Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:SysRq/Charles Lindbergh

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 05:42, April 27, 2011 by Fnoodle (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit User:SysRq/Charles Lindbergh

Checkit my super sweet Charles Lindbergh rewrite. Think it's ready for the mainspace? Want to see me eat this entire bucket of assorted sea critters? YOU decide! =D ~Minitrue Sir SysRq! Talk! Sex! =/ GUNWotMRotMAotMVFHSKPEEINGHPBFF (@ 03:43 Feb 22)

UUtea A big mug o' reviewin' strength tea? Why, that must mean this article
is being reviewed by:
UU - natter UU Manhole
(While you're welcome to review it as well, you might like to consider helping someone else instead).
(Also, if the review hasn't been finished within 24 hours of this tag appearing, feel free to remove it or clout UU athwart the ear'ole).

Well, as you've given me some very helpful reviews, I'm more than happy to return the favour. Let's see what we've got here then... --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 13:40, Feb 22

Humour: 7 OK, it's quite good, but not brilliant. It provokes smiles rather than laughs. Compared to what it will replace, it's awesome, but in its own right, it's not up there yet. For instance, it wasn't until the third paragraph and his mail-saving heroics that I found anything really amusing (that said, I do like that bit - what a guy!)

The next section is again well written, but I think the first half needs much more of an innuendo to really work - "fly your plane over the Atlantic" doesn't work that well. Helmets, joysticks, undercarriages, coming across to La Belle France - there are ways to make this more of a comedic misunderstanding. With hilarious consequences.

The "parenthood" bit is probably the most consistent section, and I like it.

And the "Other Achievements" bit seems a tad short, mentioning, as it does, only the one achievement. Either change the section heading to acknowledge this, and play up to it ("what, pushing the field of aviation forward and contributing to a sartorially elegant wristwatch design isn't enough for you" - that kind of thing, but funnier) or add something else (although I am at a loss to suggest what).

Concept: 9 A good, solid rewrite of a frankly crappy article, and a decent approach to the biographical article that so many bugger up. Good work, and definitely worth mainspacing - it is a massive improvement over the crap stub that's there now.
Prose and formatting: 8 Again, very well done. Nicely written, nothing I can really pick you up on prose-wise, and your US spelling seems fine as far as my UK eyes can tell! There are a couple too many red links though. OK, we arguably need articles for "veteran" and "entrepreneur", but not the other two, unless you plan to write them (I don't see there being a Raymond Orteig article any time soon!)
Images: 8 The right number, well spread and used. The poster is amusing if you take the time to look at it as well. "Or one of equal cuteness" indeed - I like! However, I think 8 is a fair score because, while they're decent and well used, only one brings any extra humour to the article.
Miscellaneous: 8 Averaged. C'est la vie.
Final Score: 40 This is a really good rewrite, and deserves to be mainspaced now. It's a good read, and well done, and I've tried to give a score that reflects that while also reflecting the fact that I think it's not ready for VFH. The area I feel it lacks in is the humour, as it raises a few smiles, and is decent, but falls short of really funny. I'm sure that a bit of sanding and polishing, and so forth, and you can have a real winner on your hands here. Good work!
Reviewer: --SirU.U.Esq. VFH | GUN | Natter | Uh oh | Pee 14:09, Feb 22
Personal tools
projects