Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Zombies getting fat, junk food-eating humans to blame
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
- See User_talk:HELPME#Pee_Review_Request_and_Thanks. When I feel that I'll be done within 24 hours, I'll put my template on.-- (more? --> CUN ROTM NOTM Pleb USS Pees SK ) On Friday, 10:23, June 25 2010 UTC
|Humour:||3||article contains few jokes other than the concept. people have a poor diet in modern times, so people themselves have become junk food. okay. kind of funny. that's in the first paragraph. but then where's the second joke?
second paragraph suggests that zombies have trouble protesting because people think the protest is an invasion. which i guess is reasonable. because an assembly of zombies would definitely be an invasion. after all, they're zombies. as the article says, they can't read, so how can they assemble to protest? why do they have interest in political activism? seems internally inconsistent. it's a new joke but it doesn't really work.
third paragraph contains no new joke. just explains why zombies are protesting: because peoples' diets have gotten worse. so basically it's the joke in the concept combined with a fact we already knew, that people are eating unhealthier.
fourth paragraph: zombie explains why fat zombies are a problem. why is this zombie's speech so detached and objective about zombie problems? it's like he doesn't know he's a zombie. maybe he could say something more like "LAST TIME ME GO FOR EAT BRAINS, ME NEARLY GET CRUSHED BY FIVE HUNDRED POUND LARDASS." maybe then he falls down and can't get up because he has a belly full of twinkie eating people. show don't tell.
fifth paragraph. humans are complaining that zombies are throwing up something that attracts other zombies. probably funnier if zombies made that complaint since they're the ones puking. also the whole puking up goop thing isn't very understandable. twinkies and doughnuts turn green in a zombie's stomach? zombies are attracted to zombie vomit rather than human flesh? i don't get it.
sixth paragraph. i think it says that there hasn't been a zombie supporting group since the old one formed a convention and the zombies ate them. the fact that it says conviction instead of convention made this very hard for me to read. the idea of a pro-zombie group that was eaten by zombies could be funny. but the article goes into no detail about it. just mentions it. which doesn't inspire a laugh. show don't tell.
seventh and eight paragraph. obama doesn't care about zombies. obama not responsive to national crises. that's fine. that's a valid subject for satire. but maybe include some parallels between zombie crisis and real crises. like slightly modified quotes about the bp spill. like the fact that obama waited a long time to say anything about the spill and all he's doing is announcing committees. like "i have taken solid action against this spill (zombies) by announcing the formation of a committee with senator frank and former senator daschle who will create subcommittees at a community level who are in charge of creating committees." or you could have him fire another general. or invoke prayers to god because there's nothing he can do (as he did last week regarding bp). satire works best when it mirrors reality.
ninth paragraph: zombies on diets, christian zombies. these are ideas but that's all they are. they aren't fleshed out, no pun intended. if you want to make jokes about zombies on diets, make jokes about zombies on diets, don't just announce "zombies on diets" and move on. that's a topic for jokes, not so much a joke itself. plus, we're talking about illiterate, mindless, flesh-eating zombies. they're involved in politics, religion, dieting? maybe that's the joke but it's not consistent. are they the mindless walking dead or are they just essentially middle-class cannibals? needs consistency.
tenth paragraph: worst paragraph of the article, does more to hurt it than to help it. article goes first person and drops newslike tone, full of internet memes, not funny. and "too stupid to understand this article" but not too stupid to organize political protests and go to church? no.
|Concept:||6||nothing wrong with the concept that unhealthy people = unhealthy zombies. needs more explanation of why zombies are capable of complex thought. and if they are, they might say funny things, and we'd be looking for funny quotes from zombies. i need to know more about what these zombies are really like. that's my biggest problem with the article.
also, satire of obama seems a little thrown in at the last minute. like "i need another joke what to do what to do a-ha obama!" if the concept of the article includes an inept government response to zombies then that concept should run throughout the whole article.
and the green goop puke stuff, i just don't get that at all. i don't know what the article is on about.
|Prose and formatting:||2||this article needs a proofread like nobody's business.
"they are completely satisfy"
"But recent, in modern times"
"they are complaining... that they blame the junk food companies"
"which also effect zombies who eat junk food eating people"
that's the first paragraph. there are mistakes in almost every sentence. get someone to fix this.
also maybe this isn't a prose and formatting thing but it doesn't sound much like a news article. news articles usually have much shorter paragraphs with many more quotes. and the quotes go in their own paragraph. and news articles don't usually editorialize by saying obama is saying something "rather sarcastically." and you can get that point across with the quote itself, not by making the fake-journalist seem like a non-journalist.
|Images:||7||i really don't like the fat zombie because it looks like it's from a video game and it takes me out of the realism of the article. the political zombie protest looks great. this article is short enough that it probably only needs one picture. lose the fat zombie, i think. or reverse the pictures. or find a picture of a fat zombie that looks like a real photograph. or other things. you have options.|
|Miscellaneous:||4||i dont understand what this category is for. also sorry for getting you banned for not pee reviewing my article. i didnt mean to do that. i thought since there were 2 other articles i wrote, it didnt matter if one of them sat in limbo for a day or two. but i guess they banned you. thats why i didn't put a template on this page. and also because i don't know how to make templates.|
|Final Score:||22||needs work but not a lost cause.|
|Reviewer:||Horace Donald Westenchester 19:32, June 27, 2010 (UTC)|
|Humour:||5||Well, it wasn't all that funny. I'm going to do this review in MDL's "note" style.
|Concept:||6||God, I hate this section.
Interesting and original enough concept, but the execution needs work. See everywhere else.
|Prose and formatting:||5.35||There were quite a few problems. You are getting better in this aspect, at least.
|Images:||6||Overall, they were kind of mediocre. Some analysis on why:
Now, an image-by-image:
|Final Score:||27.75||This needs some help, but I think you can do it. Also, I hope this wasn't just a repeat of the first review.|
|Reviewer:||-- (more? --> CUN ROTM NOTM Pleb USS Pees SK ) On Monday, 04:51, June 28 2010 UTC|