From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
I've been working on this a bit (was supposed to be for the Conservation Week, oh well...). Now I've gotten a co-worker for it, and before we finish it up, we want to get a review to get some advice. So, no, it's not finished yet, but advice would be appreciated. It's Magically Fucking Delicious!!! 22:19,19January,2010
I'll do this one. --ChiefjusticeDS 15:11, January 21, 2010 (UTC)
|Humour:||7||Right, the humour in this one didn't grab me straight away, but upon completing it I felt it did have a certain appeal about it. That said there are a couple of things I recommend you work at. The first thing I noticed was that the humour doesn't really seem to follow a structure, you mention an event and then you talk about it, the only thing that seems to bind the events bar the fact they are on the same topic is the chronology they follow. When I saw the images I assumed that the article would be structured so that events in history that are famous for their racist nature would be turned on their heads. The way that you have done it is fine, it just seems to lack direction which makes the jokes seem like separate entities, I am not simply referring to the "The spread of Racism" section, but the article as a whole could do with something other than chronology to drive it. My recommendation would be that you try something similar to what I suggested above, for example in the part about the spread of racism you could try mentioning World War 2 and saying something like "Adolf Hitler is generally seen as the face of racism, indeed during his time as German fuhrer he had hundreds of German Shepherds gassed as he deemed them unsuitable to inhabit the same country as the master race, Hitler's violent regime was brought to an end in 1945, when, surrounded by Russian forces, he poisoned himself and shot his two pet Jews." Now, that is not the funniest thing I have ever written but I hope it demonstrates the point I was trying to make, if you did something like that and applied it to other situations you will certainly achieve more continuity with the article. Doing this would also eliminate the need to create a completely new storyline for the article; I'm not suggesting that you go back and simply change things to incorporate what I think, what I think you would be best doing is experimenting to see what you think works with what you intended for the article. I did notice that you seemed to be trying something similar to this throughout the article, if this was the impression you were hoping to achieve then try to just be a bit more blatant with it.
The other thing I noticed was that your humour seems a bit strained in certain parts, I have always felt that articles like this are much better if they are believable in their own context. I thought that you did well at this for a lot of the article, but at times it feels strained and some suggestions seem weaker, ideas such as the origin of the idea of racism seemed quite weak, especially compared to others in your article, parts like that encouraged me to, rather than buy into the world you had created, dismiss it as fiction. Others may appreciate it more than me but I think that you should consider rethinking such ideas, if only to make them slightly easier to believe. Another instance is when you refer to "notable racist Adolf "The Colonel" Kentucky" the idea behind the joke is good but in the context of the article I think you could make it a bit more believable.
Besides that the humour is good and you are definitely on the right lines with it, just take a little bit more time with it and work at your context a bit more, you definitely have the ability to make the jokes that go with it, and I would encourage experimentation with the way to make the jokes have the most impact.
|Concept:||6||The idea is OK, but your tone is where the article is falling down. If you are going to write in the encyclopaedic style then you need to write from a point of view that is neutral. Impartiality should always be the goal of this tone, but you need to employ it carefully on Uncyclopedia, neutrality is less important than the appearance of neutrality. To e consider this article, note how the author clearly puts across the point that the metro in Amsterdam is crap but does not actually express it. You are in a similar position with your article, but you have a choice, you can either imply that Racism is a bad thing or you can be completely neutral throughout. Things to avoid when using the encyclopaedic are phrases like "is the horrible act" or "for the harsh actions". I won't belabour this point any longer since you are more than intelligent enough to know what to do yourself, so I will leave you to it.|
|Prose and formatting:||6||You are doing OK here, I realise the article is unfinished so I won't bang on about the length. The spelling and grammar that you have at the moment is OK, there are a few errors, and I would recommend that you do some proofreading when making further edits to it to make sure all the errors are sorted out. Otherwise my only comments are with regard to the image formatting make sure that two images aren't squeezing the text into a narrow corridor, I personally feel that you could space the images out a bit more, again, you may be intending to rectify this, I only mention it now so you know when you decide to finish the article. The incomplete nature of the article does make it very difficult to score on this one, which is why you have a 6 for this one.|
|Images:||7||Your images are pretty good too, I would, however, like to see the image captions develop a bit more so that they can exist with the article rather than being completely separate jokes, your final image is a good example, try to relate to all your images with the text, I find it adds something to the humour. Again it is quite hard to recommend here as I am unsure whether you are going to include more jokes, so I will just leave you with that recommendation.|
|Miscellaneous:||6||My overall grade of the article.|
|Final Score:||32||The humour in your article suggests ability to me and it encourages me of the potential of the article. I am confident that you can work at this in a way that will pay dividends. Just try to sort the tone and consider some different approaches for the humour and you will be well on your way to making this excellent. If you have any questions or comments then leave me a message on my talk page or ask me on IRC. Good luck making any changes.|
|Reviewer:||--ChiefjusticeDS 20:19, January 21, 2010 (UTC)|