Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Nachlader/Phrase

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit Phrase

Finally, after a month or two, I've contributed something major to Uncyclopedia. Again, it's a pun based joke, as was Golf War. My utmost aim with this article is to gain a feature, as ever.

To me, this is quite a complicated article. Because of this, I'd prefer a reviewer who is a regular PEEer and yet boasts a keen understanding of the English language. Also, please take care to read the wall of text below if you wish to review this article. I have a lot to say about this work, so I may as well help the potential reviewer. Thank you.

Anyway, before I started this article, I was troubled as to how I could pull it off. I can't think of many phrases on the spot. So while I lamented my torrid fascination with the most ambitious projects, I wrote down every phrase that washed up in my head. Soon, I had a pretty article-conjuring list that I knew I could work with. I then started on the introduction, "Usage", "How to Use Phrases", "Mixed Metaphors", "Art of Phrases" and the "Historic Phrases" sections.

Then, the more time passed, I questioned myself whether or not this article would even be funny, let alone understood by the average Uncyc user. I was still impressed with how the article got on, but in the same way that I'm proud with a finished essay; it still may not make the grade, as most of my psychology papers never get the result I was quite aiming for. I presumed that the finished article might end up like a excellent actor in a unfunny comedy; no laughs, but only applause for the make-up.

The content was one of the surprises. Given that it was hard enough thinking of different phrases, I really had to rack my brains in order to think of humour material to fill the article with, but then I found the job easier and the content kept coming. I knew that a lot of football managers and commentators usually say a lot of daft phrases and mixed metaphors, so I designated them as the 'wizards' of phrases and wisdom, but I did not want the article to lean on humour that is easily found elsewhere. To avoid this, I extended the "Art of Phrases" to make some puns on art-related phrases.

Then even more content came along. I added the "Oxymorons" section (the correct plural term is the long forgotten oxymora, but I went with what is more well known), ripening humour potential. Then "Slang" and "Phrases Stolen From Foreign Languages". The section on slang focuses on cockney slang, whilst foreign phrases is just a play on trying to sound sophisticated. I was also able to expand other areas of the article after this.

The images also came as a surprise. I knew I couldn't depend on direct image humour on an article based on words, so I went for captions instead. I found that I could still come up with as many images as possible and still have a reason why it is relevant to the article as a whole. One lesson learnt there.

The "Usage" section was difficult in which it involved a bunch of lies. Of course, almost every article is a bunch of lies, but this is the kind you see in articles that really struggle for material (e.g. "Born as the daughter to Hitler and your mum, Jenny invented penicillin and killed Jesus in 1947"). I stuck to the idea of using only phrases and made the section as least abstract as possible (for example, the name of the man is 'Sir Henry Phrase', instead of some name that will easily be lost to the reader, 'John Simmons'). I also tried to make it relate to the English language by composing a conflict between phrases and metaphors against another fragment of the English language, similes. I think I'm happier with how this section turned out, and that it is worth keeping in.

The biggest contributor to the English language is, of course, Shakespeare. So I wanted the article to end on a punchline that suggested oblivion towards the playwright and his influence. It is topped off using a phrase that he wrote "It's all Greek to me".

So those are my thoughts. If you bothered to read all this, thank you. And again, thanks in advance for the reviewer who dares to step up to the plate to show off his or her mettle. Nachlader 18:41, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Humour: 7 Its not hillarious, but it is funny, the humour works very well.
Concept: 9 The concept is original and works very well, it is a very well written article.
Prose and formatting: 10 Punctuation and grammar is perfecto, structure works well.
Images: 7 More images required, not many more though, the ones you have are funny with the captions.
Miscellaneous: 9 Average score 9 making this a very well written article, well done, have a cookie.
Final Score: 42 Its a very good article, little if anything to improve. Well done.
Reviewer: --Projectmayhem666 Talk 16:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools