Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Holocaust exaggeration

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Holocaust exaggeration

Uh, okay, let's get started. --  Le Cejak • <-> 01:34, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Humour:	4.2	averaged all the sections. Introduction (7) Good clean intro into the article. 1 Who are they? (5) Randomness (confusing KKK for Wu-Tang is kinda funny but this article isn't about that. The winner gets to bum a sacred David Irving blow-up doll????) 2 Where did they come from? (4) Okay, I'm starting to think reading this article was a mistake. 3 Evidence (3) fading... fading... What the hell are you talking about? This is not original. Maybe in 2006 people would've been like OMGWTFLOLZROFLCOPTER!!! but now... we've seen so many holocaust articles that I wake up screaming in the middle of the night, believing myself to be carried off to the gulag. 4 Criticism (3) I think you lost your train of thought. Maybe you got bored. 5 Laws against Holocaust Exaggeration (3) This is not only not funny, it's completely random.
Concept:	6	GAH! THEY'RE COMING FOR ME!! Oh wait, no, it's a stupid holocaust article. The only guidance I can give this article is that you really should just exaggerate the holocaust. Are you listening? DON'T EXPLAIN WHATEVER holocaust exaggeration IS BECAUSE NOBODY CARES! JUST EXAGGERATE THE HOLOCAUST!
Prose and formatting:	8	iz allright.
Images:	3	Two of them made no sense, and the middle one is just... what the hell does that have to do with exaggerating the holocaust? Get pictures of the holocaust in there, and spice 'em up with, like, people being shot out of cannons and so forth!
Miscellaneous:	5.3	avg'd all the other scores.
Final Score:	26.5	See my above comments. There's a lot wrong here but it isn't all bad. Might I suggest just exaggerating the holocaust??? Might I suggest forgetting this completely? I'm listening for your response, if you have one.
Reviewer:	Le Cejak • <-> 01:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)