Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Uncyclopedia:Imperial Colonization/Discordianism
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Please ignore the READ THIS FIRST section; the article starts at the heading Discordianism. Also the wikipedia link will link to their article Discordianism when this is moved to main space.
Any member of IC is free to review this article if you didn't help write it. But if a non-member wants to do it that's great too.
- Hey, since I just did grammar and stuff on it, can I review this? It'll make me feel less useless. (Note:It'll probably be more than 24 hours, as I am lazy/busy)--Sir ~HELPME~ Count! Awards! Pee! Help! 05:38, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't see a problem with that. Go for it. Be brutal. Use your whips and chains. WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 05:46, April 18, 2010 (UTC)
- I did warn you it would take longer than 24 hours. My computer crashed, but I will have it done by the end of today (American time)--Sir ~HELPME~ Count! Awards! Pee! Help! 16:59, April 19, 2010 (UTC)
- Anyone can do this, some circumstances I don't wish to talk about got in the way. I'll try to do it, but anyone can.--Sir ~HELPME~ Count! Awards! Pee! Help! 01:04, April 20, 2010 (UTC)
The Chief Justice of Uncy has agreed to do it. Court will be in session tomorrow. All rise for the honorable Chief Justice. Thanks chief, should be an interesting review. Aleister in Chains 16:15 4 20!!! MMX
- You mean ChiefjusticeDS? Well, I was kind of hoping for someone who had experience doing Pee Reviews, but I guess he'll do. (Seriously, looking forward to it). WHY???PuppyOnTheRadio 21:41, April 20, 2010 (UTC)
- Bangs Gavel The case of Imperial Colonization/Discordianism VS. HTBFANJS will now be heard, ChiefjusticeDS presiding. Court will be in session for a few hours. -- 13:45, April 21, 2010 (UTC)
|Humour:||7||Right, I was slightly hesitant when I was asked to break my Pee hiatus with this one, partly because I was enjoying doing no work, but also because I am relatively unfamiliar with Discordianism, but I can still take a fair whack at it, at least as an outsider. The article is generally enjoyable even for the uninitiated, there is a reasonably good frequency of readily accessible jokes in the article and the general thrust of the article is amusing enough. There are however a couple of issues here that I would recommend you take a second look at before proceeding any further. The first thing that I noticed about the article is that it starts exceptionally quickly and throws the reader straight in and not in the most accessible terms, personally I had read the wikipedia article and still had to read your introductory paragraph several times before I was satisfied I understood it. Permit me to expand, you start off by saying "You may know me better by my other name, Wendy Moira Angela Darling, or Wendy M.A.D. You know, Peter Pan's friend Wendy who pretended to be both his mother and wife so she could "get romantic" with him?" I was lost by this point on my first read through, I did eventually get what you were trying to do but only after a bit of thought, now this may be because I am a hopeless mental defective, but it may also be that your article tends to assume you are already on board when it gets going. I'm not going to criticise the article hugely on that score but I felt a little explanation would be invaluable for those who are unfamiliar with what you are getting at, I'm not suggesting you devote an entire paragraph to explaining the ins and outs of Discordianism or indeed all your jokes, but rather you look at a way to make your article stand on its own in parts without needing to be propped up by other articles on related subjects. If you consider an article like this one everything is explained within the article itself and it would remain enjoyable even if you removed all the links; one of the main problems I felt with yours in general was the extent to which it, in some cases, relies on other articles to explain it. My recommendation would be that you take a second look through the whole thing as if you had not written it, or better still get someone who didn't and find instances of confusion and then come up with a way to explain what is going on, this problem is limited to a few instances throughout the article, it is by no means a major problem but certainly one you may want to rectify.
The second issue I noticed was the speed with which your narrative moves at times makes it very difficult to pick everything up on a first look, this is a problem especially when you explain things in this manner. Take a look at this part of your article "But he brainwashed a lot of people by constantly repeating the sentence, "Look at all the order around you" while ignoring all the disorder. Kind of like you did with your mother when she told you to clean your room." There is nothing wrong with the joke or the general information you are imparting but some slowing down may be helpful, something like "Greyface didn't enjoy being merry, and so he brainwashed people by constantly chanting "Look at all the order around you" at them while ignoring any and all of the disorder in the world, I came to refer to this as the librarian strategy" Now while what I have written there may not be at the apex of humour I hope the point is made. In the first one the narrative moves quickly and I feel that while this approach is fine sometimes, if you use it excessively you will find that you begin to lose the humour potential of some of your jokes, if you look at the second you will find that the text is more drawn out and while it still retains the tone of the first it makes things a bit more obvious to the reader and keeps things relatively amusing at the same time. I hope this is clear enough, oh also I'm not just picking on this joke it is a more general problem too.
Despite my moaning the humour is enjoyable and I laughed a few times, the article has an exceptionally good and well executed self-deprecating style which is subtle enough that it doesn't get in the way of the general drive of the article but overt enough that it is easily appreciable. A bit more of a focus on the way things are written and on adding and taking information in the correct places and circumstances is needed to pull the score higher on this one.
|Concept:||7||The concept is good and you have done a good job of including a lot of situations and still keeping things feeling new towards the end. Your tone is what comes upon the problems here, the tone in each individual section is good but the overall characterisation falls a bit flat. What I mean when I say overall characterisation is that the early parts of your article contain a lot of lines that reference the character of the narrator, and these appear to go missing as the article moves on. The lines I refer to in the first half of the article are things like " Everything started twirling and rising and flying and turning inside out and shooting all over the place. Some of my clients like that, too." These lines give the reader an insight into the character from your article and my feeling was that when the article finished the reader still doesn't know much about the character or at least doesn't have much of an insight into their thought process. What I would recommend is that you try including parts that refer to what the character thinks, possibly between the groups she visits, just explaining what the character thought of that group. If that idea does not appeal then it can be implemented more subtly in a similar form to the one I quoted above, just a comment that relates something back to the character. The main reason that I say this is that you attach some importance to the character at the start of the article and it seems to fade away in the middle.
The only other thing I would recommend you do is that you ensure the character remains consistent unless a reason for a change arises, so try and keep the tone as consistent as you can. This isn't much of a problem but there are a couple of minor blips that you should have a look for.
|Prose and formatting:||9||Your prose are pretty good a couple of errors in spelling and grammar are present but nothing to get particularly worked up about. My recommendation would be to read through carefully and make sure there are no problems, be sure to check your image captions too. As far as formatting goes I understand that you are trying to fit your images into suitable sections but make every effort not to stack them directly on top of one another; my personal feeling is that it makes the article look quite untidy. That is about all I have to say on this one, you have done well considering the number of images you have.|
|Images:||9||Not too much to say here either, the images are good and the captions are appropriate. In a few cases you would be better to try and bind them a bit closer to the text, in a couple of cases the only link is the name of the subject in the image, try and have your images compliment the text as much as you can, this often means your jokes have far more impact on a reader. Beyond that not much to say, you have done a good job here.|
|Miscellaneous:||8||My overall grade of the article.|
|Final Score:||40||A good piece of work that does a lot of things right, but there is potential for this one to be better. My advice is that you take a look at the issues I have indicated and decide what are problems for yourselves, a review is just my opinion after all. Generally I enjoyed reading this one, the jokes are good and once you understand what they are getting at the article is superb. Remember to try and make the article stand a bit more on its own, especially early on. If you have any questions or comments for me then feel free to ask them on my talk page where I will be happy to answer them for you. Good luck making any changes.|
|Reviewer:||--15:35, April 21, 2010 (UTC)|