I wanted to start with concept and not with humor, but as noblesse the template obliges me to do this, I will start with humor and not the concept.
Your jokes are not bad, and some of them are good! However, many aspects of your article have been borrowed from another one, to which I would like to return in Concept.
My main suggestion is this: if you would like to really make your work better, you have to reconsider many aspects of your writing and judge them on their originality and funniness. It is very hard to be completely original, I understand, and especially when you are influenced by another good writing, but you can at least try to introduce some ideas of your own, which can be even more interesting and funny than the ones that have influenced you (I will return to this in the Concept part of the review, as well). What I think you need to change is:
Obama. Won't he be already dead in the 324st century B.C.? And if not, how come he is still a politician and how come he starts a war? Yes, even though "Uncyclopedia is an encyclopedia full of misinformation and utter lies", there are still many things you have to explain, if you don't want to take them off your writing completely. The goal which you should pursue, if you want to get a well-developed mature writing (which does not mean that yours isn't mature or well-developed or even both), is to be as funny as possible. And your Obama seems to be completely unnecessary, unless you tried to say something clever, using him.
Dates. Yes, we know that the war you are talking about is situated in future (or your perception of future), but why do you state these strange years with such precision, as if you really really needed them for your concept? Are you sure the help you to achieve something?
Actually, the above concerns all the other numbers that are present in your article.
Random people and accidents coming and leaving. Again, you maybe need to reconsider the content that you give to the readers...
After having looked through your article, it seems to me that you have been very much influenced by The Last World War, which also has a sequence of maps, step-by-step history of the war, and even the same plot: the Earth gets destroyed after the war and the only difference is that it is rebuilt later. For good, the reader hopes, seeing that we suddenly acquired a Heaven on our planet! But no, the worst has yet to come, this was only the Penultimate World War...
I know this has almost no connection to your article, even if a bit more to The Last World War, but here is the passage from "We" by E. Zamyatin, which may or may not help you:
“Do you realise that what you are suggesting is revolution?”
“Of course, it's revolution. Why not?”
“Because there can't be a revolution. Our revolution was the last and there can never be another. Everybody knows that.”
“My dear, you're a mathematician: tell me, which is the last number?”
“But that's absurd. Numbers are infinite. There can't be a last one.”
“Then why do you talk about the last revolution?”
This may give you some inspiration, as the same idea is also present in the Last World War article. Behind the ridiculous map sequences you find a deeper concept, which is actually really important to understand, because this is what makes this article so exceptional.
Yours seems to be based on the detailed account of events and serious maps. It has precise, even if strange dates, and a careful recount of what actually happened. Now, if this is a fake war, do you think you need all this? And does your article have a well-worked out concept, such as the Last's one? Have you noticed the difference between the two articles?
Now, I probably upset you. And I actually intended to do this, as if you are satisfied with yourself, you don't always want to progress. No, I am joking, I do not want to really upset you, but the truth remains the same: now you probably know what some of the weak points of your work are. And so it's time for you to see that it also has many strong ones, so you will know what to develop! Yes, the concept is not extremely original, but you have many great ideas, anyone of which can be used for a separate article! For instance, let's analyze what you wrote:
On June 23, 32437, Earth was rebuilt from the massive destruction from World War X (or the Ultimate world war), which happened on February 30, 31234. On June 27, 32628, World War XI (or the Antepenultimate world war) occured, which was even more destructive. On September 22, 32701, they rebuild the earth and then they said this:
“In 10 years, we will prepare for the ultimate destruction of the Earth.”
If the reader ignores the disturbing dates and a strange use of Obama, he will also see a hidden concept: yes, the Earth gets destroyed several times, and humans do not learn anything from the previous destruction! They destroy it over and over again! "The most important lesson that our history can teach us is that we never learn anything from our history" (my humble translation of a Russian phrase, which is probably a translation as well).
Yes, the article certainly needs to be polished, cut and expanded, maybe rewritten, but right now it has much potential. You have very nice ideas,and the only thing you need to do is to develop them! So, if you are actually sad because of what I said at the beginning, well, simply, don't be sad! Because there is work that needs to be done!
You master English well enough to build an article and to lead the reader along your story. However, the good aspects coexist with the not-so-good ones, as they mostly often do in our world. What I noticed, is that you seem to be concentrating a lot on recounting all the events that you invented and even support them with maps. Therefore, "The Penultimate World War" is flooded by that storytelling. You even seem to have sacrificed some of your original thoughts to your story. And a good story is the one that carries the writer's ideas and even lifts them higher!
Another important thing is to keep your spelling and punctuation consistent. Do not abandon capital letters at the beginning of the sentences and commas! Watch out for some abbreviations such as 'jk', which do not make your War funnier!
How are the images? Are they relevant, with good quality and formatting?
I see that you spent much time on making your images and choosing the appropriate ones. What is good is that apart from the maps, you also have some other illustrations (this is one of the differences between "The Last World War" and the one that preceded it). And if you really think that they deserve a place in your article, then put them there with respect! Do not leave them alone in little corners and take time to make short and funny comments to them! But if you hesitate, you can always try to find other, more original illustrations, or create some yourself, or ask some advice from other users!
What concerns the maps, they were filled with colors very carefully, so nice work with them! However, the maps in The Last World War were done a bit differently, and a bit more accurately. Finally, the purpose of them in that article was to make "the Last War" look ridiculous, while in yours they illustrate your story. This is not necessarily bad, but some modifications will help!
You have a start (and a promising one), you have ideas and now you have suggestions! I think that the most important aspect for you is concept, but you have to review your images and do some proofreading as well!
Anton(talk) Uncyclopedia United 22:04, January 12, 2014 (UTC)
This was a Pee Review by Anton(talk) Uncyclopedia United 22:04, January 12, 2014 (UTC)