Talk:List of people you do not want to come face to face with in a narrow hallway
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
From Pee Review[edit source]
| Humour: | 10 | Woo, this was a good article. I absolutely enjoyed the work you have done on this, and I can tell that you have put a lot of effort forward. My favorite punch line had to be the part with the Rabid Weasels, which worked in randomness and humour, a wonderful blend. The humour remained, throughout the entire article, steady and consistent. Frankly, you did a great job on this article, that’s all I can say. |
| Concept: | 9 | In general, my encounters with Uncyclopedia have taught me that lists tend to be in 1. 2. 3. 4. format, and I was grateful to see this article did not follow that. When I first clicked this link, I did not have high expectations, but you have given me an outstanding concept, which has given you plety of room to play around with. I enjoyed how you worked in this list, even when Uncyclopedia policy tends to hate lists. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | You did a genuinely outstanding job with your prose, and I genuinely enjoyed the absence of spelling and grammatical errors, and above all, there was not a single red link (*Praises the Lord*). The opening was well constructed, giving a general introduction, a thesis, and then bringing us into the point, and you rode the article out quite well. One small problem was under the Slow Walker picture, of which the caption implies that the person reading the article is talking, where in all the other captions, the author of the article is talking. This article is lacking in one major thing, CATEGORIES. |
| Images: | 9 | Your images did a pretty good job of contributing to the flow of the article, and contributed “information” to what was being said in the related photograph. Although there were a few more pictures then I would generally have expected to see in this length of an article, that is negliable because, as I said, the pictures contribute to what is going on. The most important thing your images did was contribute to the humour. I was about to take credit off for the trench coat guy, but you worked humour into that as well (His white outline is entirely unrelated). BRILLIENT, as far as I am concerned. |
| Miscellaneous: | 9 | Avg’d as per Pee Review Requirements |
| Final Score: | 45 | As with all of my reviews, I am assigning you homework for this article
I look forward to seeing this of VFH sometime in the next month, great job. |
| Reviewer: | Warm regards, Javascap 12:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC) | |
Suggested Images[edit source]
These of course would need to be photoshoped to fit in with the article.
(removed - see here)
- I'd also need to restructure the article around them. They don't really fit in either way. Kudos for the suggestions though. -RAHB 05:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
why didnt you add a Grue as an option?....then again, grues arent people, they eat people lol. probably Michael Jackson should be 1 of them. -> Nezlr 14:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Because grues and Michael Jackson are tired jokes that have no weight when it comes to producing something truly original. They are also not funny in the slightest. Most of all, they are predictable and unimpressive, which is the opposite of what I include in my humor. I have a level of intelligence which makes it impossible for me to enjoy such petty in-jokes, and wish for society to wake up and join me in bringing originality and true humor back to comedy, for the sake of the genre, and for the sake of my tired, tired mind. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go play some retro Pokemon games while listening to old acoustic folk albums. -RAHB 22:29, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
WHOA![edit source]
The fat guy is a screencap from an episode of Andy Barker, P.I.! I loved that show. It should have been given a chance by NBC. Fuck dem suits. -- 
22:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)