IMHO, this is funny as Hell. The mix of truth and truthiness is good, in that without knowing better, they are hard to distinguish. This was fun to read, and I laughed out loud twice... that's not easy to induce.
Concept:
9.5
The reference to Nancy Kerrigan was almost, but not quite, over the top... congratulations on pulling that off! I can think of no way to make expand on the concept without ruining the article.
Prose and formatting:
9.2
The writing is readable, has a good flow, topics are well presented and orderly, logical. There is a clear theme and story from start to finish, with no holes. Using so many one-liners, while keeping the overall theme coherent is an impressive feat.
Images:
9.5
There are plenty of, but not too many, images. They all work well within the article, and are funny in their own right. The only little thing is placement is a bit awkward.
Miscellaneous:
10
The numerous directions this article takes, yet still manages to remain consistent, impresses me a whole bunch.
Final Score:
47.2
I feel badly that I can't say more about this work. I honestly have nothing bad to say about it, except it's just a bit akwardly formatted. I would tighten up the paragraphs, alternate pics on left and right sides, and that's about it. Excellent effort, merits feature IMHO.
Rev. Zim (Talk) Get saved! 01:06, March 16, 2010 (UTC)
