Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Ampersand
Ampersand[edit source]
I'm curious how other people view this. It's a bit of an odd duck, an experiment of sorts. Thanks. ----OEJ 17:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
If this review seems a bit harsh, I apologize. However, having just found this site about a week ago, I love the idea of a wikipedia parody, but am disappointed by its inconsistancy in its quality. I would rather see a compact article that keeps a constant smile on my face involving several laughs than an example of mediocrity (short articles can always be added to later by someone with a fresh idea that is equally as funny). Anyway, below is what I thought PaddyAtkinson 23:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
--OEJ 17:27, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
| Humour: | 4 | By section- Intro: 1--I would take an axe to it; Geography: 6--Big fan of the triangular kilometers and Leonard Nimoy Reference, and for the rest i say "Meh"; History: 6--I like where you're going, but I think it would be funnier if you restated some of your facts as the accounts of other people (Ex. "'It looked like a cabbage truck hitting Fatty Arbuckle,' reported local surfer Herbie Verstinx.") or something to that effect; Cityscape: 2--Other than the fairly witty part about the streets being named from the Cyrillic alphabet and mathematical constants, the rest needs a good axeing; Economy: 4--The idea is not bad, just sort of poorly developed/boring; Festivites: N/A--I just don't get the cultural references that make this funny and not just pointless rambling(Like the idea of having that section, though); Death and Birth: 0--that's all I have to say about that. |
| Concept: | 7 | I am all for ripping podunk towns, just so long as it is done well. |
| Prose and formatting: | 5 | This would be WAY better if it were written in an objective style to mirror Wikipedia rather than the narrative in which it is currently written, but I could see where others might disagree. |
| Images: | 6 | Captions could be better |
| Miscellaneous: | 5.5 | Really, killing the narrative style with all of its transistions between sections and "we's" and "I's" would do ALOT for this article. |
| Final Score: | 27.5 | Were I limited to four words I would simply say: Good Idea, Poor execution. But since I'm not I'll say that I like the direction you're headed with this, it just needs to be rewritten. To me, a total rewrite of this article is what stands between laugh out loud funny and its current mediocrity (verging on VFD material ). |
| Reviewer: | No offense PaddyAtkinson 23:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |
Thanks for the review. No offense taken, of course! An opinion can't be wrong, because it is an opinion. And I appreciate it.
The intent, however, wasn't to engage in "ripping podunk towns". There are already too many asinine articles which do that. To me it always seems as if the authors of town-hate articles are mental weaklings who blame their hometown for the fact that they personally suck stale asswind. The intent of the article to hand being rather opposite to that -- to create a lightly-taken, metaphorical idyll in small, perhaps -- it obviously did not come across. I suppose it's a failed experiment. Oh well. ----OEJ 01:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
I sort of see where you're going with that, maybe just make it slight less subtle I suppose. Maybe present like someone remembering the good ol' days (everyone had a job, the streets were always full of laughter, and free love reigned). That reminds me of a friend I was talking to about this pier he lived by that burnt down and it made big news in the area. Everyone was getting all nastalgic about this thing and he'd never ever heard of that bastard even though he'd lived right by it his entire life. So I said "Ee, I can't believe it's gone, like! Used to get me bellend waxed under that pier every tuesday." Maybe taking that approach might liven it a bit...although, in essence it's still sort of ripping the town I suppose. That's the trouble with humour, though, because everyone's is slightly different. In conclusion, please disregard this post haha PaddyAtkinson 02:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)