Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Awful comedian demands third Bush term

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 20:42, September 10, 2009 by Why do I need to provide this? (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit UnNews:Awful comedian demands third Bush term

-- overwrought Ape (ejaculate) (Riot Porn) 23:50, September 7, 2009 (UTC)

If you don't mind waiting several hours, I can do this. ("Several hours" may well mean right under the 24-hour deadline. If someone wants to review this first, go for it.) WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 17:42, September 9, 2009 (UTC)
I would do it, but seeing that you're just a little tot (and I vandalized your page), I'll let you go first. Though I'm only a few months older than you. Eight, probably?                zh              07:59 September 10
Maybe. I'm working on the review now. Sorry I'm a little bit late, but I didn't drink enough and my bladder was empty. Feel free to add your own comments. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 18:30, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Humour: 8 First off you might want to know that even though I'm new here, I've edited several wikis and also think I'm an expert on politics, even though I'm not. Second, I admit, I have something of a bias (I literally cheered when Dubya left office). Third, this article already appeared in UnNews on the front page, so some admin thought it was good. But I'm a noob, and we know more than some old fuddy admins.

But I found it funny anyway.

Some things I like: Leary trying to be funny and failing: "...almost any sentence containing the words "Bush" and "idiot" was considered satire" (true), "Leary laughed hollowly," "...the aging comedian added in a funny voice, his eyes pleading with me to laugh at the South Park reference." (nice).

'"Would you like to see my Obama impression?" at which point he began beating his chest like a gorilla and making monkey noises, before shouting "Imma do 'some healthcare reform biatches!" ' This has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever read that actually works. You reference the "black-people-look-like-monkeys" controversy and bring in a political reference in a way that's really, really awful. But you make it work. Very good.

'...comedians who "are tired of waiting for Obama to do something stupid."' Love it. (Again, partially my political bias). 'However, the Attorney General issued a statement saying that the proposal was "definitely unconstitutional". / Responding to this, Leary said: "That never stopped Bush before. Hahahahahahahaha." ' Again, love it, but am showing my bias.

My main criticism is that this article is extremely biased, and Bush supporters will likely not find it funny at all. I prefer more subtle satire, and have a suggestion below. If it wasn't as biased as it is, I probably would have given humor a 9. And if it was biased in a way I disagreed with, I probably would have given humor a 6 or a 5. A more minor criticism which is relatively small is that this is a one-joke article. But it's also a relatively small article, so maybe that works.

All in all, funny.

Concept: 9 Nice concept. I remember a comedian who looked like a president saying the end of that president's term was the end of his career. Poor Dana Carvey's career dropped after the people he was known for impersonating disappeared from the news, plus NBC said they owned some of his best Saturday Night Live characters and wouldn't let him use them, #$#%")#$!
Prose and formatting: 8 Overall I really like your prose. I think formatting is something that's better if it's not noticed. And this article is short enough that I don't think formatting's much of an issue.

I do have some suggestions. As it's already been UnNewsed, it's probably too late for this, but I don't care for the title. "Awful" just doesn't sound like a news article. I would prefer "Struggling comedian demands third Bush term." Also I find your first sentence a little long. Newspapers generally regard any sentence longer than 25 words to be too long, and this comes in at about 39 (the exact number depends on how you count hypenated words). Especially being a first sentence, I think it could be shortened or split into two sentences. The first sentence also makes it unclear if it's Leary or Bush who has a flagging comedy career. Maybe that's on purpose, but it might be lost in the long sentence.

Also this article is definitely biased. You might want to a quote from someone who supports Bush who thinks Bush was not funny.

Some minor nitpicky points. In "Bush made it so easy to get a laugh. I mean, until recently, almost any sentence containing the words "Bush" and "idiot" was considered satire," you have " " within " ". This should be either " ' ' " (American) or ' " " ' (British). Same thing applies to "You wouldn't catch Obama saying something like "Most of our imports come from overseas." and it will cost ordinary American comedians like me our jobs," and also to the Obama as a monkey impersonation part. Also "definitely unconstitutional". has the period outside the quotation marks, whereas most of this has them inside (again American vs. British usage). Fix these, and I'd give you a 9 (sorry, as of this moment, I'm not giving anybody 10s.)

Images: 7.5 I think the pic's OK, but I think one of Bush looking funny would be better. On the caption, I think it would be better if you attributed it, probably to Leary.
Miscellaneous: 8.5 It's a number.
Final Score: 41 I really like this article, but again, a Bush-supporter might not find it funny at all. I generally prefer satire that's a little less biased, but in this case I'm extremely biased. If I was biased in the other direction, I might have given this a significantly lower score. But I like it, I does. I don't know if Uncyclopedia usually features articles this short, but let me know if you make some changes. I would nom it right now for VFG, but will wait in case you want to make changes. Whatever you decide to do with it, please post on my talk page!
Reviewer: WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 19:27, September 10, 2009 (UTC)


Dude, thanks for the review. I think you missed the point though. The article is supposed to be satirising lazy comedians who all did the same shitty Bush material. Its not really biased against Bush at all. Also, any UnNews can make the front page if the author chooses to put it there. -- overwrought Ape (ejaculate) (Riot Porn) 20:32, September 10, 2009 (UTC)

You're certainly welcome; I was glad to review it. But you might want to say, "I think you missed the point that I wanted the reader to get." But I did get that point, and still think if I was a Bush supporter I wouldn't find this funny. I'm not, and really liked it. I look forward to seeing more of your writing in the future! WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 20:42, September 10, 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects