Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Deal with parents (in-depth)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

HowTo:Deal with parents

I want to improve this, but I'm out of inspiration. Any help or suggestions are welcome.

I'd like an in-depth review, preferably by a PEEING member. Also, since Tagstit and Guildensternenstein recently reviewed one of my articles, I'd like someone else to do the review this time. Anybody is still welcome to comment on the article ofcourse.

Please notice that this article is not really finished, I recently replaced the construction tag with {{Little Article}}. Keep this in mind when judging the article. I'm not expecting a "good" score, but I don't want the score to be bad just because it's not done yet. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 12:22, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Projectmayhem666-has stamped this article for review. Consider your article UNDER REVIEW bwahahaha!!

As a new Peeing member, I'll give you a big in-depth review. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 23:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I know the score isn't good, however, although its not finished, it still needs love and attention. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 02:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	2	The Into - I don't like how the first line flows, what you're saying is good, although this is probably a case for the prose, it just reads wrongly to me. I think "Normally you have some kind of parents" is a brash way to start the article which is where this sounding off comes from, perhaps wording it like this. "Everybody has parents, unless they died or didn't love you". It's funnier and flows alot better as it fits with your last point, also you can say "or didn't want you" as if I've just seen works too. Nothing wrong with this intro just somethings that I will be adding into the prose and formatting section. First things first, how far are you willing to go? - The first two questions sound like the same question to me, depending on your parents and surviving in this harsh world without them is pretty much the same thing. Content is a real issue here, there is no where near enough here to warrant its own section, it's two lines followed by another section, I'll add this being bad into the formatting section for now but generally the more you can write that is funny the better. The content is so little here that its not funny at all, you've not delved deep enough into anything to give the reader anything to laugh at. How much money do your parents have - I like the bit where you've said you have the right to take their money, it's amusing. I also like the bit about spending it on more important things than your parents every will, this section is a massive improvement from the first lot of content I've just read. The next paragraphs English however has really appalled me and I can't even understand the last sentence. More content is needed in this section too. Choosing your own destiny - I like the links to other HowTo's, makes it fit in like a little series sort of thing, despite the fact I think this needs a radical makeover. I like the mind controlling part but its just not got enough "funny" in it, the comedy I see here is the nonsensical aspect. I do find the sex slave part of the article quite funny, has made me bump up the score a little, I know you're devestated with the low score I've already given this article but given what I was going to. The next part of killing your parents, it's short but also funny and is fine so long as the next part is as long as the first, I suppose I'll now see. The next part isn't long, is brief and lacks content, there is alot you can explore with running away from home that isn't covered in the HowTo:Runaway from home article. The alternatives part is good too the only point I would like to make is at the end you advise the reader to use one of the previous three methods despite the fact you tell the reader not to use one of them, but then again I suppose its fine as the reader probably won't read this in as much depth as I am, since you asked so nicely. Welcome to reality! Surviving the real world - Needs more content could easily be expanded, its simple and true and average, so I guess it's ok. This article needs more content and needs a whole lot of love, if you want I'll help you with it but you've written stuff before and I'm sure you can handle this, it needs alot of love and alot of work. I see alot of potential, a shiney light of hope underneath the dark murky abyss.
Concept:	5	4/5 for your idea, its not original but its a good idea and fits in well with a series of HowTo's, 1/5 for implementation as you can see above, potential is there
Prose and formatting:	1	In the first line, the and after the comma should just be gotten rid of so the sentence can flow. The first point below the first line should be bidding not biddings as the word does not exist plurally. Also these three points, if we're going for correct English would be Parents that rather than "parents who", I suppose that last point is circumspect and is only really if you are going for the "correct way of speaking". The last sentence in the intro there is another and following a comma, I keep re-reading this and I cannot find any use for this comma so it should be taken out and shot, it's not required as you're using the word and, and there is no pause there. In the first section, there are two questions at first, "How much do you depend on your parents? Would you be able to survive in this harsh world without your parents" I strongly believe this is the same question, perhaps removing the first question mark and replacing it with either a full-stop or comma as both would work better instead, of course in proper English it would be a full-stop. The second line there is a part where you use an and instead of a full-stop, "dealing with your parents and the answers will considerably influence", if you read that back you can tell its meant to be a full-stop as its a different sentence. In the second section, you've said "big amount of money" which is incorrect, big is not the right word, it's large, large amount of money even better if you want to be really sophisticated is use "vast wealth" or something. Another point here is "if your parents don't own a lot of money" own is not the right word, own is used for a possession, money is not a possession its a symbolism of wealth used to aquire possessions. The correct word here is have (I'm aware I'm annoying you with this but it's what the review is for). "you should get dump them as fast as you can, cause they'll stick to you like parasites." the word get here shouldnt be here, it should be stripped, tied up and beaten to death. Also using cause is wrong as well when the word should because, please stop using cause, its not correct its wrong if you must use it, it requires an apostrophe first. "but you're not much with love and support in this competitive society" I cannot get what you're trying to say so I can't correct it, its really incoherent. In the third section under enslaving your parents, you use "If you have the ability to hypnotize or mentally control people or own some kind of mind control device," the first or should be a comma, I've stopped telling you I'm just going to correct faults because this should have been proofread anyway, I think there's a request on here for proofreading that you might should be interested in. "but which may be more accessible to the general public" But which? BUT WHICH? it's either one or the other. Right I'm tired of saying there are comma's followed by and's where it doesn't work, this article needs proof reading it, to me, looks like you've just typed it all out with reading it back and put it up for review and reading the articles history backs this up. The formatting of this section is bad, the small heading of killing your parents is under the enslaving part but the text for it is way below it, I know its because of the pictures but some editing could easily fix that up. "Ofcourse there are other fun things you can do with your parents". Of course is two words, if you look at the last word in this section, you've written it as one again. In the alternatives section, "in what mess would you end up in?", the first in does not need to be there, bugger it, cut it's throat and bury it on the Moors. The final section one mistake "cause nobody else will" ITS BECAUSE!!! Thats twice now, it has a be in front of it, look up because and cause in the dictionary, they don't mean the same thing, cause is a phonetical and should not be used without an apostrophe at the front to show this. In general the grammer and prose is horrible, the formatting looks bad, there is little content in sections which just bunches up a lot of headings and doesn't look good. The way you have it laid out also spreads out some text unecessarily. I've given this a 1 because this is the longest P section review I've written. Please remember to proof read first.
Images:	4	Images are good and are quite funny but they are let down by the fact there are too many for the small amount of content and that they clutter up the page and ruin the format, as they are fine themselves I think you could fix this problem by adding much more content, either that or you will have to round some of the pictures up in a small underground room, chained up while a small puppet tells them "he wants to play a game".
Miscellaneous:	3	Averaged as if I randomely picked a number out of my head.
Final Score:	15	Needs alot more content and alot of work. Hope the review is ok, as harsh as it probably is.
Reviewer:	--—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 02:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

It's harsh, very harsh, but I'll live. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 09:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

A little note: I'm pretty sure that "parents who" is also correct. And "Of course" is often written as one word. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 10:02, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

It is correct indeed its just not as good, of course, I've never seen it written as one word. Sorry for the harshness, I just can't give you a higher score based on you saying it will be better when its done, I don't doubt it will be better (I've read your other articles) but I reviewed what I read. Sorry again. I started that review at midnight and didn't finish until 2am, so I was as in-depth as possible. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 10:39, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I'll use "that" if it sounds better to you. I don't really mind the low score (though it's a little bit too low for my likings), but you mainly focused upon correct use of grammar and vocabulary and besides that you basically told me "add more content", while my main issue is a lack of inspiration. So any more suggestions related to content are very welcome. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 11:58, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I do have quite a few like the opening sentence suggestions, problem is I don't always feel it's my place to tell people what to write in a review since most people (myself included) like to write articles themselves, so if I'd put you should write about such and such I'd be worried about sticking my nose in so to speak. I'll list a few when I get back, I'm just going out for a few hours, won't be long though. As for inspiration, have you never argued with your parents then stormed off and though of all the things you could do to make them pay? I know have so if so, use that as inspiration. --—The preceding signed comment was added by Projectmayhem666 (talk • contribs). 12:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Arguing with my parents was the original source of inspiration, but I got over it, so now I'm less motivated to write about "Killing your parents" and such as before. About the review, the score was considerably lower than Tagstit's review, but you certainly did it in-depth, so I can understand some errors bothered you more than they would most readers. So anyway, thanks for the review. I mainly requested this review to get some suggestions and maybe some help so I can finish this article. If you want to edit something in the article, go ahead. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 12:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)