Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Andorin Kato/Anal sex
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
So there was this one time, when I saw that the existing anal sex article sucked, and I thought to myself "Hey! I can improve that!" So over the course of time (mostly in the past few days), said improvement took shape, and I think it's just about ready for review. I don't think it's quite 100% done, so suggestions are, rather obviously, welcome. As is criticism and as are cookies. -- 19:23, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm in here, but not in that way. Give me 24 hours to stop feeling awkward about it. -- 10:08, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
|Humour:||8||Right, I enjoyed this article far more than I anticipated that I would, mostly because I was expecting a series of NSFW images and a large amount of profanity, and I am exceptionally gratified that you have taken a different approach with this one. I thought that your article is very strong as far as humour goes but I do feel that there is something missing from it and that it might be worth taking a look at a couple of parts again. The first thing that struck me on completing your article was that you shied away from including any reference to anal sex between gay couples, while this makes your article one of the only ones on Uncyclopedia that fails to reference sex between men at all I feel that by failing to include it in your article you are missing a key point of expansion. Permit me to expand, if we are classifying anal sex within your article as a good idea for obsessive compulsives, how do gay people fit into this? My feeling was that you should try to include them in what you are saying elsewhere, you could try classifying gay people as a particular group of obsessive compulsives who have decided that women are just too unclean, what with their monthly bleeding and various other secretions. I feel there is some potential here, and I think you could take advantage of it. I'm not saying add in an entire extra section entitled "How gays fit in" (ha ha), you could add it very subtly so it does not disrupt the generally pleasing tone of your article, just a couple of sentences would encourage a reader to keep that idea in mind while reading the rest of your article. It is surprising how simply including a bit of extra information on a topic can improve the impact of jokes later in the article and thus I would encourage you to try and incorporate this idea in.
The other thing that struck me was the manner in which you look at the OCD idea, I really like the idea in general but I found that you don't develop a the joke as far as I would have liked; to expand you spend very little time looking at the experience of an actual OCD sufferer, I felt that the way you had built up the joke meant it was practically begging for a section that expanded on this: "Hardcore practitioners of anal sex find cleanliness to be a turn-on and dream of sexual intercourse in decontamination suits while immersed in a vat of Lysol." While I didn't anticipate an exact recreation of this idea I was rather hoping that the section "Characteristics of Anal Sex" would contain a bit more on this idea. What I mean is that you could explain how foreplay works, perhaps a bit of housework and grape counting before counting down the seconds to midnight. As above this is just a suggestion but I think that because understanding of the OCD aspect of the article is so critical to the article generally that you can add more jokes on this idea.
I hope you understand that I feel that what you have written so far is excellent, but that you aren't taking it to the full extent that I thought it could be. As I read your article I thought the jokes were excellent and that the concept was clever, but it felt like something was missing generally and I've tried to sum this up with my comments in this section, there is more you can do here and I hope you consider the suggestions I have made.
|Concept:||9||I love the concept you have gone with here, it is inventive and amusing generally. The only cause for concern I had is with regard to your tone. You generally stick to the encyclopaedic tone throughout but at times you do lapse and use a colloquialism to make a point rather than staying with the tone, something like "the man's sperm are so traumatized by his relentlessly picky nature that they themselves cannot get it up and fertilize the woman's egg" Small incidents like this break the tone of the article and while they don't cause major issues they do make the article seem less professional than it would otherwise. My recommendation is that you try and stick to quoting the colloquialisms as you do here: "The term is derived from the English words "anal", meaning "obsessive attention to detail", and "sex", meaning "hard fucking"."|
|Prose and formatting:||8||Your spelling and grammar is of a good standard and I found it hard to find any particular errors. I would recommend a careful proofread before you do anything else with this though, as it would be a shame for any errors that may have slipped through to ruin the article for any grammar Nazi's. My main complaint here is that your images are pretty small, especially the second two, and while it is easy enough to discern what is going on in the images it may be beneficial to make them a bit larger so that the contents are immediately attainable. Increasing the image size would also combat one of my other pet hates, that of huge captions under relatively small images. So that's basically what I would recommend, bigger images. Besides that the only thing I wasn't keen on was the wikipedia template down at the bottom where it doesn't seem to fit so well, I leave a decision on that up to you.|
|Images:||8||As I said above the images just need to be increased in size. My only comment beyond that is that you should consider a fourth image if you make any additions that lengthen the article, once again I will leave a decision on that up to you. I apologise that this section is a little thin on the ground, but your images are good and imaginatively used. If I were being very picky I would say that you could relate the first image to the text a little more, but this isn't totally necessary.|
|Miscellaneous:||9||My overall grade of the article.|
|Final Score:||42||A superb piece of work that I have endeavoured to tear to pieces in this review, the article is very much defined mostly by what it has left out rather than what is already written. As I keep repeating like a scratched record, you have a great deal of potential just waiting to be exploited and I would urge you to consider doing so. If you have any questions or comments for me then you can leave them on my talk page or give me a shout in IRC. Well done and good luck making any changes.|
|Reviewer:||--12:05, July 31, 2010 (UTC)|