Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Left 4 Dead 2

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Left 4 Dead 2

Hye, folks. I wrote this article a few days ago, but I'm having a bit of trouble with it (it's already on ICU). I think it lacks something essential to make it funny, but I couldn't find it. I appreciate comments, criticism and suggestions to make my this article better. If you have suggestions on my writing style, speak up. If you have something to say about the subject, speak up. You're the critics, and I am obliged to listen. Thanks in advance.

The Warmonger 10:55, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

I will take this one for you in the next 24 hours. I put it on ICU in the first place and have been keeping an eye on it ever since, I'd be happy to help since you seem to be willing to put the work in. --ChiefjusticeDS 11:07, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Humour:	2	OK, first off, since this article is in ICU already don't worry about the scores too much, focus on the advice. The article is in quite a poor state at the moment and is quite incoherent and erratic, there are a couple of good jokes throughout but these are quite rare and often marred by poor execution. The very first thing I recommend you do is take a look at How to be funny and not just stupid. I am not telling you to go here because I think you are unable to write but rather because it will help you understand why some things will be rejected by the community on uncyclopedia. A good example are the frequent jokes about homosexuality throughout the article, now while a well executed gay joke can work and can be very amusing, throwing it into an article does not immediately equal funny, for users who spend a long time reverting vandalism on here, it will just be something that they have seen hundreds of times before and thus is unlikely to amuse them. My recommendation for you is that you carefully go through your article with HTBFANJS and you use it, and your own judgement to determine what material cannot be salvaged. I understand that you may have worked hard on creating the article as it is, but I would urge you to view this as a means to an end rather than a punishment. Try to be harsh when editing and only keep jokes you are certain have some potential as you will need to work them in later. Once you have cut the article down the hard part begins. My main problem with your article at the moment is that the jokes are all over the place, there doesn't appear to be any structure to them and they are just slotted in where they seem to fit. My recommendation is that you investigate the style used in the Left 4 Dead article, take note of how the author establishes a running joke for the article and that jokes rarely feel as though they have been made just for the sake of it. You need to decide two things for your article. You need to first consider how you are going to make things funny (feel free to use the Left 4 Dead article for pointers). I find that an article works a lot better if it is based on actual known facts rather than imagined ones, this is why the running joke of there being four of everything in the original Left 4 Dead works; because it is actually true, and may be something that a reader may not have noticed. Such a joke makes for more laughs than a joke that the special infected want to rape the survivors, while amusing in certain contexts it is not true and thus its humour potential is far less. You should-while trying to establish some connection between your article and the Left 4 Dead one-also attempt to find ways that you canuse to distance your work from it, rather than repeating what it says, for example about the special infected, try to focus on things that are unique to Left 4 Dead 2 (Melee weapons, new guns, uncommon common infected, new campaigns, scavenge and realism modes) and thus have not been covered by Orian, when he rewrote Left 4 Dead. This will likely require a lot of consideration and I would advise you to ask for help if you are stuck rather than abandon the article to the wrath of IP's. Another point I should mention is that you should avoid stagnant jokes that people who are fans of the series will have heard already, since your article will be predominantly read by these people you should strive to provide something new and original for these people, this will again require some careful consideration, I know that there are a lot of Left 4 Dead 2 parodies out there and the temptation to copy is always there. I would really encourage you to try to stay original with your humour and perhaps look at some of the less obvious examples of humour, perhaps the lethal nature of the frying pans in Left 4 Dead 2, which apparently inflict more damage than being shot with a pistol. I will avoid belabouring the jokes any further as you will be able to find existing help in HTBFANJS, remember that you can always ask if you are unsure about a specific one. There are some indicators of promise in here, your campaign descriptions in particular stood out to me, the supposed time of the Swamp Fever campaign made me smile, it is that kind of originality that you should aim to replicate, even if this joke was made in error, consider why it is funny carefully. I know there is an awful lot to do here but I fervently hope that you are prepared to stick at it, devote some serious time to this one and you will reap the benefits, remember, Rome wasn't built in a day, if it had been there would almost certainly have been more drinking.
Concept:	3	I am pleased to see someone taking on the task of writing a Left 4 Dead 2 article, the idea has been avoided here partly because it is quite challenging to do a video game article well (we have already had one Left 4 Dead 2 article deleted) and it is good to see one that stands a chance of being a really solid piece of work. As far as your concept goes the idea is challenging, as I already said, but the problem is your execution of the concept. Your tone varies quite erratically and sentences like "Left 4 Dead 2, unlike the first game, now has five campaigns to counter those whiny bastards who keep on complaining that there are too little campaigns to play on" are common. The problem with the above sentence is that you are attempting to merge two tones together, you are trying to be formal and encyclopaedic and tell us that Valve introduced the extra campaign to satisfy the fans who felt that the first game was not long enough, but you are also trying to give an opinion on this. Since Uncyclopedia is a parody of Wikipedia you should remember that the article should sound like a Wikipedia article and you will notice that these never contain the authors opinion of a subject. Your article should either sound like an encyclopaedia article or be completely informal, I would recommend that you go with the encyclopaedic tone. In line with the encyclopaedic tone you should avoid putting opinions into sentences, there are lots of ways to still do this however, try things like non-sequiturs: for instance, were I wanting to make the joke that people who complain to Valve are very annoying but I was writing in the encyclopaedic style I could say "Left 4 Dead 2's swift appearance was partly die to Valve being inundated with complaints from fans who said that the first game was not long enough". By using non-sequiturs you can make a point and still sound encyclopaedic, try taking a look atLeft 4 Dead for some examples of this in practice if you are having trouble understanding what I am getting at here.
Prose and formatting:	3	Your prose are usually found in very short individual sections and this should generally be avoided as it makes for a lot of stop start reading, try padding out sections into longer prose or merging two short sections into one. Your spelling and grammar is of a reasonable standard, though I could identify some mistakes. Currently I don't see any need for you to ask for help with your spelling and grammar as it is of a good standard already, though if proofreading is not your idea of a good time you should remember thatthe proofreading service is there to help out, as you should proofread regularly when writing. Beyond this you should ensure that you format corerectly, your images, notably in the special infected section are creating a narrow passageway for the text to go through, you should try to avoid this by carefully formatting them and by cutting where necessary. You should remember that formatting should come after material for the article so you should not place too much emphasis on sorting this before you sort the problems mentioned above.
Images:	4	Your images are plentiful and you seem to have a reasonable idea as to what you want to achieve with them. However I would caution against using images that aren't of the actual special infected, it feels scruffy and unproffessional and detracts from the article more than it adds to it. Be creative when you choose your images and remember that they should link to the article and should fit in with the tone you are setting. Your image captions should also reflect the humour in your article, bear in mind that they are of more importance to an image than they seem, so they are well worth spending time on. My recommendation is that you leave your images until last and then add them in once you have an idea of your new direction for the article.
Miscellaneous:	3	My overall grade of the article.
Final Score:	15	As I said earlier, the article is in a poor state right now, but I am very hopeful that you have the committment needed to rescue it. If you are concerned that it will be deleted because of the ICU tag, ask an administrator to move it to your userspace, there you can work on it without fear of deletion. I know there is a lot of criticism and advice here for you to take in but I would encourage you not to feel that the task of fixing this is not insurmountable, there is work to be done, but it is manageable. Remember also that this review is my own opinion and that there are others available, there are also other people who would be happy to give you a hand making this article better, myself included, all you need to do is ask around. If you have any questions about improving the article or any comments about my review then you can leave them on my talk page. Good luck making any changes.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 15:07, January 26, 2010 (UTC)