pic of a plane crash and explain that this was the work of an unintelligent puller.
3.1  There were some very good lines in here actually! And I like how your protagonist has started with the bullying tactics. And bending Einstein’s quote like that was very clever. Also loved the idea of misquoting hawking over 8 books, that was clever too and blaming Hitler in any other context would probably have been a bad idea; here though it’s brilliant. Again though with the unnecessary swearing though as your looking the character’s identity (on occasion he sounds like a jock when he should sound more like an evangelist).
3.2  who’s Gin? Kitten huffing! No kitten huffing or unhuffing or kittens of any sort, we need to keep in-jokes out of articles as it just makes no sense to newbies. And this “./configure && make && make install,” is what exactly? It’s just confused me and spoiled the section. And seriously the character’s mouth is in dire need of being washed out with horrible recycled prison soap. The huge amount of swearing is really dragging the article back as it doesn’t sound very professional.
3.3  Say “penis” not boner. And strikethrough the god, that’s a joke that doesn’t need to have attention drawn to it.
3.4 (+ 3.4.1)  A little less mature which shows the writer is clutching at straws but do watch your sums, also try and make the numbers slightly more realistic. And merge the two sections
3.5  "where our brains get a rest for the brief moments we don't sin" shows without explicitly saying that the IF theory is indeed religious based, and sounds like an accidental slip up.
3.6  it was your expression in this section that kinda ruined it, though I have a sneaking suspicion it may have been a little boring anyway.
4.  again not laugh out loud good but amusing enough, and once more watch the dirty mouth. And for “I CALL THIS G-DECAY” there is no need to shout; use italics.
5.  Seriously watch the mouth, the simplistic “Shit heads” isn’t nearly as funny as say “morally depraved paedophiles”. You can still be insulting just not in a profane way, it really does drag the article back.
5.1 + 5.2 + 5.3  you haven’t introduced these sections properly, you need to explain what the writer is trying to achieve as well as how he gets there. The fact that it just feels thrown in doesn’t help it and I think it’s probably some thing the article could do without (the article as a whole is too long and so I think it’d benefit from being cut a bit)
6.  this I liked! It was very good parody, and is some of the funniest stuff in the article! The usual swearing though, watch it.
Nearly there… 7.  Nice piece of scripting work here. And it’s a nice touch for the unbiased article.
8.  you spelled it wrong. And I liked this it was a nice little conclusion. Worked nicely.
As a whole: The article did have a nice flow to it and a clear direction, which are both (normally) important for a good article. it just needs to be sorted out a bit.
|Concept:||9||Brillaint really but like I've said in the above, just needs to be executed better.|
|Prose and formatting:||6||Your writing ability is pretty good, though do watch your grammar, and the formatting here was done very well - especially with the references (though sometimes people ignore these (even on wikipedia)). and i suppose it is more of a prose issue; you need to keep the charactor's mouth in check, swear less and sound a bit more like a professional bullpooer. also take another look at your expression, sometimes it's a litt;e confused like here "So, there must have been a moment when there not being gravity on went away, right? And there being gravity on came along." i think you mean something like "so there must have been a time when there was no gravity, and then a moment when someone switched gravity on!"|
|Images:||5.27||From the top
1)  not sure I got the joke to be honest. I think it was a bit too random and didn’t particularly fit in with the text.
2)  this one I liked! Was funny and relevant.
3)  you could actually use ‘’this’’ as an example of unintelligent falling!
4)  erm? Why not make this a picture of st gravity the third? The caption is just silly and the picture isn’t that funny.
5)  ok. Not for everyone but ok. And I’m not black; again with the tone for the caption but otherwise ok.
6)  good.
7)  not really necessary really.
8)  9)  8 and 9 are kinda the same joke but it’s ok. Works fine.
10)  hee hee, a mouse on a gerbil textbook. Can’t really think how to improve it but maybe get a gerbil and photo shop it properly, unless it was meant to look tacky to debunk the physicists.
11)  wha…? Battle of hastings? Coat hangers? I’m lost. Try finding something more relevant like an intelegent looking person and having the caption “what, does he think he has a PhD or something? Oh… well that’s not the point”. Anything more relevant really.
|Miscellaneous:||6.5||(averaged) I think this could definitly be FA material, if nothing else because of the concept. like i've said tidy it up make it sound more proffesional and this could go places.|
|Final Score:||32.53||If you'd like to thank/insult/ask me anout anything please visit my talk page|
|Reviewer:||Have Fun! MuCal. Orian57|Chat|Chuckle|PEE List|Awarded|UnBlog| 03:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)|