Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Local man rescues dozens from vampire peacock
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
I'm a bit of a Noob, but I'm pretty good at editing. If you don't mind, I'll give it a go. If you do... oh well, I'll do it anyway. [[The Woodburninator 18:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)]]
- DAMN! Nice, complete review, Woody! ...damn! • <19:17, 22 Jun 2008>
- Well what were you expecting? Some sort of n00bish stab at it that included only 3 word responses to everything? I think not, sir, and your doubts in me shall get you nothing more then a strong fist shaking in your direction. MMph (shakes fist) The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 20:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
|Humour:||3||I'm really trying to understand what made you choose some of your humor. I think the article you chose is great, and could really lend itself to having a very funny article written (see concept). The main problem I think I'm having right now is why you chose to focus on the Burger King aspect of the article. If the original article had been obviously advertising BK, this wouldn't be such a big deal, but it only mentioned it in passing. All of the BK advertising is not really all that humorous, and I really think you should spend more time in the article focusing on other things.
An idea I had was to make it painfully obvious to the reader that the peacock was just a peacock, but have everyone in the article convinced it was a vampire. Sticking with the peacock actually being a vampire isn't a horrible idea though. I would just focus more on the peacock, and the man who beat the hell out of it. The line
""chose to forgo the traditional methods of vampire defense, resorting to punching and kicking every part of the demon-bird that he could" " I ended up enjoying. If you can keep it, and it fits in the article, I would.
Also, I'm not sure why you chose the James Woods reference. I know that he was in the movie "Vampires", but I don't think the movie was good enough, bad enough, or popular enough for many people to get that joke. Also, I think the Baldwin thing might be a little played out. I've probably heard that joke a few hundred times by late night hosts. In all honesty, I would scrap this section. I think the idea of some random guy beating the hell out of a peacock, or vampire-peacock much funnier than James Woods coming to the scene. One thing that did get me to thinking in this section, however, was when you mentioned that the vampire was just disguised as a peacock, and it wasn't just a vampire-peacock. If this is the case, you could have someone pick up the vampire after the man beats the hell out of him, and get an interview with the vampire. What led him to use this disguise, and how he feels following his severe beating.
|Concept:||8||I like the idea you have, and the article you found, and referenced. It really could make for a particularly amusing article. Just work on some of the things I wrote earlier, and I believe you could have a good one on your hands.|
|Prose and formatting:||5||I don't have too many issues with your prose for the article here, until that last paragraph. I would forgo the parentheses, and just stick with yourself as a straight-man to the rest of the stuff that is happening. Other then that, you sound pretty newsy, if that's a word, which is good in this article. The reporter just reporting this like a normal thing I think is great. One thing I think you have a chance to do here is strike a contrast between yourself as the reporter, and the people you "interview". Really try and make the other people the funny ones, in whichever way this article goes. Also, check your commas. I noticed it got a little sketchy in a few places. I think it might help to put the whole article in a word processor like Microsoft Word, and see if there are any spelling, or grammatical errors. If you get rid of some of that last paragraph, as I already mentioned, this score would come way up for me.|
|Images:||6||I don't hate the image of the peacock you have here. You've made the red-eyes convincing, and it really stands out. The only problem I have with it, are the fangs. They look a little pasted on, and they aren't noticeable. It took me a few looks at the picture to see them, and I don't think you want that. Minimum, I would say at least make them a little bigger. There isn't really much to say about the James Woods picture. Its not bad, not great.|
|Miscellaneous:||5.5||I just averaged the scores.|
|Final Score:||27.5||I think that this article has promise, however, I think you need to re-write most of it. The idea is there. Your writing style for the news article, minus that last paragraph, is there too. I think if you can take the promising stuff, get rid of the stuff that isn't working, and focus on what made you choose this particular article that you referenced, you could have a winner. I'm hoping to see that you make some changes to this article. It could be good. Hope this helps you. If you want me to clear anything up, or tell me I'm an idiot, please do. I see you already found my talk page, just ask me there. Happy Writing.|
|Reviewer:||The Woodburninator (woodtalk) (woodstalk) 19:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)|