Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Carnies (2nd opinion)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Carnies

Though there was certainly nothing wrong with the first review, I'd like some more feedback before I proceed any further. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 17:21, November 15, 2009 (UTC)

This has been here too long. I'm in here now. --ChiefjusticeDS 10:40, November 29, 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	8	OK, your humour is pretty good and I certainly couldn't find any problems with regard to your technique, your jokes are well set up and the execution is spot-on. The problem I did find was that as I read the first part of the article I found my mind beginning to wander from what you were describing and I began to feel guilty for not doing my university work. To say that in another way the problem I found was that while the article's early parts are good enough as far as technique goes the jokes weren't hitting me as I suspect you would have liked. The problem as I saw it was that you had strayed quite a long way from what would bring people to your article. I thought that the references to the games were good and you have a good running joke in that respect, but I thought that to get to the jokes you had to wade through the less funny history sections to get to the jokes. I laughed out loud at the second quote and I thought your first quote, while a bit long winded was equally good, but as I set off into the prose again in the next section I felt that the article's humour was taking a hit for it. My advice to prevent this happening would be to gear the history sections more towards interaction with Carnies. I don't mean change the entire history to quotes but try to avoid long sections that are only meant to be funny because you are referring to Carnies, as in the "Soviet Rule & Diaspora" section. The aforementioned section felt more like a tenuous link to explain why they are now found in the US rather than Russia, sections like this are prime candidates for more jokes. As I said already the parts where you do make the jokes are very good so I would encourage you to try to extend them to these sections. If you want a recommendation as to which jokes you would be best expanding then I thought that the jokes which referenced things you do at carnivals worked best, the later parts under "Culture" were my favourite parts of the article. However you know the article best and I will leave it to your judgement. As the score should indicate the problem I have raised for you is very minor and the article is quite acceptable even if you decide to do nothing else with the article.
Concept:	8	I think the concept is absolutely fine and you have picked an interesting way to go about the execution. My main problem on this is that while you pull off the encyclopaedic style just as I would expect of a writer of your skill to do. What I felt is pulling you back here is that some of the more blatantly untrue aspects of the article drag things back and leave me feeling that I couldn't buy into the article to a great extent, for me the believability of an article like this means a lot to the humour and a couple of instances where what you have said is blatantly made up sullied what was otherwise an enjoyable reading experience. My recommendation would be that you read through carefully and try to identify the instances where your text makes it obvious that something is made up.
Prose and formatting:	9	Very impressive on this one, the spelling and grammar is of its usual high standard in your writing, but I would still recommend that you give it another proofread before you do anything else with it. Your formatting is also fine, but you should try to avoid placing images directly on top of templates, I realise that templates are important additions to your article but you should try to treat them with the same rules as you treat images, it makes for better practice. Otherwise this was fine.
Images:	10	No complaints from me on this one.
Miscellaneous:	7	My overall grade of the article.
Final Score:	42	I realise that your overall score doesn't reflect the other scores, but I felt that I needed to communicate that I was not as gripped as I usually feel on articles that score this highly. The article does a lot right and there are parts that I enjoyed but I would really recommend that you reconsider some of the jokes and some of the prose to make sure that it is all doing what you want it to do. If you have any questions for me then feel free to ask them on my talk page. My apologies that you had to wait so long for this review. Good luck making any changes.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 21:42, November 29, 2009 (UTC)