Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Suddenly, Delete!

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 22:14, February 15, 2011 by Lyrithya (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Suddenly, Delete!

Originally a rip-off from Suddenly, Raccoons, I've really come to love this article. Obviously, as it is my own. Tell me what you all think. Scofield 12:48, February 12, 2011 (UTC)

I'll do this. 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 20:42, 14 February 2011

Concept: 3 Eh, it is what it is, really. Derivative. Both copying and to a lesser extent, playing off the existing joke, the raccoons, the coons, the potentiality of Ra... problem is, though, like all out-there things, they generally lose their funny pretty much after the first one. After that, it's just, "Oh, it's another ______". Fill in the meme, since that's what they effectively become after the first one or two.

Mind, they can work - Coons did so well as it did because of its strange intellectuality - bringing in nuances of history to become both a play of words on the racoons and a fairly clever historical piece, and likewise you are taking yours in quite another direction as well, but without the play and without it likelily meaning anything to outsiders. Call it what you will, inside-joke, self-reference, vanity... those terms all seem to be thrown about the same sorts of things, whatever they actually mean. Point is, it ain't apt to mean a whole lot to the average passerby, and I don't have a much of an inkling as to what you could do about that.

But that's really rather dreary - like I said, it is what it is. If you indeed are going to make an in-joke, may as well make it the best you damn well can, right? You know your audience - Uncyclopedians; use that. Know your subjects - the vandals, the admins, even Hyperbole - how are they really, and how does the audience perceive them? Can you play off that, off both the perception of as well as the nuances of the users themselves?


A major problem here, though, is that a lot of it just doesn't make sense. Part of it is the images - half of them don't match what it says they are. Part of it is the logs - the dates don't fit, the numbers too round - why alway on the hour, eh? Add some minutes, mon. The admins saying such out-of-character things, even the reasonings and actions also don't make all that much sense, but I'll get into that later.

For more accuracy, though, or even just ideas, considered looking through the fellows' logs? Some of these admins say some pretty funny things in general, but if you do get more of a feel for what they would actually say, there is more potential for funnies for the folks who know them. Like... I dunno, Chief's strange use of commas, for instance. Bad example, but I don't actually have the logs in front of me, myself.

And why are the other ones so recent when Hyperbole's was Junish? It was a PLS entry, got disqualified because Olipro is an arse... er, I mean because it was deemed to have had too little effort put into it, despite how funny it ultimately proved to be. Instead of just ignoring that, though, why not use it? Effort vs funny, policy and whatnot vs funny, even the whole drama in general... perhaps poke fun at Uncyclopedians' penchant for making drama out of the strangest things, but even some reference might give it more grounding.

Seems too much of a non-sequitor as it is, and while the non-sequitor itself is the entire point, don't overdo it. Make it follow a little more, if that makes any sense.

Images: 3 Score due to their apparent randomness and most not actually being that funny; comments are with the humour section. Working on their consistency with each other would probably also help - size, style, etc...
Humour: 5 Now for the page-by-page...
1
A fellow dude, eh? Net surfing? Why is the image of a woman in an office with a keyboard that has more emphasis on calculator functions than keys, then? Get an image of what it is, mon, or make what it is fit the image, or it's apt to just look bad. Perhaps something of a stereotype you'd like to mock would work especially well.
And anyhow, 'fellow dude'? The folks on Uncyclopedia be dudes, now? Eh, what do most of them call themselves? Seems a bit out of place, though, 'dude'...
Mind, there be plenty of folks who think like that... it's like they think nobody will notice. Then again, sometimes nobody does notice...
You might be able to do something with the fact that this is a rip-off, too, though. Play with the irony?
2
That baby is a little young to be in a violent brawl... especially with a younger sibling. I mean, any younger would probably be cone-headed and purple. It's a good image for the notion of outrage, but it just doesn't fit. I mean, really doesn't fit. Crush her ego? Fuck me sissy? Even a ten-year-old is unlikely to use such language, but if you are going to go with a baby, why not really go with the baby? Gurgling, ga gaing, that kind of thing, and a mashed message on the keyboard for the article itself. Could have the deleter take it for a spambot, instead, which might make for a funny twist...
And since you went with JT as the admin, why not actually put that to use? Have you seen his ban reasons and deletion summaries when he writes them in? He tends to be incredibly polite and whatnot... so use that, why don't you?
3
Yup, this is pretty... sensible. Good image, too. Why not link to some rather fine pictures as well while you're at it, though? And why call it shit? The perver likes it, right?
I can see why Mordillo banned you, though. That's not like him. Why'd you use him for that, anyhow? MadMax is usually the one going through images... and I mean really going through them. Though I suppose anyone might happen across a porn, it's just less funny being random, I think.
4
An anime character? Looks like a girl, at that. Again, doesn't fit what you say the person is. Although why was the fellow in such a bad mood, anyhow? Not that it matters, but it might make for another opportunity to poke fun at angry vandals...
Mon, folks tend not to put nearly so much thought into destructive whatnots, but a lot of it is often attention-driven, as well. Anger is usually directed mostly at the target, although dissociations can be made to displace the anger onto seemingly similar ones, but the justification is rarely concious. Save for rarer cases, however, for destructiveness to really persist, the longer stuff and sprees and whatnot involve some sort of reaction, or there's no point in continuing; folks like to see how their actions affect the community, and they like the attention it gets them. Not entirely sure how this would help the actual humour of the piece, though. Perhaps add some particularly strange dissociation to the mix - angry person decides that the articles on uncyclopedia were more of the same thing that made him angry in the first place, which could be funny if it was a good or silly or something enough trigger...
Also, I don't think I've ever seen Chief put 'sigh' in an edit summary... and why would he? It'd indicate exactly what the attention-mongers are after - an impact on someone, even if it is the fellow doing the banning.
5
Eh, with this one, pretty much what I said in the concept section. Why would he be impressed, though? And are you sure he has read HTBFANJS? I mean, I haven't... but then again, he's been here a little longer.
I mean, of course I've read it. But anyhow, following the thing doesn't guarentee protection. Needs to actually be funny, or something. You know. Cheesecake.
As for the images, they're pretty basic... just of the thing in question. Nothing particularly good or bad about that,
Prose and formatting: 4 Proofread... 'it's' is a conjunction of 'it' and 'is'; use 'its' otherwise. Only use commas to separate clauses. If you have two statements and want to have them be one sentence, use a semicolon. If a quote has punctuation inside it, don't put punctuation outside it, too. I mean, instead of "... word!". just do ... word!"

The pages would probably look better if you centered the images, or something, especially on the last one - looks pretty bad on wider sceens. Add a linebreak between the text and the images, too.

Those are supposed to be log entries, right? The formatting is a little off, which you may or may not want to look to, since it looks off, but it also isn't actually needed information that you left out...

Also, I'm not sure why you start out calling it a policy - how is this is a policy? Essay, perhaps, but really it just seems to be an article, so the template has me a mite confused.

Miscellaneous: 5 Didn't he only ban you for a couple of months, or something? I'd look, but I don't have the logs. Or even access to the logs. I'm on a bus. Stupid bus.

Later: Now I can't be bothered.

Final Score: 20 There you go. Sorry it took so long, and sorry it's not very hopeful, but I've never been much of a fan of derivative works, especially such self-referential ones as this. Hopefully this should help for what it is, however.
Reviewer: 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 22:14, 15 February 2011
3
Bloink
Concept
The idea, the angle, the grand funny of the article...
Eh, it is what it is, really. Derivative. Both copying and to a lesser extent, playing off the existing joke, the raccoons, the coons, the potentiality of Ra... problem is, though, like all out-there things, they generally lose their funny pretty much after the first one. After that, it's just, "Oh, it's another ______". Fill in the meme, since that's what they effectively become after the first one or two.

Mind, they can work - Coons did so well as it did because of its strange intellectuality - bringing in nuances of history to become both a play of words on the racoons and a fairly clever historical piece, and likewise you are taking yours in quite another direction as well, but without the play and without it likelily meaning anything to outsiders. Call it what you will, inside-joke, self-reference, vanity... those terms all seem to be thrown about the same sorts of things, whatever they actually mean. Point is, it ain't apt to mean a whole lot to the average passerby, and I don't have a much of an inkling as to what you could do about that.

But that's really rather dreary - like I said, it is what it is. If you indeed are going to make an in-joke, may as well make it the best you damn well can, right? You know your audience - Uncyclopedians; use that. Know your subjects - the vandals, the admins, even Hyperbole - how are they really, and how does the audience perceive them? Can you play off that, off both the perception of as well as the nuances of the users themselves?


A major problem here, though, is that a lot of it just doesn't make sense. Part of it is the images - half of them don't match what it says they are. Part of it is the logs - the dates don't fit, the numbers too round - why alway on the hour, eh? Add some minutes, mon. The admins saying such out-of-character things, even the reasonings and actions also don't make all that much sense, but I'll get into that later.

For more accuracy, though, or even just ideas, considered looking through the fellows' logs? Some of these admins say some pretty funny things in general, but if you do get more of a feel for what they would actually say, there is more potential for funnies for the folks who know them. Like... I dunno, Chief's strange use of commas, for instance. Bad example, but I don't actually have the logs in front of me, myself.

And why are the other ones so recent when Hyperbole's was Junish? It was a PLS entry, got disqualified because Olipro is an arse... er, I mean because it was deemed to have had too little effort put into it, despite how funny it ultimately proved to be. Instead of just ignoring that, though, why not use it? Effort vs funny, policy and whatnot vs funny, even the whole drama in general... perhaps poke fun at Uncyclopedians' penchant for making drama out of the strangest things, but even some reference might give it more grounding.

Seems too much of a non-sequitor as it is, and while the non-sequitor itself is the entire point, don't overdo it. Make it follow a little more, if that makes any sense.

3
Bloink
Images
The graphics themselves, as well as their humour and relevance...
Score due to their apparent randomness and most not actually being that funny; comments are with the humour section. Working on their consistency with each other would probably also help - size, style, etc...
5
Bloink
Humour
The implementation, how funny the article comes out...
Now for the page-by-page...
1
A fellow dude, eh? Net surfing? Why is the image of a woman in an office with a keyboard that has more emphasis on calculator functions than keys, then? Get an image of what it is, mon, or make what it is fit the image, or it's apt to just look bad. Perhaps something of a stereotype you'd like to mock would work especially well.
And anyhow, 'fellow dude'? The folks on Uncyclopedia be dudes, now? Eh, what do most of them call themselves? Seems a bit out of place, though, 'dude'...
Mind, there be plenty of folks who think like that... it's like they think nobody will notice. Then again, sometimes nobody does notice...
You might be able to do something with the fact that this is a rip-off, too, though. Play with the irony?
2
That baby is a little young to be in a violent brawl... especially with a younger sibling. I mean, any younger would probably be cone-headed and purple. It's a good image for the notion of outrage, but it just doesn't fit. I mean, really doesn't fit. Crush her ego? Fuck me sissy? Even a ten-year-old is unlikely to use such language, but if you are going to go with a baby, why not really go with the baby? Gurgling, ga gaing, that kind of thing, and a mashed message on the keyboard for the article itself. Could have the deleter take it for a spambot, instead, which might make for a funny twist...
And since you went with JT as the admin, why not actually put that to use? Have you seen his ban reasons and deletion summaries when he writes them in? He tends to be incredibly polite and whatnot... so use that, why don't you?
3
Yup, this is pretty... sensible. Good image, too. Why not link to some rather fine pictures as well while you're at it, though? And why call it shit? The perver likes it, right?
I can see why Mordillo banned you, though. That's not like him. Why'd you use him for that, anyhow? MadMax is usually the one going through images... and I mean really going through them. Though I suppose anyone might happen across a porn, it's just less funny being random, I think.
4
An anime character? Looks like a girl, at that. Again, doesn't fit what you say the person is. Although why was the fellow in such a bad mood, anyhow? Not that it matters, but it might make for another opportunity to poke fun at angry vandals...
Mon, folks tend not to put nearly so much thought into destructive whatnots, but a lot of it is often attention-driven, as well. Anger is usually directed mostly at the target, although dissociations can be made to displace the anger onto seemingly similar ones, but the justification is rarely concious. Save for rarer cases, however, for destructiveness to really persist, the longer stuff and sprees and whatnot involve some sort of reaction, or there's no point in continuing; folks like to see how their actions affect the community, and they like the attention it gets them. Not entirely sure how this would help the actual humour of the piece, though. Perhaps add some particularly strange dissociation to the mix - angry person decides that the articles on uncyclopedia were more of the same thing that made him angry in the first place, which could be funny if it was a good or silly or something enough trigger...
Also, I don't think I've ever seen Chief put 'sigh' in an edit summary... and why would he? It'd indicate exactly what the attention-mongers are after - an impact on someone, even if it is the fellow doing the banning.
5
Eh, with this one, pretty much what I said in the concept section. Why would he be impressed, though? And are you sure he has read HTBFANJS? I mean, I haven't... but then again, he's been here a little longer.
I mean, of course I've read it. But anyhow, following the thing doesn't guarentee protection. Needs to actually be funny, or something. You know. Cheesecake.
As for the images, they're pretty basic... just of the thing in question. Nothing particularly good or bad about that,
4
Bloink
Prose and formatting
Appearance, flow, overall presentation...
Proofread... 'it's' is a conjunction of 'it' and 'is'; use 'its' otherwise. Only use commas to separate clauses. If you have two statements and want to have them be one sentence, use a semicolon. If a quote has punctuation inside it, don't put punctuation outside it, too. I mean, instead of "... word!". just do ... word!"

The pages would probably look better if you centered the images, or something, especially on the last one - looks pretty bad on wider sceens. Add a linebreak between the text and the images, too.

Those are supposed to be log entries, right? The formatting is a little off, which you may or may not want to look to, since it looks off, but it also isn't actually needed information that you left out...

Also, I'm not sure why you start out calling it a policy - how is this is a policy? Essay, perhaps, but really it just seems to be an article, so the template has me a mite confused.

5
Bloink
Miscellaneous
Anything else... or not...
Didn't he only ban you for a couple of months, or something? I'd look, but I don't have the logs. Or even access to the logs. I'm on a bus. Stupid bus.

Later: Now I can't be bothered.

20
Bloink
Final score
1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 22:14, 15 February 2011
There you go. Sorry it took so long, and sorry it's not very hopeful, but I've never been much of a fan of derivative works, especially such self-referential ones as this. Hopefully this should help for what it is, however.
Personal tools
projects