From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
188.8.131.52 15:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
Pee Review In Progress
Checkit bitches, this review is as good as peed on. I'm marking my effing territory. Said article is being reviewed by:
|Humour:||4||This guy actually starts out fairly strong. While I usually discourage quote templates, I did like that Captain Obvious quote at the beginning. Also, nice allusion to aaardvarks. But it dies on the table in the first paragraph. Why Belgium? And why the noobish "conversation" with the lllamas? They're completely out of place. Random humor is discouraged for a reason: it's never funny. Try to make the article consistent and intelligent rather than silly and nonsensical.
Just look at the next section after your opening. It's got nothing to do with what you wrote in the first paragraph. This is more random humor and it needs to go away. Ix-nay the whole deal about France being a frozen wasteland, the porpoise, and pretty much everything after that. It's mostly random and makes no sense. You need to be consistent. Allow me to elaborate on this in the Concept section.
But before I do, I want to pay some attention to your closing. It makes no sense in the context and needs to be ix-nayed. Unless the article calls for it, try not to break the Fourth wall. I'm sure you can come up with something rational sounding and funny for a closing.
|Concept:||6||This isn't a bad idea. It's not brilliant or anything, but an article about lllamas has potential. I'd say the idea is amusing at best, but we can certainly work with it, can't we? Alas, you began strong with the idea itself. A misspelling of the word "lllama." Not exactly laugh-a-minute, but smirkworthy. Yeah, I just made up that word. Smirkworthy. It quickly descends into typical noobery. Apparently, lllamas are the most amazing creatures ever, can be used in battle, have super powers and don't like George W. Bush. Not exactly original or funny. What I would do is to find a better way to write this article. Thinking about it as just a typical biology article isn't too funny or fresh. My buddy Cajek wrote an article about Otters, which turned out to be hilarious. Take a look at it and notice what he does. He didn't use just a typical format for articles about animals, saying that otters can destroy entire civilizations and can fly into space. He stayed real. But he also found a funny spin on the subject. Writing the article in the style of a frustrated student trying to finish a paper made for a much better read than an encyclopedic article. Get creative. Find a nice angle and run with it. Stay consistent and be original. Perhaps your article could be written by a chronic misspeller who believes that "llama" is actually spelled with three "L"s and is arguing with a teacher on the proper way to spell it. You could then go into other commonly misspelled words that the student wants to debate. But I do like the idea of having lllamas as a separate animal from llamas, so you could keep the article about a fictional creature. But if you're going to stick with an encyclopedic format, make it more interesting. Perhaps lllamas are a genetic mistake and are actually tragically flawed mutant freaks who struggle to exist past a week in the wild only to be crushed under their own body weight. Get creative.|
|Prose and formatting:||3||The prose is disappointing. Despite Fnoodle's valiant robot efforts, many misspellings remain. The grammar is atrocious in spots. And yet there are other spots that are fine. This is my biggest problem with this article. It lacks consistency. Your prose changes from section to section. One minute you've got an assumed character who is narrating the article in first person, and next thing I know, I'm reading about Hilary Clinton and George W. Bush in 1966. You use too many different voices throughout the piece. Good writing is consistent and all sounds the same. If you want to write the article in first person, as if you were someone who was actively interacting with a lllama, that's fine. But keep it like that. Don't jump from a personal tone to a didactic tone and then back again. It confuses the reader and detracts from the humor value by just seeming poorly written.|
|Images:||8||Your images are pretty funny. The graph, while out of place, got a brief chuckle out of me. Not much else to say on this, I don't think there's much room for improvement in this category. On to the final score!|
|Final Score:||26.3||This article really looks like it's in need of a drastic rewrite. You need to do a little bit of article planning before you start writing. Ask yourself a few questions. "What is my angle with this idea?" "Where do I want to take this idea?" "How can I maintain consistency with this idea?" "How much material can I get out of this idea?" "Did I have KFC for lunch two days in a row?" These kinds of questions will help you to develop a good groundwork for a great article. Planning is important. Once you have an idea in your head about how the final product will look, the execution itself will be a breeze. Just remember to watch your tone and spelling. I look forward to see any changes you decide to make to the article, as well as any of your future works. Feel free to come to me with any questions, I'll be glad to help. Cheers!|