Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Ark of the Covenant (2nd Nomination)
Ark of the Covenant [edit source]
08:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 |
This article is under review by <font-weight:bold>Gerry Cheevers. Sayeth Gerry: shotgun!! |
| Humour: | 5.8 | average of scores
well first off, i really don't think you need the 'facts deleted' template. it doesn't add much to the article, and not having read any of it yet i can't say it fits or doesn't fit with your tone, but templates like that at the top of a page just really don't bring much to the table. as for the content itself, i really do like it, but i can see from the get-go why it might have some detractors, particularly on VFH. the tone is all wrong. an article such as this would be best served by a straight, serious, encyclopedic tone, but lines like 'it's kind of silly' and 'aaron and god's stuff' detract from the content, which is in fact very good.
more good stuff here, but you tend to have footnotes that state facts and claim that 'that's what the bible actually says!' it's better presented when you don't have to assure people things are really true. i liked the first paragraph, and some of the next two, but again your language/style/tone/approach is a little off, at places where you use first person or ask rhetorical questions.
a lot of hit and miss stuff here. there's a lot of misdirection links, some of them good (tending sheep) and some of them not-so-good (food substance). the footnotes here are better, particularly the seventh commandment one.
you really could have ended stronger, this is far too short for a concluding paragraph. you could go at least into a little detail about searching for the ark and stuff. i do like the closing punchline though. |
| Concept: | 7 | 5/5 points for a well-known subject worthy of parody.
2/5 points for execution. the main idea is there, and the secondary ideas are all good, but the transition from idea to article was rough on this one. the tone is all off, and it doesn't read like a proper parody of a religious item should. use of the first person, adding in bits like 'as usual', and some of the less mature lines and links all take away from the potential of this one. you also explicitly say things like 'only the bible can do that!', which takes away from the potential of parodying the bible because subtlety is your friend here...check out UnScripts:Genesis, Episode II: In the Garden of Eden for one of my favorite bible parodies. |
| Prose and formatting: | 4 | formatting was fine, grammar and spelling were almost fine, but your prose is the main weak point of the article because it takes away from the message. |
| Images: | 6 | both images are good, but the captions could be a little less over-the-top. maybe one more image couldn't hurt. |
| Miscellaneous: | 5.8 | averaged via magic |
| Final Score: | 28.6 | my preview button tells me that your final score is 28.6. i think this has a strong chance of being featured with a little but of a tune-up. very little of the content needs to be changed, but the way you present that content needs an overhaul. i love things like the moses & sons contractors, but the general structure and way the article unfolds needs to be streamlined. good luck, and you can bring any questions to my talk page. |
| Reviewer: | 17:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC) | |