Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Fuck ChiefjusticeDS
Fuck ChiefjusticeDS[edit source]
Unless you are an exotic bird, please don't review this. Unless, of course, said bird neglects to do so for over a week... at that point, I will be more than happy to welcome a proper review from whoever. ~ 
*shifty eyes* (talk) (stalk) -- 20101111 - 17:41 (UTC)
- Ah sorry, I didn't realise you'd submitted it again, or I would have gotten it today. I'll try and get it at some point over the weekend. --Black Flamingo 19:29, November 13, 2010 (UTC)
| Humour: | 6 | Monday counts as the weekend, right? Anyway, I thought this was decent article, however I think it was a little lacking in the funny department. There don't really seem to be a huge amount of jokes, although I think most of this stems from conceptual problems that I will discuss later. Overall I think most of the article's humour lies in its ideas rather than actual gags; the idea that ChiefjusticeDS is gay, for instance, or the idea that he smells like cabbage. One piece of advice I would give you here is to get more normal jokes in; little twists in the sentences that go against the reader's expectations. I don't know, maybe you're a more conceptual writer than a gag-man. Wrists was kind of the same, although that worked a lot better than this does. A good idea would be trying to get subtle references to how pathetic the narrator actually is; little unintentional reveals that expose how silly and pointless his vendetta is, and how he's just wasting his own time and everybody else's... In fact, let's move on to concept because I'm dying to talk about that. |
| Concept: | 6 | Ok, continuing from above, I have a couple of problems with the narrator. The main one being that I have trouble believing in him. The thing is, for someone to write an article called "Fuck ChiefjusticeDS", they'd have to be a bit pathetic, and probably quite angry too. This narrator, however, seems relatively calm, even musing. He just seems too intelligent and honest to create such a piece, and it's only really at the end that you get a sense of his anger at ChiefjusticeDS, and that's the only place where the rather profane title seems justified. I'm not suggesting you go for the "cursing idiot" narrator that we've seen a zillion times before, but I think there are a few things you can do to make this guy more believable and consistent. First of all, I reckon you should be a bit meaner in the intro; really establish this guy's anger. He can still be calm and speak in an intelligent way, but also try to hint that he may not be 100% sane. Or at least that he's very, very petty. All the praise in the intro doesn't make a whole lot of sense, considering the article is supposed to be an attack. Rather than just listing how awesome the Chief is take the skewed narrator's perspective, make out that Chief's a really short-tempered guy who's gone mad with power, but all the time keep subtly implying to the reader that, in actual fact, the Chief is just a great disciplinarian and a damn hard worker. So for the intro, have the narrator ranting and raging, but in a way where the reader can ascertain that his opinions are not supported by reality. Conversely, the outro (is that a word?) is the other end of the spectrum. The idea that he somehow tracked Chief down is a bit over the top, especially when one considers the calm nature of the narrator throughout (he seems more like the kind of guy who'd just give up, in my opinion). I personally think it's funnier that this guy's written an article about it, then had it deleted. Much funnier than over the top physical violence. In fact, I actually quite liked the ending of the original article, where he just said something like "Will ChiefjusticeDS delete this article too? Yes, as well as several others". It was probably the only funny part of the whole article.
I also think there's something missing from Chief's "mistreatment" of the narrator. Sure, he's pissed off because Chief is gay, smelly and killed his hamster, but that's all a bit silly. The gayness and the smell are obviously speculative; how would anyone know this unless they knew him personally? And then the hamster killing, well I guess that's just him clutching at straws in a desperate attempt to defame Chief. Or am I wrong here? If that isn't it, maybe it should be. But what I think this article needs is more Uncyclopedia-based mistreatment. That should be the start of it, surely, the banning, the huffing, the polite but curt warnings on the talk page. Then once you've done that, get to the sillier stuff; the name calling, the fabrications. Let the tirade build. It'll make more sense this way. It's actually a little unfocussed at times too, the most noticeable example being the gay section. The second paragraph in here is all about cabbage, not gayness, and it seems really out of place (especially since the next section is about that exact subject). Don't worry if you can't get a whole load of material on gayness, after all it's a bit of a dry well in terms of humour. Also, don't be afraid to trim the cabbage section, as you go on a bit too much there in my opinion. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | Ok, your spelling and grammar seem perfect, I'm beginning to think you're some kind of machine or something. However, your prose seems deliberately complicated at times, perhaps as a counter to the fairly simple and unintelligent style of the original piece. Generally I quite like it, but there were a few parts that seemed clumsy or forced, like this for instance; "so very gay, in fact, that every time he sneezes, there is a double rainbow all the way." Don't be afraid to use more ordinary language every now and then, especially when describing something that is inherently complicated. Perhaps just try a line like; so very gay that he sneezes rainbows".
There were also parts I just struggled to understand, even second and third time around. I found the scale of gayness a bit confuddling. It seems you're just blurting out random points along the scale with little regard for sense or formatting. You should definitely take another look at this, and maybe just cut it down to two points of the scale (like something mildly gay and something extremely gay). Then in the cabbage section, you say "become the very thing that precedes him". What do you mean by this? My first thought was that he'd become a cabbage, but then you linked it to sockpuppet. Am I way off here? |
| Images: | 8 | Your images are all good, I don't have a lot to say about them really. I really liked the cabbage with skulls. Perhaps you should consider making that the main cabbage image rather than the other, and getting rid of the pop-up. It's a really pretty image, in its own little way. I'd like to be able to sit and stare at it a while. The rest of them serve the purpose, but only the Judge Dredd one is really' funny. |
| Miscellaneous: | 7 | My gut feeling. |
| Final Score: | 35 | Ok, so not a bad article, but I think it still needs a little work before it could reach feature-level quality. So fix some of those issues with the narrator and I think this will be in much better shape in no time. The only other problem I can foresee is that you won't be allowed to restore a huffed article to mainspace, especially one that covers such a subject as this. Who knows, maybe ChiefjusticeDS isn't as mean as you make him out to be. If there's anything I've said here that you want me to explain better, or if you want my opinion on anything I might have missed, please let me know and I'll try to help (seems strange giving my standard finishing up message to you). I hope the review is ok. |
| Reviewer: | --Black Flamingo 19:25, November 15, 2010 (UTC) | |