Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Stick Things in the Electrical Outlet

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 05:32, April 27, 2011 by Fnoodle (talk | contribs)

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


edit Why?:Stick Things in the Electrical Outlet

Yes, I know. Its not done. Please be constructive and in depth.--Blueflatcapsig Sir Unknown User (Talk : Cont : VFH : PEE : CUN) 02:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Humour: 8 I like this. I'm also an electrician in real life, so maybe I can relate.... I also used to be an MIT grad and a small kid. Okay, seriously though, this is a pretty funny article. Call me a loser if you want, but I really liked the subtle link to sexual innuendo. Also, the "open ending" of the article leaves the reader some room to, uh, go from there...?
Concept: 8.5 Great concept. Especially because I bet Wikipedia doesn't have an article like this.
Prose and formatting: 6.9 This is a well written article, but to me it seems like there is a lot of headings compared to the amount of text shown. And I'm not a huge fan of headings sounding like people talking with the "quote marks" and italics and all, but I'm not going to try to hold that against you. It just seems too 'headline-y' right now, especially how the headings are almost evenly spaced. I'd really like to see this article with a little more text to back up each heading.
Images: 10 This is the first 10 I've ever given. I think that says something for your images. On a related note, I've got a few articles that might need your Googling/Photoshop/PotatoChop/MSPaint abilities....
Miscellaneous: 7.5 I'm going to go stick something in the outlet.... YAY! But seriously, this is a pretty good start of an article, and with a little more body to go with the titles, well; I think it should make VHF or VHS or DVD or HD-VFH or whatever it is that everyone wants to get. Keep up the good work!
Final Score: 40.9 Psssh, more like "Why NOT stick things in the electrical outlet!?!" Am I right here people???
Reviewer: SmallbeerSpillin DylanSmallbeerTALKSmallbeerEDITSSmallbeer201:02, Dec 17

Apparently, someone edit conflicted me. I'll get you, anonymous reviewer who did sign in the box that clearly says 'signature!' - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 05:37, Dec 16

I don't know what you're talking about.... -- SmallbeerSpillin DylanSmallbeerTALKSmallbeerEDITSSmallbeer201:02, Dec 17
CHEATER!! You cheated!! Hmmph. - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 01:13, Dec 17
Humour: 7 I liked your use of the factual, encyclopedic tone, and it went well with the absurdity of toddlers sticking things into outlets being called scientists. But, I feel like you could've used a few more solid, punch lines. The tone and absurdity will only take you so far, you really have to know where you want the reader to laugh. Most of your sections did this, but I like to tell it to people, anyways. Also, make sure you stay with the tone you defined for yourself early-on with the page. The part that I took issue with for this was the "Electrical Conductivity of Sexual Organs" section. The title makes me think 'oh, ok, a bit more zany here, with the same deadpan delivery.' But the opening bit: "Shit man, you got to try this!" really doesn't fit in with that theme, and I'd advise changing it so that it does, or taking it out. Of course, it quickly goes back to the original style with lines like "The sexual experience has been described as "electrifying" "stunning" and "smokin'"." I enjoyed that line much more, because it fit. Also, I think this part: "Side effects include loss off breath, loss of cardiac function, loss of motor control, loss of brain cells , and loss of life." could be reworked to be a little bit funnier. Instead of "Side effects may include," which is somewhat of a cliche, try something else, like "This may result in," or something. You could also try to start with simpler, less severe symptoms and move up towards more absurd, serious ones so that it escalates.
Concept: 9 Love this concept. It gives you a lot of room to work, I think, and I'm personally anxious to see how far you go with it. You've gotten though the "history of sticking things in outlets," and now you really have to get into "Well why the hell should someone do that?" I like the "find out where it goes" header; I don't really know what you'll do with it, but what toddler hasn't wondered that?
Prose and formatting: 8 I saw a few minor issues with prose early on and fixed them up (I'm good like that), and I think your writing is good so far. In general, don't use too many exclamation points, as they might destroy the tone. For a good why, there's Why?:Pour Boiling Hot Water Down Your Trousers?, which I think uses a similar tone to this. You might want to check it out.
Images: 8 Good, relevant images, and the captions helped to make them even funnier.
Miscellaneous: 5 Well, I had to take off for this somewhere: it's not done. I want it to be done, dag nabbit! but, keep plugging away at this page, and I think it will become very good.
Final Score: 37 Well, it's like I said above: Stay true to your stylistic guns that you've defined for yourself. Let the page's dichotomy of absurd imagery and encyclopedic tone keep it moving along, and every once in a while try to let a line really smack you in the face with comedy. Don't be afraid to use some of the humor tricks from HTBFANJS. Good luck with this one, I hope this review helps. Questions? You know what to do.
Reviewer: - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon Baloon(Tick Tock) (Contribs) 05:37, Dec 16
Personal tools