Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/MASH v Cheers

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit MASH v Cheers

The author doesn't like this much. But he was always an idiot. Confirm my opinion and together we can humiliate him. I'mthedaddy 10:50, October 28, 2009 (UTC)


Prose and

The writing style,
spelling, grammar,
layout and overall

Writing style

Well, this is a script, there's no two ways about that. As such it belongs in UnScripts, not here as a page on it's own. It could potentially be considered a main space article if it were in an argumentative essay format, but then you would lose the allusion of the wrestling death match, or whatever it is.

As for the commentators, I could actually imagine their voices. I haven't watched wrestling since I was about ten years old, but I do channel hop past it occasionally, and I know the way those voices sound, and they have an extremely distinctive style and feel to them. I'm assuming Don and John are based upon two real people, but even if not they have the sound of American wrestling/boxing commentators.


I'm not going to rip it to shreds here - run it through a spelling and grammar check, which is what I just did. Most of these are typos, but they would be picked up in VFH and this would get knocked back by more than one person for that reason alone.


You get away with a bit here as this is being written in-the-style-of two people who are not known for being grammatically correct. (In fact sports commentators are some of the worst people in popular media for rhetoric over grammar. I once heard a cricket commentator say "Well, the day began this morning." To his credit, he was right.)

Having said that, there are a couple of mistakes where there are grammatical errors that could not be called the fault of the character speaking, but the author transcribing the characters speech. Again, cut and paste the entire thing into Word.


Okay, if we are talking about a competitive sport there are generally two sides. If we are talking about the layout of the page there are two sides. If you dedicate the left hand side of the page to MASH images and the right to Cheers images (or vice versa) then you use a visual device to support the narrative reality. This is not a criticism of the layout, more a suggestion.

Also uniformity does add to the structure of an article. If each round has the same layout, the same sized images, the left and right factor, that will improve the overall flow of this. You could even consider having each section set out in a table format, like so:-

===The leading men===
|[[Image: Sam Malone.jpg|left|thumb|150px|It is doubtful that Sam Malone would have had the same success with the ladies without the aid of a toupe.]]
|'''John Commentator'''- The inititial advantage is with smooth, handsome, bar-owning ex-jock, Sam Malone. He has the height, the athleticism and the reach to trouble slightly seedy, but nevertheless still handsome surgeon, Captain Benjamin Pierce.

'''Don Commentator''' - That's right, John, he's held off Pierce with his jab so far. Pierce's [[eye]]s are both looking a little puffy and there's [[blood]] coming from his nose.

'''John Commnetator''' - Yes, unless Pierce can do something quickly it's difficult to see this one going more than one round.
|[[Image: HawkeyeEpisode.jpg|right|thumb|150 px|Captain Benjamin Pierce's pre-bout face-off technique lacked punch]]

The other option is to have the two images fairly largish, side by side, with the letters vs in between as a classic head to head match-up, and centred on the screen.

Overall appearance

In short, it's average, and it could be improved. Keep in mind that none of the above is saying that this is a substandard piece, just simply that you can improve on it, and ways that I would do this. Feel free to ignore them as you see fit. I am giving a score of 5.5 here, as the spelling issues don't support anything higher.

How good an idea
is behind the article?
7 It is a good concept - take two TV shows and have the characters do battle as a celebrity deathmatch. It's not extremely original, but it is a good way to show the formulaic casting of these shows.

I'd also point out the replacement issues as well. The Colonel on MASH was replaced, as was the pompous git, and Trapper with BJ - all changing character type for almost identical character type. On Cheers the bar manager changed, yet most of the rest of the cast stayed the same, as far as I can remember. But the main thing is they changed the actor, but the character stereotype stayed the same. Maybe this could be your tag-team and your final section that you have at the moment could be your All in match.

Sorry if my wrestling terminology is off, by the way. As I said earlier, ten years old.

How funny is it?
Why is it funny?
How can it be funnier?
5.5 It has a few giggles in it, but not a lot of guffaws. I think part of this is due to the issues with the format/images - which of course I'll go into the image side of things in a bit more depth shortly.

I think the better laughs come from when you play to the characterisations themselves. I liked the Posh bloke section a little more than all the others, for exactly this reason. The humming of Iolanthe and Mozart's 25th piano concerto is one of the funnier laughs of the article.

By the same token reading the section about Carla versus Klinger was a bit of a let down. Both characters are very extreme characters, with very little about the characterisations that are not blatantly obvious. Klinger is known for the fact that he's trying to get out on a section 8, so therefore he'd be acting crazy. Carla is known for her biting wit, so she'd be throwing a few barbed comments into the ring.

The other thing that I wanted to see in here - or rather looking back on it I felt was missing - is the voices of the characters themselves. Wrestling is all theatre, and one of the biggest parts of the theatre is the smack-talk before bout itself. I'd like to actually hear Hawkeye smack-talking Sam as the slightly depressed surgeon who uses humour to survive, and Sam to come back as the idiot ex-coach cum bar-owner. (I don't know how to write this, to be honest. I'd actually have to watch both of these shows again, or read through a few scripts, or some of their better quotes, to be able to get a feel of the voices.) As post-match interviews could be worthwhile as well.

How are the images?
Are they relevant,
with good quality
and formatting?
6.5 Okay, I've already discussed the layout of the images. Now as to the actual image selection themselves. The best images by far are the 640 X 480 originals - the one of Hawkeye and the Mash opening sequence - as these are in classic 4:3 ratio. This is the ratio of a classic analogue TV screen, which is what these shows were originally shown on.

Having this as a standard is means that you have a uniformity in the different sections. It relates it back to the originating medium. It also means that if you have two images side by side then they have a much more balanced appearance.

The next thing I'll point out is the MASH images are fantastic, because it brings the characters back to the forefront of the mind. I know MASH a lot better than I know Cheers, so for me I didn't need the images to bring those up. For Cheers though, I had to scratch my head to work out which character was which, and didn't have the visual cues to bring it back to mind.

Also the images you had for the Cheers characters actually sent my mind in different directions. The one of Sam was just eerie, the one for Carla made me think of a Goth chick, and the one for Norm made me think of Sumo Wrestlers, which made me think of E. Honda from Street Fighter II. I shouldn't be thinking of Street Fighter II when I'm trying to get the pictures of this battle. Mortal Kombat, maybe, but not Street Fighter II.

The article's overall
quality - that indefinable
8 Given that I've taken points away for mistakes and issues with this piece, I'm going to give back a couple extra points here for the potential of the piece. And I'm going to make one last point.

Where was Cliff?

Final Score:
How much can it be
improved and what
are the most important
areas to work on.
32.5 Good job.
Reviewer: Pup
Personal tools