Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Jehovah's Witness

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 06:49, December 6, 2008 by Mnbvcxz (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit Jehovah's Witness

JamesM123 11:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Humour: 2.8 Before we begin: This article looks like, and apparently is, one of those over edited rambling inconsistent articles. If you want to fix this, I'd suggest copying it in to your user page and work on it from there. Or better yet, start a new version as a blank slate. Then put your new version on Pee review when it is finished. Once you get a good score, talk to an admin, or some else who is important, about moving your version to mainspace. Trying to work on it in mainspace will be an exercise in futility. Additionally, you might want to look at the Wikipedia articles on the J.W.'s to learn there doctrines so you can satire them.

Overall: 3 This article needs serious formatting and grammar work, in addition to a good purging of bad material and a big consistency injection. There are some funny sections, but they are lost in the randomness, ugliness and bad formatting.

By section:

Intro: 3 Way too random, especially in the first line. Don't start out on the wrong foot or too Wilde. More often than not, try to make the first half of the opening paragraph sound like a wikipedia article. Loss the country template, its all randomness. Also, references to Zombie Jesus isn't funny.

Watchtower Magazine & Kingdom Halls: 3.5 The grammar in the first half of the first paragraph is an abomination. The J.W. wouldn't be celebrating masses. The term "mass" is used in Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran and High Church Anglican churches, because of complex theological issues that would take forever to explain. Anyway, the J.W.'s call it "the Memorial".

History of Jehovah's Witnesses: 3 Its starts out reasonable, goes too outlandish in the 2nd paragraph, goes illiterate in the 3rd, and gets worse in the 4th.

The Presidents of the Jehovah’s Witnesses: 2.5 Like the previous section, this one starts out sorta weak, then the quality just gets worse from there. The "Governing Body of Jeheovah's Witnesses" should be deleted. In addition, the pic on pic isn't good, neither is the white space after the list, and you shouldn't have pics on the left side in a list. Honestly, I'd have to try to get an article uglier than that subsection.

'Pedophile Scandal: 2 It is neither funny, nor about the article. I'd suggest deletion.

Terminology: 2.5 Again, this list starts out weak then goes downhill from there. It needs serious pruning, if not removal.

Jehovah's Witnesses splinter groups: 2 Again, this list is not funny. As a rule, try to avoid lists for the sake of lists. The Terminology list has potential, this was doesn't. Its not factually accurate either.

Beliefs: 3 Some of this material has potential, while other sub-sections are probably beyond redemption. There is a need for some formatting in 2nd paragraph of the Salvation subsection. It should probably be moved and given its own sub-section. Additionally, the one paragraph per section format is ugly, especially with the two line paragraphs; the sub-section length should be longer.

Jehovah’s Witness Assimilation:2.5 The borg reference isn't funny and too random, and the grammar is an abomination. It probably should be scraped.

Score is the average of section and overall, with the overall score given triple weight. (The overall normally only gets double weight, but you have a lot of sections).
Concept: 5 The subject matter is well known, but the article is way to random and poorly formatted. It looks like it was written by at least 10 different people, without any attempt at making it consistent by a later editor. Probably because that is the case. Also, you are missing a lot of potential ideas, like the J.W.'s belief that Jesus is god by not God, to wit, they believe that Jesus is a lesser god, yet believe in one God.
Prose and formatting: 4 There is alot of ugliness in the article. Problems are as follows

Grammar In sections, the grammar and spelling is horrible. For some reason, the grammar tends to be the worst at the end of sections. A simple spelling and grammar check should help a lot, also, try reading the article out loud after the clean up to catch any remain mistakes.

Unneeded lines These are ugly, and occur throughout the article.

The abomination in "Governing Body of Jeheovah's Witnesses" subsection You made errors with the pics. First, you have a pic on top of a pic, this looks ugly, try to separate the pics as evenly as possible throughout the article. Second, your creating tons of white space by pic placement; this is also ugly. Finally, you have pics on the left side of a bulleted list, pics should go on the right in that situation. As a rule, most pics should go on the right, especially the first pic and any pics in lists or other areas which a pic on the left would look ugly. However, you should have some pics on the left to balance it out.

Warning templates If you write a good version of this article, the warning/advisory templates should go. Sectional templates (ones that link to related pages) are ok if not overdone.

No link section This is contributing to the ugliness of your article. You should generally have a "See Also" section at the end.
Images: 4.5 Most of the images are random. The airplane one was mildly funny, and if I wasn't a Christian, I might have found the pic of Jesus also funny. The Saddam Hussein and Hitler pics should go, as with the pics in the nation template, as with that template itself.
Miscellaneous: 5.5 Improvability Score. The idea has potential, and there is some humor lurking in this article. However, most of the actual humor is quite random, and even a serious purge would still leave it too off the wall. This can be made into a good article, but it would require an almost complete rewrite. I am not saying that making this article a good one would be difficult, rather, I am saying that the current article is not very far along on that path.

I'd suggest you keep working on this one. and good luck
Final Score: 21.8 If you are serious about writing a good article on this subject, do so in userspace.
Reviewer: --Mnbvcxz 06:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects