Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/WristWatch (2nd review)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
A rewrite and expansion of sorts has occurred and I would like an opinion on how I'm going. IronLung 09:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
|Humour:||7||Once again, I'm writing this section last, so preferrably read everything else first.
All in all, I'd label this a good satire. It encompasses its subject well and sprinkles it with an appropriate about of variety (see concept for more on that). The tone, content and decent attention to subject all combine to make for a good satirical read sprinkled decently with good, well-varied (if not side-splitting) humour.
|Concept:||7||You've made a good effort here; you really have. For starters, I really liked how you've toned down the 'boobs' aspect of the article without removing it entirely (as a minimal aspect of the article, it's effective).
Further on, your addition of a description of what's actually in the magazine is a massive improvement and really makes the article feel more like it's about what it's about, if you know what I mean; the description adequatley mixes the concept of, uh, wrists with typical magazine content.
The political section is also much improved; the integration of mention of African dictators into the article is very time-relevant, and has also been done in such a way as to cover it sufficiently without letting it take over the article and make itself seem irrelevant. Good job there.
Examining the concept as a whole and more objectivley, I'd call it a slightly odd, but good and relativley solid one that's found a good niche, and could have gone pretty wrong in several ways, but hasn't. It stands out on its own and covers its self-made subject neatly without overlapping other articles. Good job.
|Prose and formatting:||9||Still can't really complain much here. The prose is still topic-appropriatley neutral and informative without really affecting the humour of the article. No need to change this. Same goes for formatting; it's neatly laid out and suddenly seems a lot less text-heavy. No need to change this either.
Grammar, too, is pretty much solid, but unfortunatley there's a few subtle and missable flaws (it's 'visibly', not 'visbly'). It makes the article seem just that much less professional. But aside from that, this section is throughout the article more or less spotless.
|Images:||6||Better, sure; the monkey picture has been nicely subtly linked with the text, the magazine cover is still well-done and appropriate, and the Mugabe picture is pretty good (though perhaps the wrist significance of the picture could be emphasised a little more in the picture). Still, I do think the article could do with pictures more directly linked to wrists and wristwatches so the reader immediatley gets a full grasp of what they're reading about. But then, I don't want to feel I'm forcing your hand on that issue; too much effort can also have bad results.|
|Final Score:||36.3||You've definintley made more of an effort to improve it than I would have with my intensely lazy nature. It's still not perfect, but it's improved, and overall it's an article worthy of Uncyclopedia. I'm sorry this wasn't as comprehensive as my reviews usually are, but I hope I helped.|
|Reviewer:||BlueYonder - CONTACT|