Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Wikimedia fundraising

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

< Uncyclopedia:Pee Review
Revision as of 06:46, November 11, 2011 by Magic man (talk | contribs)

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

FAQ

edit Wikimedia fundraising

This is based more on the format from last year than on the current (which they still seem to keep changing), but if you're not familiar with their appeals, just go on Wikipedia and click on one of those banners. Alternately, see an example appeal here.

You should probably also see our other appeals.

So anyway, I guess the main question here is does this work? Or is it too dependent on folks having seen the real ones? And is it just cheesy? 1234 ~ 16px-Pointy 16:40, 9 November 2011

Humour: 6 Hey, Lyrithya! First time I've ever reviewed an article of yours (accept once for a competition, but that doesn't count), so let's hope I do alright. Anyway, let's get into it.

So I think this article is funny, to a point. One of the biggest problems is that it feels rushed (or maybe just unfinished). It has a nice start, gets off track a little, gets back on track, starts to really get to what seems like it would be the good part, then it ends. That's, like the whole article. Maybe you could add more to the end, that would help (but keep, "I will have that room full of squirrels." as the last sentence). I would suggest adding more about why we should donate. It's there, don't get me wrong, but it really just doesn't feel like enough. Maybe something along the lines of, "Speaking of the men, some of this money could be gong to them. I feel that you might be more compelled to donate to your own race... especially if they'd be tortured otherwise. given treats for each donation collected." Hopefully that'll inspire you to write something better, but I don't mind if you want to use what I wrote.

Another problem with this article is that you've missed some jokes. Like this one: "Consider it - donating $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can afford" there are so many other humorous things you could suggest to donate. I won't suggest any, I bet you can think of some creative ons yourself, but you might want to look into it. Another missed joke is talking about what you eat. Why wasn't that there? It could've been really funny.

The white box works well, but isn't really all that funny. I mean, there aren't really any jokes in there. Maybe it's just me, but you might want to expand, for reals.

The green box is really funny. But I think when you click on the buttons it should actually go somewhere, somewhere with words, somewhere with more funnies. Maybe even allow the little dots next to the amounts be clicked so when you click the buttons it goes to different places. Like the five dollar one could say something like, "Oh, five whole dollars? Big spender today, aren't we? Is that 250 dollar bill burning a hole in your pocket? Apparently not, 'cause it's not flaming in our pockets. But hey, I'm not here to judge! If that's all you can afford, who am I to call you out on your poverty? *Cough*Cheap*Cough*, excuse me, hairball." Then a higher one could say something like, "Oh so you actually decided to be generous? First one today. I wish more people could be saints like you." I can't really thing of much to say with that second one, but you get the point. As for the text at the bottom, that's just fine as it is.

So I like the humor in this article, but there are a few problems. But have no fear, those should be easy to iron out in no time!

Concept: 9 Great concept, nothing really to critique here. The only reason I gave you a nine is because the concept allows for a little bit of randomness, but you can work through that.
Prose and formatting: 10 Nothing that I noticed.
Images: 5 None. But it sort of works, however if you can find any good ones to add, by all means do.
Miscellaneous: 8 My overall feeling of this article.
Final Score: 38 So while this article has some problems, most of them can be fixed by expanding. Sorry the review wasn't very long, but the article's shorter than most, and there's not a whole lot wrong with it. Good job.
Reviewer: -- Tophat headless 06:46, November 11, 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools
projects