Is it just me, or is Pee Review a bit dead? I can't complain, I haven't done any in a bit. Is it cause of the Conservation Week or something? I'm not being impatient, I just noticed that almost no articles are being reviewed.--Smokin'Cheddar BBQ: TheKing of theTriangularSnackfoods 01:55, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
I've had final papers to write (which is what I'm doing now). —SirGuildensternenstein 20:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
True that. I suspect it has something to do with the fact that it's spring, and people want to go outside and not waste their lives on their computers. Fucking sun. —SirGuildensternenstein 23:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
This is a good example of being serious about silly things. I love the idea of a guy with a British accent discussing thin mints and the controversy surrounding them. Your links are pretty good, too. The problem is, there aren't any laugh-out-loud moments of hilarity. It is kind of funny, but see if you can work in a few jokes while maintaining the serious context. Maybe do something else along the lines of the pedophile quote. It doesn't have to be pedophiles per say, but that was among the funniest individual moments.
Love it. You have a good, consistent style that contrasts well with its subject. Using links for your jokes is a good way to be funny while acting serious. It isn't perfect, but it is pretty good.
Prose and formatting:
As I am reading this, I can honestly envision some guy with white hair, a big mustache, a pipe, and a monocle sitting in a big stuffed velvet chair in a cashmere robe in front of a crackling fire narrating it. It's great. Your grammar is excellent, although some of the sentences don't quite stick. In the second sentence of section "Girl Scouts, I would personally change "possibly" to "perhaps" but if you really think it is better as it is, feel free to leave it like that.
Your images do need a bit of work. The first one sort of pushes the limits of vanity policy--I really don't think you should include your user name on your articles. The others aren't really that funny, either, although they do tie in well with the article. See if you can work on the laugh-out-loud hilarity, but don't ruin the context.
Averaged your scores.
It's a very well written article. It just needs needs something kind of ridiculous that is funny in the serious context. Most articles suffer from the opposite problem--they have good jokes with poor execution. This is good, and I think you can develop it into something feature-worthy.