Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:911 conspiracies explained by a sandwich
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
This is maybe an interesting page for VFH at some point, so pleeeassseee help it to it's final glory. Thanks! And a dippity doodle to ya. Aleister 19:23 15-9-'11
- Love the title, I'll give this final-gloryising a shot then. - 01:46, September 16, 2011 (UTC)
|Humour:||8||I think this article is very funny, and a nice original take on 9/11 humor. The guy goes slightly more bonkers as the article progresses, Anderson Cooper is agreeing with him, and when it gets toward the end with the explanation for why Bush reacted the way he did, that was hilarious. If there's anything I'd suggest changing to get it to VFH status (quite honestly it could probably hold its own on there as is), then what it comes down to is some shaky areas in the delivery. Particularly, the bit with Tom Brokaw kind of throws off the tone of the article, which is already taking liberties slightly with the UnNews format, and cutting that part out could also probably get the article down to a nicer length. Essentially Brokaw is just restating what we, the reader already know anyway.
The foaming and going crazy part at the end is a little cliche, but it can probably still stay. Maybe it would sound better with different wording, but it just feels a little off to me. Nothing stopping a feature, it could probably just use a tweaking. After combing the article several times, these are the only two humorous things I really have to comment on. The rest is pretty well glowing in the funny department.
|Concept:||8||As I said, very original concept for a tired old topic. It does what a few other articles tried to do in making fun of the conspiracy theories/theorists without inadvertently turning into just some rambling preaching about them. Instead it always teeters on the verge of being a commentary before becoming silly and humorous again. In that aspect, it's also as well-executed as it is a good idea in the first place.|
|Prose and formatting:||7||This is the area where I think a deal of improvement will really make the difference on a VFH vote. For the most part, the prose in the article is fine, in that I can understand it, and it's mostly grammatical. However, there are a number of parts where the narration is slightly hampered by either the way things are worded, or the occasional botched sentence. These include:
Those things and rephrasing the things I said in the humor section, and that should be about it, I think.
|Images:||7||The images are just fine, and their captions are funny, they fit the article well, etc.|
|Miscellaneous:||7.5||Other scores averaged together.|
|Final Score:||37.5||As I said, if you just take care of the things I've mentioned, this should be feature-worthy. It's already right on the edge, but the prose keeps it from being a unanimous thing, I think.|
|Reviewer:||22:30, September 16, 2011 (UTC)|