Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Socialist Alternative (revised)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 07:01, December 20, 2008 by Mnbvcxz (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Socialist Alternative

Missunderstood 09:41, 18 December 2008 (UTC) Feel fee to add to this article or correct grammer etc.

Concept: 4.5 The general idea has potential; however, it appears that you are trying to use bias as a substitute for humor. That doesn't work, even if the reader shares your biases. As the HTBFANJS guide says,

*Never substitute bias in place of humor. While biases and points of view are allowed, often to the extent of encouragement, on Uncyclopedia, simply writing something like "The Big Mac is a piece of dog shit on two buns" or "Man United are considered by everyone to be the best athletes in the history of mankind" is not funny by itself. Instead, explain, in lavish detail, what makes these things so great or terrible. Remember, you aren't the only person on this planet. Try to keep your stuff funny, but not insulting.

In other words, a political rant is not funny.

Also, your relying too much on randomness to try be funny. That never works, the article needs to be fun of the subject matter. "Throw away" one liners do work occasionally, but they run the risk of hurting the article. Whenever you edit the article, think, I'm I making the overall experience of the article reading more funny, or am I only making the sentence this sentence funny, at the expense of the entire article.

Finally, when you write articles about the politics of Australia or other minor nations (i.e. any nation besides the United States or the United Kingdom), you run the risk of your readers not knowing what your talking about. Being an American, I have fairly good knowledge of American politics and some knowledge of British politics, but I don't much about the politics of minor English speaking nations, not even Canada. That doesn't mean you shouldn't write articles about minor English speaking nations, but don't be surprised if it only appeals to a niche market. When you put such articles up for pee review, you should generally ask for an Australian to review in your comments, other readers may miss some of the humor.
Prose and Formatting: 6.5 I did some clean-up on this article. Currently, the article has a listy feel to it, and it seems like the 3rd picture is overwhelming the article. The listiness is caused by the 10 commandments parody and the long list of links at the end. I'd probably keep the 10 commandments, its not too bad for a list, and prune the see also links. Also, you want to avoid unneeded white space, you don't need any more than one space between headers, texts, templates, et cetera, and sometimes, no spaces at all looks better.

Also, pics generally look best right below section or sub-section headers, putting them there makes it unlikely that they will go thru header lines, and it generally prevents one or two lines of text from sticking out between a pic and a header.

As you can see, I did some clean up on the formatting. I often do that because its easier to show someone how an article should look than explain everything. The prose score is the score of how the article looks after I did the clean up.
Images: 5.5 I really don't get the first image. The second one is too blurry and not really that funny, I'd look for a better pic of the communists. You generally want at least one pic of the subject matter of the article. Otherwise, it feels like your article is missing something. The third one sort of "overwhelms" the article, mostly because of its size. I'd keep it and see how it looks after you flesh out the article. Its just giving off the feel that the image has more humor than prose, I think the fact that it is busy with text is what gives that image its overwhelming feel.
Humour: 4 I didn't really find the article that funny overall. The article is both too random and too attacky at the same time. Like I said in the concept section, bias is not a replacement for humor, neither is insulting the subject matter bluntly. Try to be more witty in insulting. Bludgeoning insults can work at times, but not when they are the only weapon in your arsenal besides randomness. You might want to see HTBFANJS for some hints on article writing, and Best of for some good articles. If you can't think of anything, you might want to change the perspective of the article. For example, have it be written by the subject in a pseudo-vain way and accidentally insulting itself.

I'd also consider getting rid of the quotes and the template. The template only serves to uglify the article, and as a rule, "advisory" templates should be avoided unless there is a good reason to keep them. I generally don't like header quotes because the start the article off on a one-liner, instead of dead-pan going into humor, which is a method that I prefer. As a rule, you should start off in "straight man" tone and then go more outlandish as you go on. If you start out to strong, you can't escalate.
Improvability Score: 6 This article should be easy to improve upon, but its going to need some change in the underlying concept. I'd rate is at a medium rewrite, some of your material is keepable, but the underlying theme of the article and its tone need work.
Final Score: 26.5 good luck
Reviewer: --Mnbvcxz 07:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects