Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Narnia

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 03:29, March 22, 2010 by Iwillkillyou333 (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Narnia

IT'S A LION! 18:10, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

I might get this one when I'm done with Unununium, but this is open to anybody--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 21:27, March 18, 2010 (UTC)
I officially claim this article to be reviewed by me. 24 hours--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 04:33, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
Remember that conversation we had about a 12 hour maximum? It still applies here, you have improved your work but your reliability is still in question. This one is now open for anyone to review. --ChiefjusticePS3 16:37, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
The reason this wasnt finished is because of my damn computer I had it done but my computer messed up and lost some of that information I'll retype it and put it on here by this afternoon My apologies--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 17:27, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
I like to write a lot of things, I’m pretty good at Pee Reviews, and the only award I had even gotten was a Author of the Month Award. Also I like Avenged Sevenfold, Modern Warfare 2, Halo 3, and brunettes and emo girls.
Concept: 2 I don’t really know what to say about the concept except it could be worth something but the way you executed it is what kills the concept. Even though its about Narnia, much of it is entirely false Even though making up stuff could be a key factor to humor, that’s not always the case, as stated in HTBFANJS, ‘’ The truth is usually funnier than nonsense. The funniest pages are those closest to the truth.’’ That is a true factor. I didn’t know this I was first here. You don’t always have to be honest about what you write, but you have to at least be somewhat true full. Heres a example also founded in HTBFANJS:
  • Example: "Erik Estrada was born in 480182525234 BC to Chuck Norris and Oprah for the sole purpose of fucking up humanity."

Stupid. Pointless drivel. Although possibly funny within the somewhat dry context of the page, without that contrast it lacks any kind of humor.

  • Example: "Erik Estrada is an American (possibly Costa Rican) television actor, known for a successful career in the California Highway Patrol following his retirement from the television, or "prostitution" industry."

Funnier because it's closer to the truth. "CHiPS" was a real TV show. Blending fact with fiction, or blurring that line makes for better comedy. This is not a particularly hilarious line, but you get the idea.

You get where I’m going here? That doesn’t have to be the Case for something like and HowTo articles or an Unbook article, and that case you just have to make some sense. Remember Being funny is better than being stupid, not that you are stupid, but you get what I mean

Prose and Formatting: 6 Grammar and spelling is not the problem here, although I did see at least one error, so you should read the article and look for errors like that or use our marvelous Proofreading Service, who will send a use to look and correct mistakes in your article for you. Getting back to what I was saying, the main problem is the tone of the article. You switched from third person to first person a lot. That’s a big no no. What you need to do is to choose a tone and stick with it. That will stop confusion and agitation.

Also there’s too much swearing in this article. Unless it’s a quote, UnBooks, Unscripts, or first person article, it’s usually a big no no to use on articles like this. Even though swearing can be humorous at times, using too much of it drains the article, so please keep swearing to a minimum

Also things like, ‘’and then plunge Narnia into One Hundred Years of Winter because, hey, it was something to do’’ should be disregarded. Don’t be afraid to go into detail. Maybe the reader wants to know why she did I, so refrain from saying things like ‘’because that’s how it is’’ and just explain why. And the ‘’The Dark Age That Nobody Really Feels Like Writing About’’ don’t make one sentence sections. Those are highly annoying and do not bring up much humor, if any at all.

And lastly avoid red links. Nobody likes them and are fucking annoying, so get rid of them.

Humo(u)r: 2 I’m sorry to say that this article was hardly amusing. Even though the article may be long and may look funny, it’s truly not. There are many problems with it that really turn me off from this article. I’m not trying to be mean, but I’m afraid the article would win VFD rather than VFH. Let me point out what makes this score so low and how to correct these mistakes.

There is too much randomness in the article, most of it with stuff that either doesn’t make sense or contribute very little to the article Things like racism, rape, same family marriage, drugs, and such just completely ruin this article. Stuff like that are very less humorous on Uncyclopedia nowadays. Once in a while is fine, but too much of it isn’t good, because people aren’t taking articles like that seriously these days Using other humor techniques to replace these outdated and stupid jokes are very wise Try to make fun of stuff that are in chronicles of Narnia instead of making thing something they’re not.

Avoid using people like Chuck Norris, Jack Bauer, Adolf Hitler, and people like that unless it’s absolutely necessary (in this case it’s not) because they have been overused all over the internet and people are sick and tired of them. Stick with people who are in Narnia and avoid taking that path.

Avoid making people what they aren’t. Although something like this could be an exception, it has to be done in a right way. Try to keep the characters like they are in books and films and abstain yourself from using too much fiction with characters.

Images: 5 Got plenty of them, but with the exception of the second and possibly the first one, they don’t contribute to the article. Try to stick with actual images of things from the series and use random images seldom. The first one is iffy, so I’m going to let your own judgment decide what to do with this image, but I think it can be a keep.
Miscellaneous: 4 My overall grade of this article.
Final Score: 19 I don’t think you did too bad, trust me, I’ve down worst. If you’re a new user then this is perfectly the acceptable, as all new users don’t really know the rules of Uncyclopedia (unless they actually read them, I sure as hell did not). Anyways, this can be turned into something good but you need to follow my advice as well as look at HTBFANJS, it helps, a lot. Know that I was not being mean when reviewing this, just have to be in-depth as possible. IF you have any questions and or comments, just go to my talk page, and I’ll be more than happy to answer/reply to you. Good Luck. Cheers!
Reviewer: --Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 03:28, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects