Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/We Are Your Best Friend (re-sub)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Erm yeah, didn't exactly get the most positive review last time but I've made some changes and I think it's a bit better now. Looking for an In-depth review please. SK Sir RotM 22:39 14 July 2008
- I'll claim this one - it looks interesting... User:Gladstone/sig 13:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
|Humour:||6.7||It's good - it's taking a well-used concept and working it into Uncyclopedic humour.
|Concept:||8||Right, so... It's basically Gnome-Mart isn't it? (For those plebs among you who don't read Private Eye, it's a centre-page cartoon spread that they always have in the Christmas edition with lots of dodgy spoof gifts). Anyway - inherently, it's a funny concept, and the gifts/books are generally well executed, if a little random in places. I'm not sure how well the "We are your best friend" concept fits with it though - the bit about mother/wife/kids/15 year old distured piece on the side seems a bit, well, "Peep Show"-ish. And I never really got "Peep Show", so it's probably me.
My one query really is the gifts bit - it took me ages to work out that they're arranged in rows (Ok, so I am having a retard day...). Perhaps it's worth using some sub-headings to point it out?
|Prose and formatting:||8.5||You know what you're doing, so I feel a bit of a fraud even trying to comment on this bit!
It's easy for me to read as a fellow Brit, your prose is good and generally well punctuated. There's a couple of little splling errors/gramatical mistakes, but it'll be easier for me to edit the article than to try and list them all.
My one issue about the formatting is that it took me a while in the second section to work out that they were in rows (Ok, so I am having a retard day...). Perhaps it's worth using some sub-headings to point it out? Point off (plus half for the typos) as it spoiled the joke slightly for me.
|Images:||7||Sounds harsh? They're all good pictures - but they're a bit dry. That's not why I've marked it down though - oh no. It's a spoof of an online store, right? So GIVE ME A LOGO! (ahem). I don't care how crap it is, but the top welcome bit should have a logo on it.|
|Miscellaneous:||7.6||Average of previous scores.|
|Final Score:||37.8||It's nearly there - I think it's getting close to the finished article. There's just sort of odd bits which need touching up really.|
|Reviewer:||--User:Gladstone/sig 14:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)|