As I know you don't know me, I'll introduce myself. Hi, it's me.
Writing this as straight foward and encyclopedic to me was a very good choice. The humour is in trying to figure out what the hell the article is saying, not in "funny" writing.
Prose and Formatting:
You may know I put Humour comments in with P & F to avoid repeating myself, but do score them separately.
First, this was short. To me that's a good thing, bee cause its herd two reed. I'm not complaining about that--to me it fits the joke that spell checkers "aren't all that."
Second, because I'm anally-retentive, I ran this through four English spell-checkers at http://www.spellchecker.net. I checked for usage for Canada, United Kingdom, United States, and Kangaroo (sorry, couldn't resist that). My thought was that the more accurate this article is, the funnier it would be. American, British and Canadian didn't like the various forms of cheque but Australian did, so I thought that was good. Anything that could pass an English-language spell checker but not for American and Britain, where probably the majority of Unc's writers and readers come from, to me is a good thing.
Frankly, I was surprised at the number of forms that passed the Australian spell cheque. I knew there were various uses for "cunt," but didn't expect it to be accepted by an Australian spell chequer--I didn't know the word had gotten that acceptable there, so I learned something. Did you know that during the Middle Ages in England, most English towns and cities has a street named "Gropecunt Lane," which meant what it sounds like, a lane where you could grope cunt? Gropecunt Lane was where you could pay for the services of prostitutes. No hiding it back then. I love the Middle Ages.
All right, back to the article. There were four words that didn't pass any of the chequers, and in this I was not surprised. "Injun," "indian", "apache," didn't pass, the latter two because they weren't capitalised--I'd capitalise these as I don't think having them lower case makes them funnier. "Injun" stood out to me as not working even before I ran the check--it looks like a spelling spell chequers would reject, and they did. I'd suggest changing it to "in jun," especially as "jun" was accepted by the Australian spell chequer and rejected by the rest.
The fourth word none of the chequers recognized was "Wikipedia," and I think you could have some fun with this. I'd suggest something like "Wee key pee dia," especially as "dia" was accepted by the Australian but rejected by the three others.
You might want to know that in America and some other parts of the English-speaking world, "aye" is pronounced like the letter "i" and not like the letter "a."
There were a few places where I didn't figure out what it was supposed to be saying. These include "may beast and," "au pair ate ting honour," "asp art offer." It could be either that I just didn't get it, or that these could be made clearer. What are these?
Au pair aye shun
I didn't get the meaning of were "stemming." Also "intended" is often pronouced as "in tended" and not "in tendered"--again, this may be different in different countries.
I rarely literally lol when I'm Pee Reviewing, but I did on "the come pewter nose."
What's "pose eh sieves"?
"Eat ease knot noun weather (a) more foe logical an alley sis provides benefit"--I'd add the word "a" or a word that sound like it.
Don't see a problem.
"orphan knot proof re ding there tie ping (e feet) passed aye spell chequer." I think some form of "if it" is needed here.
"The conk lose shun...."--I think it would much funnier if the conclusion was that spell checkers did not lower ability. Suggestion: "Eat was found in re search that hire skilled righters (dead knot loose) their purr for mince a billy teas with spell chequers turned on. The conk lose shun ease that spell chequers do (knot) re juice the a billy tea to rite."
Sea all sew
"AAAAAAAAA!"--the spell checkers didn't recognized this, but I don't think that's a problem.
I like the proofreading tag, especially as it doesn't make this article appear on the proofreading needed page. This is one article that should not be proofread.
To me this is an amusing article, not a hilarious one. But I think that's fine.
I think the images and captions are fine. To me the white lettering on the road looks a little too bright, but that's a minor point.
I'd really like to see the ending changed, or this would be higher (also note a total score of 40 means I'll likely vote for on VFH, so this means I'd like you to do some slight improvements first).
All in all I like it. My suggestions are: explain to me the parts I didn't understand above (that way I can know if I simply missed the joke or if it might work better if reworded); change the apparent grammatical errors I found (or let me know why these are not grammatical errors--I think this will work better if the grammar is perfect); and change the ending to say spell chequers do not negatively impact on English--this to me is the most important of my comments.