Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Mortal Sin

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 20:04, March 3, 2010 by Black flamingo11 (talk | contribs)

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


edit Mortal Sin

Fadda Murphy thanks you for doing a review. He wants me to tell you that for doing that you get a thousand years taken off your sentence in purgatory. The article needs a few more links, which I'll work on. Thanks for your kind attention, but I know you're really doing this for the Church, praise the Lord. Aleister in Chains

I'll review the shit out of this. Give me until tomorrow night. --Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 20:59, March 2, 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, take as long as you'd like, no hurry. As for reviewing the shit out of it, all I can say is yummy! Aleister in Wonderland 14:28 3.3. 2mx
Hiatus has put some really good and relevant data on the talk page, which could end up to be a good information depository for the page. Al, later that day.
Humour: 8 Hey Aleister, you've got a good article here, I can tell that your writing ability is really growing. However there are a few things I identified that I feel might strengthen what you already have.

Humour-wise, I feel your biggest detractor is the opening paragraph. It isn't as strong as the rest of your article, which is pretty consistent and doesn't need much work. The opening quote from the Fadda's "assistant" for example is a little cumbersome and could use trimming. Firstly, the Harry Potter joke is a little out of character - if you wanted to keep this part I would suggest you change it to some kind of gangster-film or bible reference. You also take jabs at Catholicism in general, particularly the paedophilic aspects of it. This contrasts with the rest of your piece which is more about comparing the Church to the Mafia, so try to cut stuff that isn't to do with this, especially in the intro where you need to be focussed.

As for the rest of article, there are a few jokes that are too random or fall a bit flat. Generally you don't have a problem with this though. I didn't really get the reference to Buffy, perhaps you should try a less esoteric (but still funny) sin. The "Don't Ask" joke which follows is amusing so I wouldn't recommend just removing this reference. Another joke I couldn't get my head around was the "play grabass with the cook" line. Perhaps you could make this clearer. Finally, I think the Godfather III reference you added is a little vague, and doesn't really add anything to the Da Vinci code joke you already had. Try to trim down any namedropping or pointless references to popular culture.

As for HH's comments, I agree they're interesting. I don't think adding any of these real life events would enhance your article much, but it might be interesting to see the Fadda mention some of this stuff as proof. Or perhaps you could include them in the citations at the bottom. It's up to you really.

Concept: 9 Ok, your concept of Catholicism being a scam is pretty solid and I was very impressed by how you delivered it. As I've said above though, you might want to work at establishing this quicker in the first paragraph. It's not a major problem, but I think it could help. There is one other thing I think you could do to strengthen this, but I will talk about this below in prose.
Prose and formatting: 7 Again, most of your prose, spelling and grammar are ok, and apart from a good proofread there is very little that needs work. There are, however, a few parts that are slightly unclear, possibly due to the eccentric voice you use throughout the article. For instance, the sentence: "Same with looking at your neighbor or someone walkin' down the street like ya wanna fuck 'em," reads awkwardly. Several times you try to cram too many ideas into one sentence like this. In this instance, maybe you could just say "looking at a stranger" to make it simpler. The answer to the Jewish guy's question is another that could do with being made clearer, as I found it hard to tell what you meant throughout that part. Generally speaking though, just try to make your sentences as simple as possible, especially since you're using broken English.

Another thing I noticed was that the Fadda starts off being quite well-spoken in the introduction, but then quickly takes on the stereotypical gangster accent for the rest of the piece. I would recommend bringing the two tones closer together to keep your character consistent. Since the end of your article seems stronger than the beginning, you should probably work to make it more like that. Apart from this your tone is very good.

Images: 5 Right, this is probably the weakest part of the article. I didn't really find any of your images to be particularly funny, but I understand good images can be hard to find for a well-established and very specific concept such as this. My main suggestion would be that you need more, and try to make them relevant, focus them on your concept of Christianity being a scam. The one of Ming the Merciless for instance doesn't really have any place here. Your first image is probably the best, but maybe you should try to get a 'chop done of a kind of ganster/priest combo. Wikipedia articles about similar subjects tend to use classic paintings for images, so maybe you could try to spoof this by having the Fadda comment on them in the captions. These are all just suggestions, at the end of the day I trust your editorial decisions.
Miscellaneous: 7.3 Averaged.
Final Score: 36.3 So to sum up, this is a good article and I really enjoyed reading it. Your only problems are fairly minor and don't detract too much. A little bit more focus and clarity and this could very easily become a great piece. So having said that, I'll let you work on it for a while then maybe we'll talk about a VFH nom.

Well that's that. I hope you find this review useful, but if you do need any clarification on anything, or want me to take a look at any changes you make, get back to me and I'll be glad to help. Good luck with the changes 'n' shit.

Reviewer: --Hugs and kisses, Black_Flamingo 20:04, March 3, 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools