Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Kreator

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Kreator

I thought it was high time a good Kreator article was made. It's been around for a little more than a month.

Wilytank 17:23, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

Somebody has attempted to do a review of this page but as the quality of the review is so low I have reverted it back to a blank review, as per the previous revert by Chief. I will take a look at this but given the time of year I doubt I will be done in 24 hours, so feel free to stake a claim on it if you are willing to do a review with constructive criticism and something that will assist the author in improving the overall quality of the article. Pup
Humour: 4 Firstly I have to say that it is a very brave thing to take on a band article. That is for one main reason - they are notorious for being bad.

Now it's never the intention of the author to write a bad article, and it makes sense to pick a band - writing about a topic you know is more likely to be successful then writing about something you don't. But you end up faced with a major issue. If you write like a fan boy it will sound like a fan boy article, and that will become sucky and dull. See Michael Jackson for a taste of what a fan boyish article reads like (although in that case it's very deliberate). Alternatively you take the piss out of it, and it's a dull rant - see lady gaga. Or you try and go middle of the road, and you end up greenday.

The road to uncyclopedian greatness is littered with the corpses of more than a few band articles.

So you are left with a couple of options to write a good band article. You can do an untunes, where you do a parody song - the weird al yankovic approach. You can do a funky twist on the concept, similar to Mastadon. You can do an unlyrics like the great gig in the sky. Or you can avoid them altogether.

What will never work however is trotting out a string of stale and dull over-used jokes about Hitler, Satan, Glen Benton, Chuck Norris, blah blah blah. It is an old and tired record and will generate no genuine laughs.

That is in essence what you have acheived here. Silliness can work, but only if it is consistent silliness.

Concept: 3 So what options do you have here? Well, option 1 is to say "Screw you and your shit sense of humour" and pack up your bat and ball and gp home. If you've put in this much effort I'm guessing that you want to be a writer, and giving up here is not going to help.

Option 2 is to do a partial or complete re-write. I would steer away from this at the moment as band articles are hard to write, and you want to work on something a little easier to start with.

Option 3 is to walk away and try something else. Pick something that you know that there isn't an article about, or that the current article could use re-writing and start with that. Read HTBFANJS and a few featured articles to get an idea of what flies and what dies. Do a PEE review of someone elses article - after all this system only works if you blow as well as suck. Or something.

So I'm not going to go too much in depth with the rest of this review, as this is not where you want to be at the moment. I will give a few points but leave it at that.

Prose and formatting: 5 I haven't spell-checked or grammar checked, so this is simply about layout, voice and overall appearance.

The voice of the piece is... Odd, as I can't think of a better way to describe it. It doesn't read like an encyclopedia article, or a newspaper or magazine article. It doesn't read like a blog or an opinion piece. It reads like a narrative as told by a child. Long sections of "and then what happened... and then what happened..." padded out by a bunch of listcruft. Short articles are often better than long articles if you have scant material to work with. Putting in more okay stuff just leads to a long, less than okay article.

Layout is average. Nothing spectular but nothing spectularly bad.

Overall appearance is a little slapped together and comes across as a poorly written and formatted article. It looks as though you have written a single draft and stopped.

Images: 5 When choosing and image from the uncyclopedia files, check to see how many articles that is already in. I am so tired of seeing the banjo playing Hitler I was ready to cry when I saw him again. It doesn't fit, and that brings the entire article down.

Have a look at a site that runs through a discography of a band. As a general rule album covers are displayed in about half of the discographies I've seen. Here is an opportunity for you to get some decent images and use these as album covers. And what heavy metal parody is complete without a black album? Just look at Spinal Tap and Metallica.

Miscellaneous: 5 There is some promise in here - a creative comedian wanting to spring forth. This is not the article you want to start with though.
Final Score: 22 If you want to write a narrative, go for an unbook. Parody song go for an UnTune. Leave this one alone today and you might even have the chance to make it brilliant tomorrow.
Reviewer: Pup

PS: Sorry about my spelling mistakes and redlinks. It's late and I'm doing this from my phone which means I'm a little limited. If you are unhappy with a review, by the way, you have the option of asking for a second review. I would suggest talking to User:ChiefjusticeDS or User:Why do I need to provide this? first though. Pup

Personal tools