Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Jim Crow
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
I know it's not a great page but I did put time, effort and a whole lotta love into it, so I hope someone can save it from being deleted again. 
|Humour:||3||More painful than funny. I'll expand in the next section, because the problem is really more about the concept than the execution.|
|Concept:||2||I saw the title of this article and I was expecting some pretty scathing satire. All I got was a bunch of puns, and a rather repetitive bunch. Now, that might not be a bad way to start the article, but there's just not enough to it to carry the article, short though it is.
The conceit that the Jim Crow laws were actually aimed at crows might work, if you left out the pointless name dropping and based the article more closely on the truth - crows having to ride at the back of the bus, for example; or an image of a "whites only" drinking fountain next to a birdbath labeled "crows only". You could have reference a film that crosses Birth of a Nation with The Birds. There are any number of ways you could take what you have and turn it into something great. I suggest you have a good long read through the Wikipedia article you've linked too, and then do a bit more research on the topic, and then come back and rewrite the article. And when you do, don't be afraid to use your teeth.
|Prose and formatting:||3||Not great. There are too many red links. A few is okay, but when your introductory sentence is almost half composed of them, maybe you're being a bit too free with them.
There are too many short declarative sentences where more sophisticated language would add much. Also, you need longer paragraphs - a paragraph should do more than just introduce an idea, it should explore it to an extent. The paragraph about Jim Crow's family is a good case in point; it introduces his family only to dismiss them three sentences later, which in itself contradicts the opening of your article where you name Crow's descendants. Perhaps you were going for absurdist humour, but it just looks lazy.
|Images:||4||It's not a great pic, and it's not a great caption and yet it still gets my highest category score. This is a problem|
|Miscellaneous:||3||Average of other scores|
|Final Score:||15||You're talking about a particularly unpleasant aspect of US history; and I really think you should be bolder. In spite of my low marks, you have a fairly decent premise. You also have a subject that deserves strong, biting satire, not a string of puns and word-games.|
|Reviewer:||--Cap'n Sir Ben GUN WotM VFH VFP 02:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)|