Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Tripple entendre

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Tripple entendre

This is an article believe me! Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 13:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm are you sure Acrolo? There isn't anything to review here besides Socky's recent foray into featuring VFH pages. Putting this into an article doesn't give us anything to say. Besides the fact that it's an In-Joke, the novelty of which wears off pretty quick, especially when you consider that there are still people out there putting time and effort into writing to try and reach VFH. I'm going to refer this one to the powers that PEE (ha ha) and see what they have to say.

Note to PEEing members and other reviewers. Could we please hold off a review until UU or Boomer comes round and decides whether this should remain on the queue. Thanks. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• I'll do it soon. InMooseWeTrust 01:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Chief bashes his head against a wall--ChiefjusticeDS 06:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

• Sorry i was all in bat fuck insane mode at the time, I wasn't being serious with this article... Pshaw cmon now you know me better than that? -Silentcough- Sir ACROLO KUN • FPW • AOTM • FA •(SPAM) 08:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	1	It's really not that funny. I mean yeah, it's ridiculous how her boobs explode and all, but come on.
Concept:	0	What is your concept, that you want to feature a picture about a one-line article? It doesn't seem to click.
Prose and formatting:	1	You can't really lose here, so I don't think it applies. However, I'll be a jerk and give you a low score because it's a raster-based and not a vector-based picture.
Images:	3	The exploding boobs thing is great. However, it's a tiny picture and there could be a lot more to it than that.
Miscellaneous:	-5	It just seems like people want to have a bunch of featured articles that only have one line. There are some situations where that can be done well, but most of the time it's bad.
Final Score:	0	Honestly, this picture/article/whatever seems more of a candidate for speedy deletion than a featured content. Don't take this as an attack on you (or anybody else who contributed), but it's definitely not worth the two minutes people spend reading the vote list.
Reviewer:	InMooseWeTrust 01:48, 4 August 2009 (UTC)