Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Uncyclopedia Defence Squadron (resubmit)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 02:42, March 8, 2010 by Skinfan13 (talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit Uncyclopedia Defence Squadron

This article has been reviewed once already, and the review was very helpful. I'm just relisting the article because I've made all (most some) of the required changes. Cheers. Fahrenheit 18:15, March 5, 2010 (UTC)

Vmiflag ¡Hola! This valiant VMI cadet is here
to guard this article while
it is reviewed by:

-- Sf13 Upsilonsigmasigmacrest

If he hasn't reviewed it
within 24 hours since
08:57 EST 6 Mar, remove this
tag and shout at him.


Humour: 7.5 The way I review, I generally put the majority of my comments and suggestions in the humor section. This allows me to be lazy keep all of my thoughts organized. I'll give you my first impressions after one read through and then go in for a more detailed look.

Initial Impressions

Well, I don't know. This is pretty funny at parts, but some jokes seem to come completely out of left field. This also reads more like a usergroup page rather than an article, and in some respects I think it is more of a usergroup than an actual article. If this is the case, I would encourage you to make this as a page within your userspace.

More Detailed Look

This article seems more like it should be titled the "Wikipedia attack/vandal squadron" as what your article suggests users do is not defend Uncyclopedia, but vandalize wikipedia (in a way that probably shouldn't be too seriously encouraged). I think what I want to say is that what you have written is fairly funny, I just don't know how appropriate this is in terms of being an article.

At any rate, the introduction is probably the funniest part of your article. It has a good flow and tone in it and clearly states the purpose of the UDS (may I call it that?). You do, however, need to find an appropriate link for that redlink to the "cult of Jimbo" either on uncyclopedia or on wikipedia. perhaps just linking the page on jimbo wales would be a good idea, or linking jimbo's userpage on wikipedia.

The second section is ok, but you never actually state why it is that wikipedia needs to be destroyed. You have a list of "things" that Jimbo wishes to accomplish through wikipedia, and then you have a sentence on what would happen if his plans were realized, but you never actually answer the question posed by the section heading. I also find it a little ironic that your article has defense in the title and the first section poses why wikipedia should be destroyed. I find it somewhat akin to the assertion that the United States must invade Iraq in order to a future war. just a personal observation.

Third section, well, doesn't really do well since it completely shatters the fourth wall. Your article instead of describing a fictional defense squad is recruiting for it. This is where my comments from earlier come into play: if this was meant to be an actual group, transfer the page to your userspace and add it to the list of unofficial user operations and groups. if it wasn't meant to be that way, you need to make sure you aren't breaking the fourth wall in this manner since it will actually encourage people to vandalize wikipedia.

at any rate, what you've written is fairly funny, but I just don't see the purpose of the article. I think your writing talents could be used on better projects.

Concept: 4 OK, so here again I'm confused as to what the purpose of your article is. Is it an article about a fictional group? Is it an article promoting a fictional group? Is it the homepage of an actual group? I honestly don't know. At any rate, I feel as though this is an underdeveloped idea regardless of the direction intended for it. It's short, and lacks any real substance. Now don't get me wrong, like I said, it is funny, but something just isn't right.

I mostly get the feeling through that this was meant in a semi-serious way. If this is true, it needs to be moved into your userspace. It also needs to less overtly support vandalism, remember, vandalism can go both ways.

Prose and formatting: 5 Good structure and tone for the most part. You do have a significant lack of links to other articles and one of the three links you have in the article happens to be a red link. As I mentioned above, you need to make sure this redlink turns into a bluelink. In addition to that, you need to put more links into your article. There is also the length issue and the tone of the last section, but all in all the grammar and spelling appear to be good.

edit: -2 points for "Defense" being misspelled in your title

Images: 7 You have one image, its a good one, its clever, and its used all over the place on this site. I know using other people's images isn't a big deal, but I just feel that this perhaps isn't the best image to go along with what you have. perhaps there's an image you could produce yourself that better describes your group? You could also request such an image if you don't think you are capable of pulling off something you have in mind. Personally, I think including a logo for your group might be appropriate in addition to what you currently have. Also, maybe a picture of what an average member of the group looks like. at any rate, as the article is, I think there could be a better picture out there to illustrate your concept. The image you've chosen is funny though.
Miscellaneous: 2 Normally at this point I simply rate the level of enjoyment I got from reading the article, but there's just something intangible about this article that makes it seem incomplete. I really didn't get what the point of this was.
Final Score: 25.5 I think the best thing you can do with this if it's an actual group is to move it to your userspace. If that wasn't your intention, I think redoing the article to reflect an actual article about such a fictional force would be the best idea. Sorry I couldn't be of more help, but this was a challenging review in that this really isn't very long and doesn't read like a standard article. If there's anything you'd like to discuss please drop me a line.
Reviewer: --Sir Skinfan13 Talk {< CUN RotM FBotM VFH ΥΣΣ Maj. SK >} 21:39 EST 7 Mar, 2010
Personal tools
projects