Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Polish language

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Polish language

OK, I'm the retarded Pole who wrote this retarded article about Polish language. It's long etc. But what I want is:

  • Czeching article
  • Adding some stereothypes about it from English side
  • Changing bad parts to better
  • General Cheching ;p

PoliszSir Ptok-BentonicznyPisz tutaj KUN 16:00, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 7 Hey it's me again, the random person who edited your article some time ago. See, I was trying some proofreading but your article was really too long. I was going to leave you a message to tell you about it, but my internet had "network timeout", and after that I forgot all about it. When I proofread I try improve the clarity and the "how well it sounds" as well, I tend to edit very liberally. But anyway, I will complete it in the future (really, I promise), so, let's get onto it.

Ok, I think that you are already an established editor and it probably won't be very good if I force my taste onto you, but I think the article is not bad but too long. If you want to improve the quality and don't mind extensive revisions, I suggest you read German grammar and HowTo:Learn Hebrew. See, I don't know anything about German or Hebrew but I find those articles very funny. You article is only mildly funny to me, and I think that I have to know Polish to understand some it. I always think that when quoting a non-english sentence, putting the exact wording/translation next to it in English is good, like how they do it in Wikipedia to help us fucktards understand what's so funny. (You've done that in most cases.)

On the other hand, I also found this article: Pripyat River funny, and it uses deliberately bad English. See how this article uses a lot of comical exaggerations, while your exaggerations are more cynical and sarcastic in nature. You could also use more of them jokes. Just stating facts with varying degrees of sarcasm doesn't make it funny. So, needs a higher joke to exposition ratio. Also I notice that you have a lot of the same jokes over and over again, like the injuring yourself while speaking Polish joke. While HTBFANJS says repetition is good, I think it should only be used once or twice or it will be overdone.

A lot of funny moments in there, such as the table in "noun cases" and "verb prefix". Unfortunately, they get buried in a lot stuff that are just exposition (or sarcasm). I don't know if you'd be comfortable editing them out to make the article more concise, because you might want them there for completeness. If so, try finding a way to make them funny.

Polish stereotype? Are they like Eastern Europeans? No...wait...it's Central! Central! Is it the country with the composers? No...that's Austria! (Ok, I don't know much, other than there are a lot of Polish jokes and Poland got invaded.)

Concept: 7 The general concept is "Polish is absurdly hard". The two articles that I recommended you also use the same concept, and when writing language articles it's very hard to come up with something creative. So, I think the key is in the creativity of the jokes that you try to make.
Prose and formatting: 6 You need to do something about the red links. Either do away with the links or link them to Wikipedia using external links. As for the grammar, if it's still on the proofreading list I or somebody else will get to it. The formatting and using of tables is quite good, and nice and appropriate for your article.
Images: 5 You really need more images for an article of this length. I don't think three is enough. It gives people something to look at, you know? A general rule that I follow is when I scroll, there will always be a part of an image visible in my screen. Not saying you have to follow this, but more images would definitely be better. I didn't find your existing images very funny either, but they have to do with the topic I guess. Since you are after Polish stereotypes, maybe include some pictures of stereotyped Poles?
Miscellaneous: 7 Arbitrary scoring again. I don't know if you got what you were after, if not, just ask for a second opinion or ask me to clarify.
Final Score: 32 I'm always available through my talk page.
Reviewer: ~Scriptsiggy.JPGTelephonesig Star Starsig Kidneysig 09:31, Dec 25, 2009
Personal tools