Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Uncyclopedia to be preserved in the Library of Congress

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit UnNews:Uncyclopedia to be preserved in the Library of Congress

First UnNews I've written-which seems to have gained some attention, but I'd still like some feedback from someone else on what I can improve. Murder Frog I use the scissors. 23:19, November 27, 2012 (UTC)

Concept: 5 This article, since it mentions Uncyclopedia, falls into the category of inside joke, or, at best meta humor. Is this based on a real news article about the Library of Congress preserving an internet website. If so, it should list links in the sources. The sources not only make the article look like legitimate news, but give links in case the reader is unaware of what is being parodied. Since you are using {{original}} in your article, I will assume that his article is based on nothing.

As a general rule, it is best to avoid metahumor. In unNews, there is a "Wikipedia exception." For example, is Wikipedia does XYZ, and it is a "real world" notable event, you could write a "Uncyclopedia does XYZ"

The article has a bombastic tone. All the established users know full well that Uncyclopedia is a relatively mild site compared to ED or 4chan. Jokes about Uncyclopedia being hardcore isn't funny, because we know we aren't hardcore.

Prose and Formatting: 6.5 This article is written as a standard unNews. I don't see any major problems, but I do see some small errors.

You have a red link to "D.C." I assume you slavishly followed the formatting template. The correct usage would be to use Washington, D.C. USA or Washington, D.C.. Also, Washington should not be capitalized.

You also have a lack of categories on the page. All the categories you do have were auto-generated. To find appropriate categories, go to a similar article, and look for categories that could go on your page.

The first word after a quotation mark is always capitalized.

In the last paragraph, you have the word "says." I assume this is a typo, as it is the only tense shift in the article. It should say "said," as quoting is almost always in the past tense.

Images: 6 The image is appropriate, but too small. I tried enlarging the thumbnail, but the thumbnail can be no larger than the image itself. As a rule, I would advise against enlarging thumbnails, but if an image is wide, it can look small, especially if it is the only image on the page.

Wikipedia and Wikimedia commons are good sources for images. Additionally, most of the images there are in the creative commons, which removes the off chance of DMCA takedown notice. Also, probably document any image, giving proper attribution if needed. If you do need to use "fair use claim" images, try to use images that are already spammed over the internet. If you take an image from deviantArt, the artist might have a hissyfit.

Humour: 4 The writing isn't horrible, but there is nothing particularly funny. The tone is close to good "deadpan," aka is written like a real news article, not a scattershot rambling. However, your writing style does get "choppy" in places. Here is example:
... We feel it is our responsibility as part of the government to preserve the best of this incredible database so that future generations may see how our world was shaped through time. However, it is also our duty to preserve the bad as well as the good."

The phrase "as part of the government" is too vague. It almost sounds like what a 10 year trying to sound important would write. Instead, "as the library of Congress" or "as America's library of last resort." There is a reason the Library of Congress, instead of the Coast Guard, would be preserving uncycopedia.

You also contradict yourself by calling uncyclopedia an "incredible database" but saying "it is also our duty to preserve the bad as well as the good." Self-contradiction is not funny, but only confuses the reader, or makes the article look scattershot.

I get the feeling that you are trying to in a consistent style, but aren't quite pulling it off. Maybe you weren't really trying to be consistent in tone. I really can't tell someone's writing style from an UnNews.

Improvability Score: 4 This article isn't really bad, but there isn't any potential here. Unless it is based on actual news, I would see little point in trying to fix it. My theory on metahumor is that if it doesn't almost write itself, its not funny.
Final Score: 25.5 Please direct all comments to my talk page, as my watch-list is ridiculously long. Also, you may want to delete your pee review request at the fork.
Reviewer: --Mn-z 17:06, February 12, 2013 (UTC)
Personal tools