Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Martin Luther King Jr. (rw)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Martin Luther King Jr.

Now that the semester is finished, I may actually have time to finish working on this. I rewrote it a while ago. I figure the King should probably have a decent article around here. Just wondering what we think of it so far. Woody On Fire! Wood burningTalking Woody Stalking Woody 09:33, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Woody On Fire! Wood burningTalking Woody Stalking Woody 09:33, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 6 While I found the article to be very well-written, I thought that it's not actually very funny. I got the feeling that the narrator is trying to be objectionable just for the sake of it - sort of like being offensive just for the sake of it, but less bad. If I remember correctly, HTBFANJS mentions somewhere that stating the complete opposite doesn't make something funny (I could be wrong, I didn't actually check).
  • Your intro was basically straight, with that punch line that came off as a bit shocking and in your face. While I don't particularly like it, I think it's ok and not too bad.
  • It was also very encyclopedic, but the rest of the article switches to a conversational and ranty tone afterwards. While that is not that bad, I do think I would like it better if it stayed encyclopedic all the way. It could also work your way, of course, but I think you should make the transition less sudden.
  • Also, since your narrator is biased, and trying to convince readers that MLK is a douchebag, he probably wouldn't list MLK's accomplishments like that in such a positive way. However this way is necessary if you want to keep your "sudden transition" joke (which I didn't really like). Anyway, if not, you could use that section to try to make your narrator try and appear fair and balanced but failing, and letting his bias show through, for instance by making huge understatements or by missing the point.
  • In "what?" and in various places there are hints of racism. Also, that first footnote and some others mention black stereotypes. I think this could be further developed, maybe to match with examples of MLK's douchebaggery? I also felt it might be funnier if you make the (subtle?) racism a consistent strain throughout the article, but might that be pushing the offensiveness?
  • I like respectable=white.
  • You focused mainly on MLK's disregard for etiquette, but I feel it would be funnier if you develop this. Maybe mention something like the implications of rude sneezing or Parcheesi on MLK's morality, character, principles, leadership abilities etc (sort of like the situation of Obama's terrorist fist bump).
  • Parcheesi: I feel the punchline would look better like this:

beat his wife...

At Parcheesi

Parcheesi? So on and so forth.

  • In "hold on, hold on", you go on a lengthy digression before what I thought was actually a good punchline (the Parcheesi), and decreasing its funniness.
  • "he's "busy" and has to "organize a rally," or "speak at a church."" - I kinda like this. It's making light of MLK's achievements while emphasizing the importance of more trivial matters.
  • For some reason I also like the booty pun.
  • Is your narrator a racist, a conservative, an etiquette Nazi, or a rebellious article writer? I think this is your biggest problem, as a result the article looks a bit all over the place. I think you have to pick one and stick to it. Picking which also affects your main points, and may change the reasons why MLK is a douchebag.
Concept: 6 Yeah...I mentioned most of it in the above box. I think it needs more than "Everyone thinks MLK is great, but I'm gonna do the unexpected, and say he's a douchebag." Maybe try and streamline it and make it more unidirectional, but certainly don't limit yourself.
Prose and formatting: 8 Prose is mostly good. But - "got beaten up by Donnie Thompson for trying to stop him from beating up one of his friends" - you used beat up twice, so it doesn't sound good. Also, I know this is not Wikipedia, but your overuse of weasel words annoyed me a bit. Also the reliance on sources like "his best friend in 8th grade" (I know this is not Wikipedia, ok, but habits die hard). It sounds like the narrator is not even trying to make his case convincing. (It's not really a big deal though.)
Images: 6.5 The first one had the same sudden humour as your intro, which I, admittedly, am not a fan of. But I guess it is consistent with your tone. The second and third one are not that funny. They look a bit bland, but sort of illustrate the article. I think your images may be a bit small as well.
Miscellaneous: 7 My scoring is arbitrary, so don't emphasize on them. Also not all my suggestions are recommended, as I'm just throwing around some random alternatives.
Final Score: 33.5 Bye.
Reviewer: ~Scriptsiggy.JPGTelephonesig Star Starsig Kidneysig 19:27, Dec 14, 2009
Personal tools