Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/HowTo:Survive the apocalypse before and after!(2nd entry)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
HowTo:Survive the apocalypse before and after![edit source]
vladimirKruscecev 01:38, July 18, 2011 (UTC)
| Humour: | 4.5 | Okay, this article does have a decent idea, but it is plagued by some serious issues such as bad writing and randomness. The introduction, for one thing, doesn't make any sense, but when the first section begins, I get to see what you're trying to get at. You seem to be saying that the apocalypse gives you the opportunity to do all kinds of things you could never do before, but it also means you have a high chance of dying. Unfortunately, this article is neither coherent or engaging enough to really interest the reader. The later sections of your article are basically listcruft. Though the lists do have some good ideas (like all the weapons you need to carry, or what kind of jobs you can get), the formatting is pretty poor and disorganized and hence I really can't make complete sense of what you're trying to say. Some of the list entries also end up getting a little repetitive |
| Concept: | 7 | It's a good concept, but the execution is lacking. Your article needs proofreading and cleanup, and you need to elaborate more on the funny bits instead of just making passing references to them. |
| Prose and formatting: | 3 | This article has got terrible formatting. The list entries are haywire, the paragraphs aren't coherent, and the article on the whole is very erratic and choppy. I strongly recommend you ask a fellow user to proofread your page and help you in making your paragraphs more coherent. For instance, you might want to completely rewrite your introduction, as well as your list about the people whom you may have to deal with in an apocalypse. Both of them are in bad shape and could do with a rewrite. |
| Images: | 8 | The images are actually quite reasonable, but you should add some content so as to make them seem more relevant to the rest of your article. |
| Miscellaneous: | 4 | |
| Final Score: | 26.5 | This article may have a good concept behind it, but its execution is pretty flawed. A lot of your paragraphs aren't coherent, your lists need work, and the article on the whole is a bit messy and confusing. I suggest you ask for an experienced user's help in getting your article on track, because there is quite a bit of potential in here that a good writer could tap into. |
| Reviewer: | --Scofield & The Machine 10:05, July 18, 2011 (UTC) | |