Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Keep your baby in the oven (2nd review)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 19:39, October 6, 2008 by BlueYonder (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Why?:Keep your baby in the oven

Second review, trying to get this good enough for VFH, so in-depth reviews would be appreciated. Editing the article would be appreciated too.

TWO MONTHS LATER What if I said, "Please"?

MafiaHatBrown Velosi-T Icons-flag-us {] Screech * Vomit * Mutilations [} 01:20, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...this seems to be badly in need of a review, and I need to keep my numbers up, so if you'll give me some time, I'll do it. BlueYonder GalaxyIcon - CONTACT
Humour: 5.5 Well, well...for a beginner, I can't call this bad work, and there’s definitely some chuckle value in here. However, there are no laugh-out-loud moments, since the humour here seems to be rather marred by several separate factors-primarily the conciseness of the article and an unfortunate inconsistency in voice and tone. I won't say much more about either of those here, as I'll probably go into them in later sections, and I don't want to overlap. Suffice to say, I see promising potential for humour here that I'm sure you could work with and ultimatley bring out a great article-but for now, I can't give too much credit, as the potential is interfered with.
Concept: 5 As I think I said, I really think you’ve come up with a very promising concept here, but have used it to a percentage of its potential-I’m very surprised it’s so short, to be frank. Seriously, with the right amount of work you could go on for paragraphs about, for instance, reasons why the baby should be kept in the oven, behavioral reactions parents can expect, the couple’s developing relationship over the time of keeping the kid in the oven, perhaps the effects on the kid as it grows up-really, you cut the whole thing off far too early. There’s so much more to this concept that I’m sure you could pull out with just a little effort. As it is, I have to give this section a low score for what I unfortunately perceive as a waste of potential.
Prose and formatting: 6 Hmm...bit of instability here, I'm afraid...see, if the article is going to be in the voice of a specific person (in this case, the wife), it's best that the whole article is in that voice-or, if not, that the transition from one voice to another is foreshadowed, introduced, and made clear. It keeps the article flowing; in this case, the jump from the third-person narrator to the conversation between the couple is rather sudden. It would have been better if the article had started off in the form of that conversation, or if the narrator had introduced the conversation beforehand ('This is something like the conversation you should have with your wife', or something similar). A voice must be consistent and clear, or it risks feeling out of place in the article. And, on the subject, if you feel like working your arse off, you might want to experiment with some different voices for the article-this one is effective, but others might well be even more so-a tone similar to a child psychology book or parents’ guidebook, for instance, might come well come out great.

As to the rest of this section, I can't find many formatting problems-the way you've represented each question as a heading is a tried and trusted way that works well-and only one grammatical complaint-"lets buy a crib" should be "let's buy a crib". A small thing, I know, but there are plenty of people out there, myself included, who find easily missable things like that distracting-they can give us unfair bias against the article. Watch out for those.

Images: 6 Hmm...the one image keeps us nicely in mind of the topic, but I really think something like a picture of a lit-up oven with a funny caption ("Oh, it's just a pork roast, Mr Social Worker", except that's not funny), or a well-photoshopped image of a giggling baby in an oven, or anything similar, could have worked wonders. No image damages an article unless it's deliberatley chosen to do so-remember that.
Miscellaneous: 5.6 Averaged, as usual.
Final Score: 28.1 Not much to add that hasn’t been said-it’s a great idea that’s too short and has been underused. Put in the effort, and I’m sure you could come up with something great. Good luck to you!
Reviewer: BlueYonder GalaxyIcon - CONTACT
Personal tools
projects