Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Da man360/Channel 360
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
It's this thing I'm working on. I add stuff to it often so don't think that that's it.
HAPPY 00:39, 24 July 2009!
- Aah... my template doesn't work right for User pages - I'll fix that later... maybe...
|Prose and |
The writing style,
layout and overall
|2||What am I supposed to be giving a score for here? There is no text to speak of, unless you cycle through the options enough to get to the "Chat time with Dave" option, which to be honest I couldn't be bothered doing. The What is Sparta.gif gives me a headache and the sooner I could get away from that image the better.
So, given that there is one option out of five where there is text, I'm looking at this text. It is very hard to pluralise the word that by adding the letter s at the end. If you mean the plural of that then you need to use the word those. If you mean the conjunction of that is then you're looking for the word that's.
I'm not going to comment on uhg as a word. Twice.
Layout of text. Generally the way speech works with paragraphs is that you have a new paragraph for each person speaking. Try this as an example:
Okay, so that's fairly clear as to who spoke first... or something, and now try this.
And it all tends to run in together.
So, getting rid of the script aspect, we have a number of different videos/images that pop up as well. Different sizes, no frame, no consistency.
We have a vertical menu across the top that relates in no way to the content below.
How good an idea
is behind the article?
|2||There are two major elements to a good concept. The first is originality, and the second is recognisability. In regards to original, there is none. You've stuck a bunch of videos/images in there that you've found around the place.
I'm glad to see that you can recognise humour that you have found, but annoyed to see the lack of creation.
How funny is it?
Why is it funny?
How can it be funnier?
|3||Okay, taking aside all the issues that we've had so far, taking the text for "Chat time with Dave" and the text for the "heart attack burger" there is some humour involved here. As to the originality factor I can't tell, but I don't recognise either of these exactly as they are.
These happen to be the most promising aspects of this, and to be honest you have the kernel for a good UnScript of a talk-back radio show, complete with advertising. The problem is that these kernels of good are washed out in a sea of bland.
How are the images?
Are they relevant,
with good quality
|3||The Sparta image is a clever image, for all my complaining about the headaches it give me. It's still not original, but it's clever.
Channel_360.jpg is a waste of pixels. It looks like something that my 12 year old threw together with MS paint.
The article's overall
quality - that indefinable
|1||Originality factor. I would like to put this through as a VFD, but as it's in your user space I'm letting you work out what you're going to do with it.|
How much can it be
improved and what
are the most important
areas to work on.
|11||I've found this an extremely difficult review to complete. There is not much in here that I can look at to see if this has potential as a creative endeavour. You do have the potential to create some decent playlists through youtube, and if that's what you would like to do then I'm happy to applaud it. But it's not really an uncyclopedia page.|
|Reviewer:||Pup t 03:01, 27/07/2009|