Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Worst Article Ever (Actual Actual Review)

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

FAQ

edit Worst Article Ever

I think I will let Necropaxx review this--Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 03:47, January 22, 2010 (UTC) Grue JammyDirectorEye 4WILLExplode 3YOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 03:47, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Necropaxx Hi there! This big ol' grin must mean this article
is being reviewed by:

Necropaxx (T) {~}
(While you're welcome to review it as well, you might like to consider
GOING AWAY and REVIEWING SOMETHING ELSE).

(Also, if the review hasn't been finished within 24 hours of this tag appearing
at 08:44, January 30, 2010 (UTC)
feel free to remove it and give Necropaxx a swift kick up the butt for being such a loser).


24 hours. Necropaxx (T) {~} Saturday, 08:44, Jan 30 2010
Sorry, I haven't been able to get to this because of homework and sleep and other assorted IRL stuff. I'll try to do it tomorrow. Necropaxx (T) {~} Sunday, 06:03, Jan 31 2010
I still haven't been able to get to it, so if anyone else wants to have a go, be my guest. Necropaxx (T) {~} Friday, 03:34, Feb 5 2010
Humour: 3 First impressions...: 3 words - truth in advertising. I momentarily thought about just placing the in-article Pee Review here, but then I realized that would be too easy. So now you must suffer through one of my horrible reviews! Mwahahaha!

Intro & First: Well, I see we are off to a frightfully random start. Here is how I am reading your article: "I like Uncyclopedia. Waffles! Let's make an article! Then meadows, butterflies, eating squirrels, your mom jokes, tough guys, insults, emoticons, Chuck Norris, Mr. T, and one of those annoying counters to finish it all off." The only thing I missed were All Your Base references. I know you're trying to write the "worst article ever," but I think you're doing it a little too well. Suggestions: Read How to be funny and not just stupid. It will help.

The rest of the article is basically a rehash of the first section, with different spins on it (Pee Review and a VFH nom, among other things). I really don't feel like reviewing the same thing 6 times, so just read the next boxes, where I actually tell you what's wrong.

Concept: 5 OK, your concept itself is sound, which I believe to be make and article proclaiming how bad it is, and in the process, trick the reader into laughing at the article. There have already been some features based off this concept, which is where you got your 5 points from. (HowTo:Write An Article That Stands No Chance Of Featuring On Uncyclopedia and I can't remember the other one) These articles had the exact same concept as you, so what went wrong? Well, I believe that while the authors of their respective articles were trying to present the concept in a self-deprecating light, you took it to the extreme. Instead of subtly saying, "yeah, this is how not to write an article," you go and write that very article you weren't supposed to write. Let me be clear: That does not, did not, and will never work. This is the root of this article's problems. You needed to distance yourself from the garbage you are parodying, instead of emulating it.
Prose and formatting: 3 The prose is childish, brain-affected, and quite frankly, retarded. Which is how you meant it to be, so I gave you a point for irony. Take a look at Mhaille's article. Its prose never sinks to that level which he is satirizing. It is possible to make fun of really stupid things by treating it very scholarly-like. Your formatting is also very bad, purposefully so; however, you don't need to do that. Your current format is creating a humor black hole, sucking away all the jokes before they have a chance to elicit a lol.
Images: 4.5 5 images, all of them not funny and greatly overused on the site. The captions don't give me much hope, either. The old man pic is also poorly formatted: see the giant white gap between the lines of text? That shouldn't be there.
Miscellaneous: 3 My average grade for the article. More on that in the next box.
Final Score: 18.5 Look, IWKY333 (can I call you IWKY333?), this review may make you feel like you're no good at writing articles. Don't listen to these traitorous emotions! Anyone can become a funny writer - you just need practice. Think of this article as a warm-up. In that train of thought, I am going to recommend that you abandon this. Unless you are planning on some major revisions, I don't think this can be saved. So burn it on the funeral pyre and use the ashes to create a new, different, funnier article. Good luck.
Reviewer: Necropaxx (T) {~} Thursday, 15:56, Feb 11 2010
Personal tools
projects