Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Build a Better Mousetrap
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
HowTo:Build a Better Mousetrap[edit source]
took me ages to write. mostly becasue i started it, didn't edit it for months, then finished it. i'd like an in-depth review, please. 18:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Okay. I'm reviewing this. Right now. I'm doing it right now.
18:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Humour: | 7.5 | Hey Gerry. I have not slept in many hours. So I make no promises as to the coherence of this review. That said:
One final comment: This is not really a "HowTo" at all. The article currently sitting at Mousetrap is not very funny. Not at all. I'd like to move it back into the original author's userspace and move this article there. I don't know where I'd go about building consensus for that. |
Concept: | 6 | I like the concept of building a better mousetrap. I like the concept of the board game "Mousetrap" being a better mousetrap. I don't like the concept of the reason we need to build a better mousetrap being that mice have an advanced civilization full of scientists and engineers who foil us at every turn. That just seems to take the article out of the universe that it would be funniest in. You know, ours. |
Prose and formatting: | 9 | The prose is good - crisp, clear, and refreshing. My one thought on the formatting is that the pictures look awfully small. But then, I'm on a monitor with an unusually high resolution. So maybe you should ignore that. |
Images: | 6 | I love the "diagram," but, well, we've already gone over my problems with anthropomorphized mice. |
Miscellaneous: | 6.5 | Your miscellaneous score is: (drumroll) 6.5. |
Final Score: | 35 | So, that's my take. Make it longer, make the mice dumber, talk about different trap designs, and move it into normal-article-space. That's highly subjective advice, obviously. Other reviewers may disagree. So... if you want a second opinion, feel free to resubmit this and wait another two weeks :) Good luck! |
Reviewer: | 18:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC) |