Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Take a Pregame Dump?
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
So, I wrote most of this a year ago, before my on and off absence with the sight. I just finished it up and added a picture, But I'm not sure wether to call it done or to try and add more content to it. Any thought/ideas/pies are great. Thanks.
- I'm tired of reviewing articles of people I don't know. I wanna review articles of people I do know. And that people is you! 18:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
|Concept, which must be|
the basis of your article
if I'm using this template:
|8||Quite a good concept here. Not the most... sophisticated of topics, but it's certainly original and is perfectly utilized within the article.|
|Humor, without a second u,|
because I'm American:
|9||I got quite a few chuckles out of this. I'm a fan of screwballs in articles, and there are screwballs aplenty here (I especially liked the "several small mountain goats"). However, there are still a few things that could use improvement. Foremost among these is that the article is simply too short. The three body sections each get longer than the last, which makes the first one seem far too short in retrospect. You conclusion is also downright puny. If I insulted it enough I could probably make it cry. Shrimpy tiny little bastard. With yellowed teeth and inferiority issues. Probably has a tiny penis, too.
I also think that you should swap the first two body paragraphs, putting Stress Relief second. I would actually prefer for the section to go last, but the section you have third fits very well as the final body paragraph. My reasoning is that it's a more "sophisticated" topic compared to the other two. If it were placed second or even third, you would end up with a great contrast of ideas and style, especially if you changed up the language in the paragraph to make it slightly more high-falutin' while still keeping words like dump and shit.
You should also expand it because it's, like, short. Seriously.
|Your spelling and grammar,|
which probably sucks:
|7||Spotted no obvious errors. There should be more words, though. Some more sentences, too. An extra paragraph or two couldn't hurt, either.|
|Images, or lack of:||6||I know the entire concept of this article is vulgar, but nobody likes looking at pictures of poo. I don't like looking at pictures of poo. I disabled the picture of poo, because I don't like looking at pictures of poo. Besides that, your other image fits fine with the article, and the captions on both work well. However, you have a picture of poo. Also, if you're going to expand your article (like you really should), you'll need to add one or two more pictures as well, to make it more exciting. Preferably not pictures of poo.|
|Miscellaneous, not averaged,|
despite what some would
have you believe:
|5||A picture of poo.|
|Final Score, totaled, as most|
would have you believe:
|35||Besides the poo picture, your article is quite good. Just expand it a bit and keep to the same style and you should end up with a definite feature. I have nothing else to say here, so I'll simply reiterate my previous points. You have a picture of poo and your article is short. Good day.|
|Me:||18:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)|