Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Laws of Physics (Rewrite)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 08:21, December 16, 2008 by Docile hippopotamus (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Laws of Physics

J-Shea 00:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Humour: 7 Good work with this article. It’s funny that your mocking the outrageous things that happen in the Warner Brothers cartoons. This being said there are still some things that need to be edited. At the start you wrote, “There are six unique Laws of Physics, which govern all motion in the universe” but because the six laws govern cartoons, I think it would be better to write “There are six unique Laws of Physics, which govern all motion in the universe of Warner Brothers cartoons.” Since that is more accurately describing what this article is about. “Conception” was written fine and I can’t think of any ways that that can be improved. “The Six Laws of Physics” needs to be improved though. This can be done by telling the reader how these six laws work. Recently there was an article written about gnomes that described that gnomes are responsible for things like electricity, so under each law give an explanation of how it works with gnomes. In “Rise to Fame” paragraph two, you could write that Warner Brothers, now insane with money, hunted down all those who doubted their science and “were promptly tarred, feathered, and beaten to death with ACME rubber chickens.” “Where Are They Now?” was written fine and doesn’t need to be tampered with, while “See also” needs to be slightly edited, because instead of having Physics linked to physics, have it linked to Physics doesn't exist, its all about Gnomes. Link the first physics you wrote (at the start of the article) to either physics or Physics doesn't exist, its all about Gnomes.
Concept: 7 It’s a good concept, and you’ve helped bring out much of its potential. Now all you need to do is expand it with all the stuff written in this pee review.
Prose and formatting: 6 It was written well, but there’s no need to incorrectly spell “who twied to catch that wascawwy wabbit” since it doesn’t fit in with the rest of that neatly written paragraph. In “Rise to Fame” you put two commas after “a rascally rabbit” instead of just one. It is worth using bold and italics for added emphasis, such as using italics for the laws, or bolding the names of the characters in “Rise to Fame.” You only have three hyperlinks in this article (excluding the three in “See also”). Add more, for words such as ‘Bugs Bunny’ and ‘Wile E. Coyote.’
Images: 7 Only one image. It is appropriate, but if you could put another image in, like the image in Wile E. Coyote and write something like ‘Wile E. Coyote needs help to catch and eat roadrunner. Will YOU help him?’
Miscellaneous: 6.8 Used the pee formula.
Final Score: 33.8 Good work with this article. I hope you have found my above advice useful and further improve this already great article.
Reviewer: --Docile hippopotamus 08:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects