Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Ganon
Ganon[edit source]
The former article wasn't funny at all so i rewrote it.Would like to know if it's funny, or at least, better than the former one.
Adorfin 19:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Fear not, I have arrived and, together, we will finally get you off the Pee queue. (Give me 24 hours, but I thought I'd best show you that I am here and I will be reviewing shortly) --ChiefjusticeDS 09:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 2 | You seem to know what you mean to do with the humour and the parts of the character you want to joke about, but you seem unsure about how to do it properly. I think you would find far more success with very careful study of HTBFANJS, this will give you a good idea of better things to joke about. My main suggestion would be to stick to being funny about the character's actual in game appearances, rather than making them up yourself. Since people who arrive at this article are, most likely, going to be fans of the Zelda series they will want to read a humourous slant on a Zelda antagonist, not an article about this characters secret other life that exists only in your head. My best advice to you here is to go back and do a rewrite and pay close attention to HTBFANJS as you do, as many of your jokes are pointless or just not amusing in this context. Have a look at this article and see how the character background differs to yours. Notice how the author makes up events but notice how they also bind them back to the character in a way you have not.
For the rest of the article stick to a similar style, bind the summaries back to the game, if a section is titled Ocarina of time, then the Ocarina of time should be a cornerstone of the section rather than a loose framework to fill with jokes and made up story. I think success lies in aping the Wikipedia article, write with the same article framework as they have, just satirise it, that gives you a template to work from. Otherwise, mind the profanity, it isn't an instant funny code, it sounds unprofessional and unless used very well then it isn't good. Serious work needed here and I'll be keeping an eye on this one, it is a prime candidate for VFD in it's current state. |
| Concept: | 3 | You have a reasonable concept that could be made into a very solid article but your tone and execution needs some work. You have decided on an encyclopedic tone, however profanity and colloquialisms spell a quick end to such a tone. Have a look on Wikipedia and see how often profanity appears in their articles. Use their writing style and use it to be funny. Writing AND SHE WILL BE RAPED in capitals is less than funny or professional.... in fact it isn't. Re-write and be careful, you seem to have re-written a bad article and just made it bad in a different way. If you are serious about fixing it up then you need to sort your tone out and fix it, I know you are capable of better than this. If you don't know how to improve ask for help, I would be happy to help you out and so would a lot of other more experienced editors, no harm in asking. Since your article has potential I implore you to work hard at fixing the tone up. In the instances you do get the tone correct you are usually referring to something irrelevant that you couldn't make a joke about if you tried. Sort this out. |
| Prose and formatting: | 1 | I have never ever dished out a score for prose this low. I'm usually pretty generous with my scores on this one if there appears to have been some attempt to proofread or sort the grammar out. However as I read your article I see almost every tense confusion, syntax error, punctuation error and grammar error I can imagine. Not to mention the spelling. Did you even take another look after you finished writing??? The first thing I saw when I arrived was a red link to nothingness. Let's set out the basics:
1) Do Not start sentences with And 2) Do Paste the article into a spellchecker 3) Do send the article to UN:PS 4) Do Learn the principles of silent letters in words 5) Do Not Misuse conjunctions 6) Seriously Run the article through UN:PS You also need more images as the prose dominates the page and your text to image ratio is currently like a see-saw with an elephant on one end and a very light thing on the other. Text breaking and standard reviewing practice alone save you from a zero for this section. |
| Images: | 2 | Here you gain a point for each image used, and only one of those is mildly amusing. This just smacks of laziness, pictures are essential for an article, especially one like this. You need at least two more and should consider overhauling all the images full stop. Steal the images Wikipedia use if necessary. Think how you would react to arriving at an article this long which contains a total of two images, which both appear at the top, you would be unimpressed. So, do something about it. |
| Miscellaneous: | 2 | My overall grade of the article. |
| Final Score: | 10 | I have never reviewed an article that has annoyed me more, I see so much potential in your writing that seems defeated by laziness. If you could muster the motivation to try and rescue this article, then why not the motivation to do it well? The bottom line is this: Above all consider bulldozing the article and starting again emboldened with knowledge on how to fix your humour from HTBFANJS, second, do not be afraid of asking for help from me here, or from another writer. I will be watching this page and will be placing the rewrite template on it in a few days time if you choose not to take action. You have the potential, don't waste it.
Good luck. |
| Reviewer: | --ChiefjusticeDS 18:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC) | |