Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Cluck!
Cluck![edit source]
I thought it would be funny if there was an article written in the style of chickens, and one that has a humorous yet serious message written in the context of links placed intermittently throughout the article. If you are going to edit it, make sure you keep similar links written in the same dialect as it appears first. For example: chicken is gawk cluck cluck and thus should appear that way every time you use it. I am not trying intentionally to create another AAAAAAAAA! or Quack Style page, but one that is still telling a humorous plot by chickens to overthrow the government, and to end the genocide by KFC (Which fits well because PETA is trying to do the same thing)-I am a Vegetarian, and i mean that in the Uncyclopedian way (I eat meat). So please be helpful and contribute some content that will be greatly appreciated.
| Humour: | 4 | Difficult to find the humor in encoded articles. |
| Concept: | 4 | The concept is difficult, the implementation uncompromising. |
| Prose and formatting: | 3 | Not really relevant. |
| Images: | 5 | Appropriate images. |
| Miscellaneous: | 4 | My personal reaction is negative. |
| Final Score: | 20 | |
| Reviewer: | ----OEJ 23:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC) | |
Articles written in code put a terrific burden on the reader: you can't just read them, you have to solve them. I think that for most readers the trouble is more than they're willing to put up with. The use of links to make semi-coherent phrases ("chicken uprising conspiracy overthrow the government KFC") is helpful but not enough to carry the article into realms of genuine readability.
Some articles have interspersed stretches of code with plain English, I think -- for instance, in this case you might have a human who understands Chickenese interviewing the revolutionary chickens, with his questions and commentary in English and only their responses in Chickenese. Done cleverly enough the gist of the chicken talk can be suggested in the interviewer's English sections.
But as it stands this is neither an easy nor funny read in my lousy opinion. ----OEJ 23:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)