Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/The Way In

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit The Way In

It's my first article so I'm naturally scared. Please don't be harsh. --HonestUser 10:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Woah, back off there, 'cause it's YesTimeToPee...for YTTE, not you. Sorry, you'll just have to go find somewhere else to empty your bladder, or you can choose to wet yourself. I got this spot, biatch.
Humour: 5.6 Quote: You've got your one quote at the top, which definitely makes it look more like a proper Uncyclopedia entry. But, much more importantly, does it add anything to the funny levels of the article? And without being harsh, I'm going to have to say no. The quote is not that funny. It needs replacing. Have you heard of Captain Obvious, yet? Maybe a clever Captain Obvious comment could work at the beginning of this article? In fact that's pretty much what this Oscar Wilde quote is -very obvious. Oh and another thing: in-jokes are generally meant to be discouraged and Oscar Wilde quotes are getting a little old, so yeah, stay away from Oscar.

Opening Para: "The Way In is a doorway into everything that lead in " - Eh? What? I presume there's a typo in there or something, cause that sentence confuddles me. Is it meant to be "leads in"? That would make a little bit more sense... "is as self-described as it's title " - now I shouldn't really be putting this in the humour section because this is the wrong use of a word (and therefore should go in the Prose and Formatting section, but oh well) - you mean "self-explanatory" not "self-described". "you'll find it in all of it's majesty. It's wooden door, it's handle should be considered godly " - That there is the first piece of real humour and it did illicit a smile. Well done, but I bet you could make that even funnier, because even though it did make me smile, it lacked punch. Also I think you mean "it's a wooden door". Here you could really splash out on adjectives, e.g. "It's a beautiful, hand-crafted, mighty wooden door, gleaming as bright as the sun, the aged wood shimmering in a stunning radiance" etc. "It's also used as a metaphor, so when people are saying. Hey, where's the way in. They'll be saying. That's the way in. That's the way in. " - despite the bad formatting of this I do like it, and it did illicit a little smile.

What can be considered the way in: Well I'm afraid this seems a bit bland this paragraph. I see what you're trying to do, I think. And in some places you're jabbing in the right direction, but not quite reaching smile-land, smirk-territory or laughing-place. You need to read this (which you may or may not have come across). "That is the way in. Cause the finger has magical proportions. " - Very random, but for some strange reasons illicited a smirk!

What can be considered the way out: The first sentence confused me, what do you mean? In the second sentence there's another little mistake, why is there a full stop, in there:"There has to be a way out because without a way out. People won't be able to leave. "? "wouldn't be coming out " - There I think you mean "going out". This whole paragraph is, I'm afraid to say, littered with mistakes, which means any humour is pretty well lost to confusion. I'm not trying to be really harsh here, or unfair, I'm just saying you need to fix all those mistakes so you can get to the funny bits. Because of this there isn't anything, really, to comment on. There are bits in there that almost illicit a smile, but only almost. For example "without that, physics would be screwed up and then people would be confused by which is in and which is out. " could be funny, but it's got a few mistakes in it (I think you mean to say "confused by which way is in and which way is out." ) and its simply not as funny as it could be: there could be sarcasm in there, getting at physics people, for example. Here's an example of what you could do, it isn't that funny, but I think it's a little better: "without that physics would be utterly blasted out of the water, like you would shoot a baby duck with a shotgun, just after its mother has gone off to get food. And if physics was blasted out of the water, in the described fashion, then just think of the consequences! You would never be able to become a ninja, your head might just asplode and people would be confused as to which way was in and which way was out". You must remember, going off on random and unrelated tangents can be funny, if you do it right. A user called Cajek does that particularly well.

In short: This is quite funny, it's very short, but I reckon you could get rid of the "has to" bit so it's: "There's a way in and a way out". This would work even better if you'd written more for the other sections so there's a big contrast between the long, complex explanation and the "in short" explanation. This definitely did illicit a smirk, and I liked the idea of having an "in short" section.

Finally: You're getting there. But you need to work feverishly over this, you need to toil away at work, at school, at home, at wherever. You need to find out what makes funny and then you need to apply that to your article. If all those little mistakes are cleared up it'll be easier to actually get to the humour, which is important. Overall the humour of this article is not really up to the standard of a good Uncyclopedia article, but that isn't to say that's how it should stay. Fix it, because the concept is OK, so you can definitely get a decent article here, maybe even an article which is very good, which would be impressive for your first stab at Uncyclopedia writing. Now the scoring: this ins't quite average, it's a little below, I'm afraid, but I didn't want to give you just a five, so I gave you the rather odd score of 5.6. Normally I try to stay away from fractions, but I felt that 5 and even 5.5 was too low, but 6 would be a little high, so I went for 5.6.

Concept: 7 The concept is distinctly average: it's a weird and wacky (sorry that word sort of slipped out - no I don't like it either) idea. In less I've missed something this idea is an invention of your own. Right? Or have I just made myself sound stupid? Anyway, the concept itself isn't dazzling, which means the humour is very important. As I often find myself repeating actual humour writing is less important in articles with amazing concepts (e.g. AAAAAA! has no humour writing in it, what so ever, but is still very funny because of the concept). There's little here to say about your concept, it's decent and average, nothing more, nothing less and with better humour, a little more formatting and a few pictures this concept could be the concept of a good first article. I reckon though there's a lot more you could do with this idea: you could add lots of mock science/physics bits and make the way in seem like a very important thing, that is the pillar holding up the world as we know it, including our society and our universe. You could even write a fake equation for the way in. For example, using the <math> tags: Failed to parse (lexing error): W = D/P ÷ E
where W = Way in, D = door, P = place and E = existence. That's just a quick example, I'm sure you could do better than that. You should have a think about all of this. I'm sure there are other ways you could expand on the concept, as well, you just need to give it a think.
Prose and formatting: 6 Your article is divided up into three blocks of text and one sentence. I come to the page and although it's just a short article I am imeaditely worried by the fact that you have these three blocks of text. You need to split it up and generally vary the formatting - if you don't know how to then feel free to drop by my userpage and ask for formatting help. Also you only have three titled sections! You need to add more, and to use one of my favourite phrases "flesh it out". And another point: your article has 7 links, three of which are red (that's just under half your links) - I would generally try to avoid these "red links" as much as possible. The main thing you need to do with formatting is to vary it, though. The style seems to be a fairly normal encyclopaedian one, which is kept up throughout. "so when people are saying. Hey, where's the way in. " - This could be done a bit nicer, like so: so when people are saying: "Hey, where's the way in?", otherwise it could be a bit confusing to the reader. This is really hard for the reader to read, though, and not very attractive: "What's being considered the way in is this, if there's no entrance in the front of the building. Then there has to be an entrance in the front of the building, what could be considered the answer to the way in is this. "Hey Joe, I'm looking for the way in." ". I really don't understand what you mean and again you've done the speech thingy not very well - it should be in italics at the very least. This particular quote would look much nicer if it were formatted like so: "considered the answer to the way in is this: ' Hey Joe, I'm looking for the way in. ' " See what I mean? Much nicer like that.
Images: 0 Well I can't really give you any other score, there are no images. Every article, and I mean, every article needs image(s). This article could do, possibly, with a picture of the "way in" and maybe some over complex diagram explaining the way in. I guess you would need that diagram to be photoshopped so you would need to ask for it on this page. In fact if you ever want any sort of picture made/edited for you, that's the place to go, just don't expect a response immediately.
Miscellaneous: 4.7 Averaged all other scores.
Final Score: 23.3 My scoring has been quite harsh, so I'm sorry, but I'm hoping it will motivate you to go back and make the changes I've suggested (and anymore that you can think of). There's lots of little mistakes that make it frustrating to read. You're getting close to having a decent article here, you just need to work a bit more. First you should read it through a couple of times and correct all the sentences that don't make sense. Then you need to read this and try and apply some of the techniques from that to your piece of work. You need to just funny it up a bit. Apart from reading that you can also browse the web for standard jokes and see if you can apply them in some way to your article. Also you should have a look at the very best of Uncyclopedia and see what makes those articles so funny. Your article isn't actually awful, it just needs a lot of work. Apart from funny-ing it up you need to improve the general formatting of the article, with more sections, and italics for when someone's speaking etc. And very importantly, you need to find pictures! Oh and one final thought: you should place the {{construction}} tag on your article somewhere to let people know that your article is still being worked on. You can do this by putting {{construction}} at the top or bottom of the page. Good luck, and feel free to drop by my talk page to ask for help. Oh and congratulations on writing a first article that hasn't been instantly huffed or ICU-ed (which is what happens to a lot of new users).
Reviewer: - 02:22 28 AprilSir FSt. (QotF BFF NotM) YTTETalk!Read!Sign!Whore!CMC!Pee!
Personal tools