Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Miles Davis (2nd review)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
After discussion with Under user, and as I've made a lot of changes to the article since the last peer review, I've decided to put it up for another review. Knucmo2 10:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Pee Review In Progress
Checkit bitches, this review is as good as peed on. I'm marking my effing territory. Said article is being reviewed by:
/me runs in, pretending to be out of breath Whoa, deja vu. Anywhoo, sorry about the apparent dickery and procrastination, I will now drop EVERYTHING and review this article for you. Feel free to hurl various week-old produce items at me while I do it. @ 03:11 Apr 20
|Humour:||9||Wow, this was hilarious. You have some great zingers in there, which readers will enjoy. Take this for example: "...Miles forged a new style of trumpet playing which involved missing high notes, splitting notes, and playing solos far simpler than Bird's." I thought that was great. Same goes for this: "...'cos all the damn white honkeys realised that Miles' style was easier to copy than Bird's." Your humor was strong, consistent with the concept, and made for a very entertaining read.
If it weren't for this last big section, it would be a solid 10. Checkit what I'm talking about. The "algebra" thing needs to go. It's unsupported, and bears very little humor value. But the "Bitches Brew" also needs to be cut for just about the same reason. Sure, it's a little longer than the other section I mentioned. But it's also unsupported and doesn't fit the article. I don't like the lists, I don't like that paragraph above it, I don't like the section at all. It's not funny, which is unfortunate because the rest of it was very entertaining.
|Concept:||8||This was a great biographical article. Having written biographical articles before, I can appreciate how hard it can be to develop a good concept. But you did a great job with this. It was nice and sarcastic without being too blatant. What I liked about this was that people who don't listen to jazz will find it entertaining, but there's an added bit of humor value for people who actually do know what you're talking about.|
|Prose and formatting:||9||I found the prose in this article to be most entertaining. Your tone, which really helps to get the reader into the whole vibe of the jazz era, is most appropriate, and is earning you some serious points right now. It's consistent, which I like. Your formatting is fine, images are well placed, and everything looks nice and purty.|
|Images:||9||The whole Gil Evans deal was just great. The opening image, which I was initially a little iffy about, now seems to fit just a little better in the context of the article. Your images are nice, in both number and quality. Not too many text based images in here (other than the first one) which is good.|
|Final Score:||43.8||I swear to God that this score isn't me trying to bribe you into forgetting about my tagging this article and then not doing it. This was a great article. Like I said before, the last bit needs to be ix-nay'd. That's the only thing I would change. Other than that, I would safely say that this is VFHable. =D|
|Reviewer:||@ 03:58 Apr 20|