Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Konqueror (rewrite)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Konqueror

The article has been reviewed before Uncyclopedia:Pee_Review/Konqueror, but has changed quite a bit lot since then. Aizmov 18:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Why no love? :-( Aizmov 09:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	3	The main problem with this article is that browsers and programming just isn't funny. I can see that you've tried to wring some humour out of your concept, but I don't think there was much there to begin with. Let's look at each section individually. Quotes: Just awful here; pretty much the exact thing you shouldn't do at the top of an Uncyclopedia article. People don't care about what Captain Obvious/Oblivious/etc. or Steve Ballmer have to say about your article, because these quotes are formulaic and the joke is weak and easily anticipated. Intro: I couldn't find any humour here. KHistory: During WWII, there weren't any computers you could design this browser on. This section relies on the massively overused "vague origins" joke and it just doesn't work here. "Nazis did it" is a much less popular joke, and might be a better focus if you want a random history, but honestly I would recommend writing something about recent history. It's much easier to make satirical. KPride: This section contained the only funny line in the article, about converting porn to ASCII, but it's still likely to go over the heads of many people. Pride in using a piece of software is only funny where that software is so exceptionally awful that anyone using it is wilfully torturing themselves, but I didn't get that here. KFeatures: This section is constructed on the idea that the browser is useless. Again, there are zero jokes to be made on this subject that haven't been done many a time before. Dragons: Wait, all of a sudden this browser is run by dragons. WTF? A more straight-faced and coherent article, based entirely on the dragons on teh internets, might be a better idea, but as a last paragraph alone it just looks random and pointless.
Concept:	3	The concept is just not good. As I stated above: browsers are not inherently funny, nor can they learn funny. So your article simply cannot be about features of a piece of software and be funny. Konqueror could be anything you can imagine, like a scheme by malevolent dragons or an awful piece of software accidentally created by a four year old with various hilarious comic effects (hilarity ensues). That's right, you can actually imagine the concept yourself.
Prose and formatting:	1	Absolutely horridly unreadably appalling. I had to fight my better instincts to close the page, turn off my computer and throw it out my window. When I can't make words out of what you've typed, there is a problem. It felt like learning to read again because I was assessing each word individually. What I'm trying to say is: ditch the K. I get that it is a joke about the developers naming their programs, but it could be confined to one sentence.
Images:	3	First two images are boring; dragon images are the bad kind of random because they don't feel related to the article; I assume that Acid3 is some kind of measure of performance, but it makes for a seriously boring image.
Miscellaneous:	1	The overall effect is bleeding eyes.
Final Score:	11	Read the beginners' guide and HTBFANJS again, rethink the concept, and give it another go from scratch.
Reviewer:	IronLung 20:55, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate your review. I'm sorry you had to force yourself to read it. If possible can you read my other article Safari and let me know if the problem is specific to Konqueror or I'm, overall, a failure in funny.

I'll scrap the article and start over. I need to imagine big, it is obvious that I confined myself, I like your ideas, I think I should rewrite Konqueror as a scheme by malevolent dragons to take over the Internet.

I thought for a while that I over used the K naming joke, it seems I did to the extent of making the article unreadable. Aizmov 07:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)