Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/releasimification (3rd review)
From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Just wondering what you guys (hyperbole) thought now. This article is fairly new, and I was wondering that if w/time this article would be funny?--Bobofosho2 20:15, 7 June 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:
If you wanted a fresh opinion on this (although Hyperbole is a fine reviewer) I'd be more than happy to do this.
- go ahead and do the review, thanks-Bobofosho2 16:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
|Humour:||1.8||Most of your jokes in this article tend to derive their humor value from silly black stereotypical slang, and nothing really witty or funny. I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with using black slang as a humor tool, but it needs to be supported by actual content when it is employed. I'm finding the occasional chuckle, but overall there aren't too many jokes here. Allow me to employ Cajek's template.
|Concept:||2||The concept of this article confuses me. Obviously, "Releasimification" is completely made up. But you're not making fun of/satirizing any real life thing. At first glance, it looks like random black stereotypes. But after reading it a few times, it's starting to look like just random humor with some black stereotypes over it. Hey, it is what it is. I'd love to tell you to just scrap the idea and rewrite it, since there doesn't seem to be much of an idea. But I feel like we could still work with this.
Namely, what your article is missing is a solid concept. It lacks coherence because it lacks a central idea, a main joke, an overall angle that all jokes can draw from and be traced back to. I'm not saying to write one liner articles. Instead, come up with a central idea and run with it. You already seem to have an idea of what "Releasimification" is, just make sure you keep it consistent. I was utterly confused by this article. It needs structure, it needs a main idea.
|Prose and formatting:||2||Oi, a little disappointing here. I know you were trying to mock the black stereotype here by trying to use "jive" in this article, but it's spotty and inconsistent. At first, you only use it in quotes. But then you start doing it in just your narration. You go back and forth between tones so many times that it's confusing. You need to have a consistent voice.
My other major beef in this section would be that your grammar is ghastly. You need to give this a good proofreading before deciding it's done. It also needs formatting. Try adding some links; right now this is pretty much a dead-end page.
|Images:||3||I didn't much understand or care for your images. Well, I understood the first one. The second one had to do with the strike, which I still don't understand, and so the image was lost on me. Both images were poorly done. Sometimes, having poorly made images can add to the humor value. This is not the case. You cannot use MS Paint to put out decent looking images for your articles. If you don't have Photoshop, feel free to ask an experienced user to make you an image over at UN:PIC.|
|Final Score:||11||I have a little to-do list for this article, in case you tl;dr'd the above review.
I hope this review is helpful. Good luck with this!