Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Roh Moo-hyun City
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
|A big mug o' reviewin' strength tea? Why, that must mean this article|
is being reviewed by:
UU - natter
(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).
|Humour:||2||Wow, this seems pretty random to me. Seriously, even allowing for the fact that English doesn't seem to be the author's first language, this is not great to read. None of the paragraphs seem to have any relation to each other, and as a result, it's just a mess to read. I tried, I really did, but I couldn't find a single joke in here. Part of the problem is that it's had a bunch of edits over the years, and started out as something of a stub. That doesn't give it a central direction - see the concept box.
To be honest, there's not much I can recommend here, as I don't understand where you're trying to go with this. I'd be tempted to level it and start again - there's nothing here to start from. We do have some half-decent city articles - Atlanta springs to mind as an example, so have a look at that. See how it has an innovative central idea? That's the kind of thing I mean, someone has thought about how to hang jokes on this article, instead of just adding a few lines that have no connection to the rest of the article and that only make sense to the person writing them.
|Concept:||2||There's no central idea here and it shows. I say this every time, but concept is king - without a coherent central idea, you don't have an article. So go get one, then work the article around that. You'll find jokes suggest themselves more easily.|
|Prose and formatting:||4||I hate to be negative when it seems that English isn't the first language of the writer - their English is better than my <insert other language here> after all. But the fact is, this doesn't make a whole lot of sense, it's hard to follow, confusing, and not funny as a result. The formatting is OK but not great - it's one block instead of sections, which doesn't help, and the infobox is as long as the article, which is also not great.|
|Images:||2||One, which is in the infobox and adds nothing beyond a splash of colour.|
|Final Score:||12.5||Wow, this is one of my lowest scores ever. But then, this just isn't a great article. And as this review was requested by an IP, I doubt it will even be noticed. For what it's worth, my advice is simple: start again, from scratch. Get a basic idea for the article, either a straightforward parody of a wikipedia article on the place, or focus on one aspect of the city and make it as absurd as you can. And enlist the help of someone who speaks English, if possible.
I'll finish the way I usually do, by reminding you that this is only my opinion, and others are available. And then I'll wish you luck - you'll need it!
|Reviewer:||--UU - natter 10:56, Jul 19|