Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/The Doctor (3rd review)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 17:43, August 5, 2009 by ChiefjusticeDS (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit The Doctor

Hopefully improved in tone etc after not zero, not one, but two reviews. MacManiasig.png MacManiasig-cheerios.png MacManiasig-holmes.png MacManiasig-starwars.png MacManiasig-firefly.png MacManiasig-pixar.png MacManiasig-oregon.png MacManiasig-lesmiz.png MacManiasig-doctor.png 16px-HalLogo.png Portal16px.png UncycLensFlare16px.pngDalek16px.png 16px-ChekhovSig.png16px-JapanSig.png Sir MacMania GUN 00:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got this one. --ChiefjusticeDS 20:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Give me a bit longer, running into some difficulties. I should still get it done before 24 hours though.--ChiefjusticeDS 06:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Humour: 8 Much improved from last time, you have sorted out the coherence which was my main gripe with this one. You have also sorted out the Doctor profiles pretty well. You can improve slightly more by making a couple of cosmetic changes to your article. The first of these is something I recommend to everyone who has just finished all necessary amendments to an article which is to, carefully and slowly work your way through your article, with HTBFANJS, and make any final edits and additions as you see fit, be harsh and only keep what you see as the best parts. The second change is more specifically to do with your article, make sure that you still provide lots of jokes, as it can seem a bit of a slog to get to the next one in your article. You have a superb tone and you give lots of amusing details, but the jokes are some distance apart, I fear if you take this on VFH you will get a lot of "I didn't get it...." or "Not enough funny", so why not fix this up? If VFH is your final destination.
Concept: 9 Again some excellent work has gone in here and you have taken my advice to heart, which pleases me more than anything. The reason this is not perfect is mostly because, a couple of times, deep within your article's prose you deviate and I was very disappointed. You don't deviate much and the article doesn't suffer unduly for it and nobody cares about this on VFH, but it seemed like the fly in the article's proverbial ointment. You should pick up on any instances of this if you go back through as I suggested above.
Prose and formatting: 10 Nothing for me to complain about here anymore, your spelling and grammar is top notch and I literally couldn't find a single error as I looked through. I'll find one when I submit this now, but that is irrelevant currently. Possibly the best prose I have ever read for spelling and grammar. Formatting-wise you have done a lot of tidying up and the article looks far better, you removed the pictures that crowded the article, and I think the new Doctor images are infinitely better formatted than they were when I last reviewed. Well done.
Images: 9 I like the images generally and the caption on the TARDIS one redeems what would otherwise be quite a boring picture. The only reason you lose a point is for the first picture, while it isn't horrendously bad, it is still relatively small and there are hundreds of pictures out there with much more clarity than that one, if you do want to keep it then it could do with being a bit larger.
Miscellaneous: 9 My overall grade of the article
Final Score: 45 I am very impressed with the improvements you have made to this article, and the calibre of those improvements is demonstrated by your score increase from my last review. Just the final touches to be put to this one now and it will truly be superb. Well done, and good luck making those final edits.
Reviewer: --ChiefjusticeDS 17:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects