Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Icomplet Hmour
Icomplet Hmour[edit source]
sausage lol 17:47, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
I'll get this one tomorrow. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:45, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
| Humour: | 3 | OK, I had actually considered reviewing this one and decided against it before being asked, the reason was because it looked to be a very challenging prospect. Having made my way through it I have to conclude that I was right. I have a few suggestions for you. The first is the obvious, the incomplete words idea that surrounds the article, while I see what you are trying to do with it I think it needs scaling back, the reason for this is that at times the narrative is so difficult to translate into readable English that I found myself yearning to skip sentences as I felt that no joke could be worth the time I would have to spend deciphering the text. I fully support the idea of trying a new idea for your article, and my recommendation would not be that you bulldoze through the article and spell everything properly, but rather that you re-examine the way you use it. Consider it this way, to be certain I was not being strange, I forced several people I live with and Mrs Chief to read the article, and all of them said that it was a difficult to read and 2 of them said that they would not read to the end given the opportunity to stop. What I would recommend is that you continue to use the incomplete text idea but refine it a bit, rather than writing the entire article in that way that you try to write parts of it normally and others in the incomplete way. If you do this you will ensure that you still retain the humour that you have already. I will go into the way I think that this would be best accomplished in the concept section.
The other problem I noticed was that beyond the incomplete text ideas you are quite sparse on jokes, my approach, were I writing like this would be to try to write it so that it would be funny without the incomplete text, because I realise you want it to come off as a foundation for the article rather a gimmick but I think the way to do this would be to frame it with normal prose rather than go the whole hog with it, because it does currently feel a bit like a gimmick. Now there is nothing wrong with a gimmick but you shouldn't overstate the effect it can have, a gimmick that is transferred to try to work on this kind of scale feels like it is being used to fill in for a lack of ideas, my recommendation would be that you put the idea to one side and focus on the other jokes, and then carefully add the incomplete text idea back in. Remember that if people do go to the trouble of deciphering what you have written they will want jokes to compensate, and while there were jokes there, they were quite sparse or did not justify the time it had taken for me to find out what you were saying. You may well think that I am being thick by being unable to read what you have written, and perhaps I am, but it just seemed to me that you didn't really provide a justification for writing the article like this, except in the title and it seems that the article could be name Humour and work in exactly the same way. So my first move would be to find a reason, choosing a reason would not only provide you with more topics to make jokes about but would also justify the reader having to decipher the text in the article. What is there at the moment is by no means awful, but I cannot stress enough that if people don't finish your article or cannot read it without making an reasonable you could have written the funniest conclusion and filled the article with brilliant humour and it wouldn't matter, that is why your score is so low, you need to find a way to justify the reason for having incomplete text besides the title and if you want to use it to this extent you need to make some changes so that it can be read with less problems. |
| Concept: | 3 | Right my feeling on your concept is that it has bags of potential, but the way you have chosen to execute it means that you aren't in the optimal position to employ said potential. My feeling was that had I been writing this I would have been reluctant to employ the incomplete words idea to the extent that you have. I think that rather than write the entire article in that way you write normally and have sections for the incomplete text. To that end my recommendation would be that you renamed the article something like "A history of .... Humour" and then let readers come to the conclusion that this is a joke. For the body of the article I would have tried something like talking about the fact that history was replete with examples of incomplete humour, then I would introduce the sections with the incomplete words. Now I'm not trying to say, what you have done is wrong, do this and everyone will love your article, I'm suggesting that you try experimenting with this, as an alternative to what you have already. Even if you are very attached to the way the article is formed at the moment I suggest that you simply try putting some justification into the article, at least more than you have currently. |
| Prose and formatting: | 7 | It is very difficult to score you for spelling and grammar on this one considering the style of the article, there are a few grammar errors I could identify but nothing that a quick proofread couldn't fix. In this case I would say that a proofread would have to be done by you unless you change the article drastically. Your image formatting is fine, though another image may be desirable, and I would suggest that you move the image of Plato down the page so that things are a bit more spread out. |
| Images: | 5 | The images are fine, though I would endeavour to make the captions fit the article a bit more and perhaps explain why parts of the images are missing, I get that it is to go with the whole incomplete idea, but why are these pictures incomplete? Were they funny before you took something out? I would recommend you address this problem. |
| Miscellaneous: | 4 | My overall grade of the article. |
| Final Score: | 22 | This article is by no means poor, I think it has plenty of potential but the delivery is wrong, feel free to let me know if you think I have judged it poorly. Besides that I think that some careful consideration and a bit more hard work is what this article needs to be excellent, and I have full confidence in you delivering that. If you have any questions or comments then feel free to leave them on my talk page or let me know on IRC. Good luck making any changes. |
| Reviewer: | --ChiefjusticeDS 20:54, January 16, 2010 (UTC) | |