Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/File sharing
File sharing[edit source]
I happened by the file sharing page today and thought to myself "Self, this page sucks." So I hit my sandbox and took a couple hours to rewrite this. (Compare with the version, before my edits, here.) I think it needs a handful more links and could do with a few more images, but other than that any constructive criticism would be great. --Andorin Kato 06:05, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
I'm in here, so all you other bitches back off! --ChiefjusticeDS 09:18, October 22, 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 7 | OK, the article is much improved from it's prior sorry state, but there is still some work to be done. My overrall impression is that your humour, in general is pretty viable, and can be improved and doesn't desperately need fixing. The first thing that I would recommend is that you make much more of the joke that artists and the music industry don't really need the money that they would be deprived of from file sharing, for example, instead of saying: "How will this already-starving artist feed his children if you continue to recklessly steal his music?" try saying something like "How will this poor artist build a moat around his solid gold castle if you continue to recklessly steal his music?" While I am taking it to the extreme there I think that there is much more room for jokes like this, not just here but in the article as a whole. I think that this contrast between a rich artist complaining when a person in a homeless shelter downloads their song is an excellent source of humour that is mostly going untapped at the moment. My other suggestion for the humour would be to try and integrate the user into the article, through liberal use of the {{Username}} template. If you have ever heard of the TV licensing adverts in the UK then use that principle; if you haven't heard of the adverts then it is basically the idea that the government know if you don't have a licence and they can find you, the advert consisted of an entire room of people on very hi-tech equipment following one person who was watching TV without a license. The point I am trying laboriously to get to here is that you should integrate a similar idea, try saying something like: "The RIAA You should also try to avoid making the article listy, you have two sections that are lists right next to each other, you can try to flesh one of these out into prose if you want or you can just revamp the sections. Remember that lists are like parachute jumping, you only need to do it once and sometimes you don't need to at all. Analogy aside, lists are fine, but two in one article is a bit of a no, no and can lead to people deciding that your article is too 'listy' to be a feature. My only other point would be on the 'script' that you have near the bottom of the page, I see what you are trying to do, but I think it would be worth revisiting it, and perhaps making the events slightly less far-fetched, it is vaguely amusing as it is, but looking at the rest of your work I think you could do much better. |
| Concept: | 6 | The concept is good and I really like the way you have turned it round, the reason for the relatively low mark is that I feel that the article is crying out for something more in this regard. Basically the problem is that your style is seemingly lodged between two choices, either making the article a first person explanation of the dangers of file sharing, or being a Why? I got the impression from the first couple of paragraphs that you were speaking to the reader and explaining why they should not download music, but later got the impression that the article is supposed to be a look at an RIAA document that can be given to people in general, which is it? I'm not taking marks off because I'm too indecisive to make up my mind, I'm taking the marks off because the scope for the confusion is there. This won't be a problem if you put the article on VFH in a similar form, it is just a writing style issue, it doesn't effect your existing humour, but does, in my view, hold back the article's potential. |
| Prose and formatting: | 7 | Your prose is pretty good and your spelling and grammar has virtually no errors in it, just make sure you proofread carefully after any future edits to make sure more typos don't slip into the article. Your formatting is reasonable just watch out for the second half of the article where the formatting is very clumped up and it feels scruffy. I already banged on about lists, so the only other thing for me to question is the template. I might be being thick again (trust me, it happens) but isn't it a bit of a juxtaposition to say that people shouldn't read the article and then immediately address them beneath that? |
| Images: | 9 | Your images are fine, the communism one is good and you have done a nice job of integrating it with the text, the other image I'm unsure about, you have to make it bigger to actually get the joke, the joke is good, but it breaks the flow of the article to have to make the picture bigger, read all the text, go back, find your place etc etc. My advice would be to exchange the image for another or make the content of the pirate bay image a bit easier to read. |
| Miscellaneous: | 7 | My overall grade of the article. |
| Final Score: | 36 | You have a good solid article here, and I have amazed myself by finding quite so much to say about it. What you have got written down is amusing and enjoyable to read, but for a few small problems. If you can sort these problems then we will have the makings of an excellent article on our hands. You definitely have the ability to make it work, even without me telling you how much better it would be if you changed this that and the other. If you have any questions, comments, requests or pie, then feel free to leave them on my talk page. Good luck making any changes. |
| Reviewer: | --ChiefjusticeDS 10:07, October 22, 2009 (UTC) | |