Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Become a king
HowTo:Become a king[edit source]
It failed vfh. It needs cleanup. Your advice is appreciated Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 
14:44 May 29 '09
- Sure, I'll take it. Assuming I don't become a king first. Staircase CUNt 20:16, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 5.5 | SInce this is a conversation-based aticle with many small sections, I'll abolish my "section-by-section" reveiwing technique. Now let's get straight to the beginning.
From there you start us off right at the point. However, even though you get right in the thick of things, there wasn't a lot of laughs. Then you move on on how to become a king. THis is where I seemed to notice a problem. You gave us three ways to become a king. The article is called "HowTo: Become a king". However, after these three ways, the person becomes a king. Most of the article remains this way, where the person is king but is just trying to prove he is the true king. I think this was the biggest flaw in your article. Now, back to the humour side of it. Let's be honest here, I didn't laugh all that much. Maybe two, three times the whole article. In these three ways to become king, you presented two good ideas: having many/power, and killing the king. Being born into the kingdom didn't really strike me as a good idea, because so many people were born in kingdoms and very few became king. Also, these reasons failed in their main points which was to get the person to laugh. These were, or were supposed to be, the main points and ideas of the article, and they supplied no laughs. Once the person finally does become king, that is when I started laughing. I liked how the secret service guy said they were starting a rebellion and "I" said "Oh, fuck!". This part struck me as funny, but the rest kind of fell flat. The part with the sword in the stone kinda made me go "meh", and the dragon part as well. At this point, I would reccommend a full on rewrite that deletes the points that show what happens after becoming king. The I would suggest you take a step by step approach towards becoming a king and remove the conversation completely. You do not have to do this, but tis what think is best for your article. However, you if do not want to do that or do not have the time, you could keep your conversation theme. Just try and add more funny lines and witty dialogue. This method would be easier, but I think that doing in step-by-step would make a much better article with proper execution. |
| Concept: | 6 | Ok. The concept of this article isn't that great. The biggest problem was the fact that the article was called "HowTo:Become a king" and only about half of the article was about becoming a king, the rest was about things that happened after becoming king. This flaw can be fixed just by deleting the stuff that happens after becoming king. You may put a brief section called "Aftermath" or "aftersomething" and have a little bit about what happened after the subject became king. I Failed to mention this in the humour section, and I just thought it up now. What you could do is instead of removing the the part about slaying a dragon and pulling the sword part of becoming a king, you merely move it to the beginning and have it as two of the ways the person can becme king. This would make the process of becoming a king much more complete than it is now.
As I said above, I do not think the method you chose would lead to the best article. If you execute this style to its full potential, than yes, you can make a fantastic article, but I believe that doing the other method would make an even greater one. I believe you should do a step-by-step which would probably result in the best style of article. If you need any real help with that, just look at other HowTo's and see how they are formatted and see what kind of jokes they have in them. |
| Prose and formatting: | 5 | The formatting of this article was a matter of concern for me. From what I can see, you had two people talking, correct? However, I only saw one label of who was talking. Actually I did once see a quote labeled "Writer", but only once did I see that. Your sections were mostly pretty brief, and there was a lot of them I suggest that you combine them, assuming youkeep the conversation style. However, if you go with the step-by-step style I reccomended, then Formatting shouldn't be that much of a problem. However, you did have a decent ammount of pictures that were spaced well. I would suggest you move one of them to the left side, however, to spruce things up a bit and make your article a bit more interesting-looking, if you know what I mean. |
| Images: | 6.5 | The images were satisfactory, but not much more. The first image didn't really remind me of a king, So I Suggest you change the image to a picture of an actual king. This will make the point very clear, and, if it is a good image, draw readers to your article. The second image seemed a bit off the point to me, if it weren't for the caption I wouldn't have got it at all. I suggest you just remove that image altogether. As for the third image, well done, it was a nice seection and definitely did its job well. The fourth image, well, when I saw that I started shaking my head. I think you should get a different picture of a dragon to put there if you do that, It will add more pop to the article. And, as I said in the formatting section, You should probably move an image over to the left. |
| Miscellaneous: | 5.8 | See Below. |
| Final Score: | 28.8 | So, In my opinion, you have a lot of work to do with this article. If you stay with your conversation approach I have a list of steps you should take to make your article Better.
All of the advice above is for the article if you keep in the conversation style, which I assume you will. Still, I suggest an attempt at least ot the article in a step-b-step, more factual type of article as opposed to the conversation style. Sorry, if I seemed sort of harsh, I was just trying to give you the best advice I could come up with to make your article better. I think if you follow my advice your article will become feature-calliber. Good luck! |
| Reviewer: | Staircase CUNt 21:29, 29 May 2009 (UTC) | |