I wrote this article under my userspace after discovering we had no page for the guy- which is bad because he is historically important. And I'm happy to remedy all these missing articles about historical figures myself. Except I have no idea if this, the trial run, is any good. By the way, most of the article is historically accurate, with little jokes or "funny" embellishments thrown in. Now, please, tell me if I'm doing this right. --SirIsaac 18:59, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Going section-by-section ensures that I will miss the point entirely. So let's do it.
Intro: 9. This strikes exactly the right chord. There's something delightfully lowbrow about this humor - which meshes perfectly with the encyclopedic tone and extremely highbrow photos. I laughed at the "Whig/wig" pun. I laughed at the nickname "Old Cry and Bird Poop." Didn't really laugh at the McClellan bit, but it didn't ruin things. Off to a good start.
Childhood: 6. "He was probably raised in a log cabin by poor parents or something" is amusing, but not hilarious. Plus, it may be too early to break out of that encyclopedic tone. I'd consider replacing this section with a joke or two - maybe some fictitious element of his childhood - or, if there just aren't any jokes to be made, consider getting rid of it.
Entering the Military: 7.5. Not bad. Being "forced out" of the legal profession for shooting prosecutors is funny. "Ability to whistle" is a throwaway joke but amusing. Calling the summary execution of POWs "lawyering ability" was the funniest bit here. It's not an uproariously hilarious section, but it's good. Maybe a bit short.
Generalosity: 7. The first sentence is extremely clunky and needs a rewrite. The "freedom/ okay, fight to wrestle land" bit fell a little flat for me - it might be better to insist that it's a fight for freedom in an absurd way (e.g. "America's valiant struggle to free itself from the oppression of not owning half of Mexico"). The idea that he was unaware of a division under his command is funny but underused - a couple sentences on the idle unit could be funny. The joke about Lieutenant General having been forgotten falls a little flat.
Winfield Scott, insufferable prick: 6. The shift in tone in the section header is pretty funny - it would be even better, I think, if the others were all deadpan and laudatory. The section is amusing, but full of missed opportunities. Sending scouts to their death out of spite over a chess match got a chuckle out of me, but there are so many other petty ways to make a prick out of oneself - why not touch on a couple?
Mr. Scott goes to Washington: 7.5. As I said, I'd retitle this section header, just to make the prior one funnier. This section is shorter on the punchlines but it's good, consistent comedy - I think it works better than the previous one just because it's a little longer and gives a little more time to get into it. The stuff about forcing slaves to bring him water is very funny, but I think there are more opportunities for prickish behavior toward slaves. "Get drunk and do whatever" is a funny tone drop-out, and this far down in the article, it works better.
Back to the Homefront: 8. This section is really good. The juvenile "Black-COK" made me laugh, as did "in actuality, a big barbecue." A little more length could benefit the section.
Scott's last hurrah: the Civil War: 8. "Was, by all accounts, old" merited a laugh. The Anaconda Plan also got a laugh out of me. The obesity jokes are a bit weak and perhaps should go. The "fruit attack" didn't strike me as funny at first, but the payoff at the last sentence made it worth it. Not a bad section.
Well, it's pretty much a tried-and-true concept: take a figure from history, and make fun of him either by presenting serious facts about him in absurd ways, or absurd non-facts about him in serious ways. And it's executed well. No complaints.
Prose and formatting:
I loved the prose in this article. It has something that so, so many Uncyclopedia articles lack: comic timing. I like the technique of drawing out the punchline, e.g. "was, by all accounts, old" - the wordy buildup to the asinine conclusion is a very clever bait-and-switch. In fact, I'd give the prose a 10. The article loses a point in this category for its over-short sections and the way it seems to just sort of abruptly end. It could do with a conclusion.
The pictures are perfect for the article; they give it an atmosphere of total seriousness, and then you read the captions, and get some delightful lowbrow humor. "because, well, no one likes being photographed on the toilet" was one of the biggest laughs of the article to me (and, I note, it uses the same delayed-punchline technique I noted above). Good job. Of course, if this article gets much bigger, it's gonna need a third picture.
Not averaged. Number pulled out of my ass for no reason.
So, 41. According to the guidelines, that's "Better than average; might be VFH." Sounds about right. This has very definite VFH potential; really, what it needs to be VFH-worthy, IMHO, is more. It needs to be maybe 150% as long as it is now. So, my advice: keep going. This is one of the funnier articles I've seen submitted to PEE in quite a while.