Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Drown

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

HowTo:Drown

Please excuse the grammer. ~  The*  (say shit) (My train wrecks) Π   ~  18:28, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

12 hours or less--DirectorWILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 20:32, June 24, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, never mind, better have someone else review this.--DirectorWILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 01:55, June 25, 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, it's 'grammar'. Secondly... something. But I'll review this just so it gets reviewed; how's that for a terrible reason? It shall be done in one day. One earth day, that is.

Unless I forget. ~ Lyrithya *shifty eyes* (words) (actions) -- 20100713 - 02:42 (UTC)

yes it is grammar but it made the point better to not spell it corectly, either way thank you ~  The*  (say shit) (My train wrecks) Π   ~  03:05, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

Lies. Not sure which part is lies, but... LIES! ~ Lyrithya *shifty eyes* (words) (actions) -- 20100713 - 03:32 (UTC)

Wait... what about 'corectly'? Did you intentionally mispeel that? ~ Lyrithya *shifty eyes* (words) (actions) -- 20100714 - 02:57 (UTC)

Humour:	6	Hmm... The introduction is just confusing, and the telling the reader to drown itself if confused isn't that funny just plain because it really is so confusing. The famous drowning victims - as is, it's a list, matter of fact, straight-forward, and not overly funny (not helping that I don't even know who half of those are and some people won't even know that many). But perhaps if it had some expansion, going into some detail as to just how or why or where they drowned would help. The your mom joke that someone added, though a mite tasteless, is a step in that direction, for instance, but beyond that... Calling those who die by other means 'uppity' is kind of funny, especially considering that once they're dead they really aren't in any position to be pretentious at all. Choices, comparisons to toddlers, the sheer complicatedness of it, these are good overall. Irony and whatnot. The novelty (wrong section) - could be funnier if there was a right section for that. Aiding those trying to drown themselves - Going more into the step by step and essentially exploding the section into its pieces as paragraphs would help it immensely... also, is it 'exploding' in english? That's what it's called in php, but I never was any good at english. 'mafia families' - I feel like you could do something incredibly silly with this, perhaps just a link to something or maybe an elaboration on the families and their methods... Competitive Drowning - elaborate? Just how crude were the beginnings? What is the strict body of guidelines? What is the format? What sort of prizes would 'the big prizes' be? Something highly ironic, perhaps? 'The competitive drowning circuit page'? Does this actually exist or are you making it up? Would it not work better to end on an actual humourous note of specifics rather than referring to something unreachable?
Concept:	5	All hail the optimism-friendly HowTo. I'd say we need more of these, but there sure are an awful lot already... not really the point, though, as this was a requested article and all. It fits what it is - a howto on the usually obvious and/or unintentional. You took it beyond the obvious, however, which works well for this.
Prose and formatting:	3	Without even reading it, I shall say... this needs links. Why are there no links? Some articles, the funniest part is the links, where the article says something reasonable and then links to what it actually means and whatnot. And aside from that, it's a bit of a dead end. But anyhoo. "If you are reading this, then you fall under the second category." - What was the first category, then? "I'm getting this out of the way now, because I am so sure of the methodology behind drowning that it may be my last chance." - Wait, who's dying/murdering here, the reader, the author or both? Either way, this doesn't really make sense given the pronouns. "You were the asshole who couldn't even drown yourself in the tub." - Asshole generally means some sort of jerk, but this person is more of a failure or a loser. "Contingencies have been made for just such a person." - I'm assuming you mean as the aforementioned asshole, but saying 'person' is still kind of confusing. Someone Else - bit of a non-sequitor given the previous jests that the reader is reading it to drown itself. Not that it matters too much or I know how you could make it fit in more, but it does seem a mite out of place after how the article introduces. "Well, you could always consult the how to get things for free page" - why not link to it? This is hypertext, after all. "Now I see why you searched for this page." - Searching is actually not that common around here; people usually seem to just follow links or use the random button... perhaps 'came to this page' would be more accurate as it would cover all the options. Previous record drowning attempts - Could have synergy with the list of famous victims; as they share a name in common it feels like there should be some relation. Call her 'the previously mentioned Virginia Woolf', for instance, and maybe elaborate upon the first list... "But for some reason you have that look of a jilted lover." Another non-sequitor; it just doesn't flow with what you were talking about immediately before. At very least give it a new paragraph. Pets - should probably be a subsection of Someone Else - they're not exactly people, but having it as its own main section makes the next main section look completely out of place. Although now that I've noticed the overall sectioning problem, maybe not. Your paragraphing is a little odd. Generally, you want to start a new one with each change of ideas or at transitions of setting, for instance between getting hired and what to do afterward, the individual callers and what to do with them, etc. If you go through and work on this, it may help improve the flow of the overall piece (at very least, though, it should look better to the casual viewer and be easier to skim). It would help to natural progression of the instructions in general, really. The sectioning doesn't make sense, either. Looking at the table of contents, you only have two sections and the rest are just subsections of the second one. Check the consistency of your header tags. I am not excusing the grammar. I refuse. No, instead I shall attack it with a garden hose at once. But seriously, the bad flow is kind of a killer, here. A proofreading won't necessarily fix that, either. And I'm not proofreading it until you try to fix the flow, and while someone else may, it still needs fixing.
Images:	7	I rather think the images are the best part of this... nice drowning people. Good pictures, decent captions, although they could be better. Perhaps include some tasteless puns or something... those are always nice. This is just my arbitrary opinion (not that the rest of this review isn't), but The Quit fighting one could thumb to be a mite bigger, as it's such a nice image. The size does not do it justice.
Miscellaneous:	5	Median number. Or mean. Or... well, it starts with m, whatever it is. One of those. I'd make it higher, but frankly the readability is kind of bad.
Final Score:	26	It's a start; it needs fixing up. Perhaps remodeling. Grammar and format and sensibility and flow, mainly... hopefully this will help.
Reviewer:	~ Lyrithya *shifty eyes* (words) (actions) -- 20100714 - 02:57 (UTC) Sorry this took so long. I really did forget about it. (I was taking a nap, okay?)