Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Obama wins Democratic nomination, Clinton pushes forward with campaign
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
I had this reviewed a few days ago, and made the changes it suggested, and would like to get another review on the new version. ----20:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
|Humour:||6||Well you seem to have taken a lot of my previous suggestions on board, which is good. The opening paragraph you have worked on, a little bit, and is decidedly better. It's not amazing, but it's better. I see you're trying to follow my advice on her contradicting herself (going from a Jewish to a Muslim state) but "Clinton has begun laying out her plans for the creation of a larger jewish state in Israel, and the surrounding area's, and has also begun showing interest in a larger muslim state in Iran and other parts of the middle east " doesn't really work for me, though. |
I still feel, that while your article has improved, you should be satirising two things more (the things I mentioned in my last review): America's imperialism and world dominance and Clinton's stubborn refusal to bow out of the Democratic race. Apart from this there are a few suggestions I made in my last review that I feel you could have acted upon, a bit more, as well. For example there's the little idea I came up with in my last review: I presume you heard of Hillary's claim that she ran from an aircraft under sniper fire. Why not use this? Every time you mention her landing or taking off in the article you should make it under fire. At first it could be rifle fire, but throughout the article it could work up to WMD fire. E.g. Hillary ran to her plane under machine gun fire, yesterday, and landed in Iran amid shell fire. Hillary arrived at a children's hospital, later on in the day, with rocket fire blazing over her head. It's just a suggestion, and you may not like it, but the article needs some fleshing out. Also there are jokes that could be made about Obama, McCain and Bill Clinton (you can't just have a go at Hillary!).
|Concept:||8||Well the concept hasn't changed (and it shouldn't either, it's fine as it is) so you get the same score. There's not much more to expand on here, since last time. I think the concept's a great one, since it offers so many opportunities to satirise various elements of American politics. You could probably use this article to have a go at nearly everything American, but you should try and onlt satirise a select group of things. But again, nice idea which provides a good platform for (oh noes, I'm going to say it again!) satire.|
|Prose and formatting:||6.5||There's a few bits that need fixing up, here. In "as well as the dozens of superdelegate's endorsements that will ensure that she gets the nomination " just watch your apostrophes, it should go after the s, as there are more than one superdelegate. And I believe in "a larger jewish state in Israel, and the surrounding area's, and has also begun showing interest in a larger muslim state in Iran " there should be capital letters at the beginning of "jewish" and "muslim". There are a few other mistakes in your article, as well - mistakes which are annoying, rather than article-ruiningly major. Like I suggested last time, this is the sort of thing UN:PS may sort out, if they're still doing stuff.|
I also feel the writing could be a bit, er, "richer" in places and a bit smoother. The whole thing doesn't quite sound like a proper news article, yet. There are a few "newsy" phrases that really can improve the quality of an article, if used sparingly. Also things need fleshing out (as I mentioned in the humour section). You move on quite quickly from one bit to the next, you need to slow down a bit and add just a bit more to each idea...
|Images:||7.5||You've added another picture, I see, but it looks a little bit out of place, since this article is so short. If you lengthen it a bit, maybe the second picture will fit in a bit more...at the moment it looks a bit...wrong. It's good to see that you did go to the effort of uploading the second picture, though. However, in my opinion, the first image is currently the stronger one - the picture's capton is better, and it seems to fit better.|
So my picture advice: Maybe get rid of the second one, at least until you've expanded on bits of the article. If you can though, see if you can try and find a more appropriate or fitting picture - or a caption that will make the second image just a bit funnier.
|Miscellaneous:||7||Your average, sir.|
|Final Score:||35||Well you've improved it a bit, but I still don't thing you managed to get the full funny potential that this topic offers. There's a few things that need to be death with: A bit of an improvement on the writing and the grammar. Some expansion to the article, as suggested in the humour section. Also a little brushing up of the second image, would improve the image score. I've made quite a few suggestions, which you can follow (if you want...). Whether you follow my suggestions or not, there's a fair amount of work to be done, here.|
Good luck, and as I've already said: anymore help you want, you know where to find me. Nice UnNews, hope you can turn it into a great UnNews...and stuff.
|Reviewer:||- [18:33 18 June]|