Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Psychological Perception test

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit Psychological Perception test

This was tagged with {{PeeReview}} back in April 2007 by its author User:Naughty Budgie, but an entry was apparently never created. MadMax 08:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

UUtea A big mug o' reviewin' strength tea? Why, that must mean this article
is being reviewed by:
UU - natter UU Manhole
(While you're welcome to review it as well, you might like to consider helping someone else instead).
(Also, if the review hasn't been finished within 24 hours of this tag appearing, feel free to remove it or clout UU athwart the ear'ole).

OK, I'll give it a quick once-over. --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 18:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Humour: 6 Uhh, wow, this is difficult to score. It feels quite random in places, although I guess that's the point. In others, it's pretty funny, although structurally a little ragged. I see what you're aiming for here, and I quite like it, I think, but it needs to be more of a coherent "whole" although not necessarily much more coherent, that's not what you're aiming for right?
Concept: 5 An insane sanity test? Quite an interesting route to take, although I'm not too sure about the approach you've taken to it - those initial questions take up a bit of space and aren't very interesting. They may well put people off before you get the the meat of the article further down. And then when you do get there, it feels a bit... well, random. The structure more than the words is the problem though. Formatting will help - see the next box, but... I know you're aiming for a bizarre feel here, but I think the best way to get this is to have a straightforward layout and structure, and just let the words do the job for you. So think about the comments in the next box and make easier to follow in terms of layout. Then let the madness of the text do the rest.
Prose and formatting: 4 OK, take a look at this. Bold text, line breaks, paragraph structure - basically, this has a better layout that makes the test easier to follow. With this concept, you want people to be confused by the words, which is the point. Losing them with a very basic layout like this won't help what you're aiming for.
Images: 6 Well, there are two, so points there. But only two - for an article of this length, you could do with a couple more. And they're both in the same section - try to aim for an even distribution throughout the article. People are more interested if there's pics. Sad but true. That said, I like the yin yang thing quite a bit.
Miscellaneous: 5.3 Averaged cos that's how I roll.
Final Score: 26.3 One more thing - you mention the answers are at the bottom - they're not. Looks like you got so far down and then ran out of ideas before the end - particularly seeing how few edits this has had recently. I'd say: sort the formatting and then see if new ideas strike. I'd also say: seriously think about finishing it, I don't know why, as this sort of thing is normally a bit random for my tastes, but I kind of enjoyed this. I won't make any further comments now (I normally do) as I don't know if this will get acted on. If you do pick up on this and want to work on this again, ask me on my talk and I'll add some more comments and ideas. But for now, I'm off to remove the review tag from the article. Job done! (As always, this is only my opinion, others are available, and good luck!)
Reviewer: --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 20:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects