Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Lynx
Lynx[edit source]
Bertiebeek 09:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I'll review this, for now enjoy Noel with this coupon. — Sir Sycamore (talk) 19:09, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
|
For a bumming session with Noel Fielding |
| Humour: | 6 | Not bad at all, it seems to lack impact, this is because it relies on clichés and stereotypical humour some o this is good, but more work is needed. Throughout the limitation to the topic is really borne out. Reference to British teen males is kind of old hat really; I also think that they prove as a rule a poor topic to parody - the fact is: teenagers aren't interesting - this is my view, but it might be n idea t broaden it out some way.
Throughout the reference to unilever and cooperate evil as well as Faberge eggs seems a tad random – to get it to work you might want to have more solid characterization ad figures (the pope is a bit dodgy) - I like in the film “Wedding Crashers” the character Will Farrell plays this forty something adolescent who founded the whole thing - something like that would work very well here - broaden it out - Lynx is not made by teenagers, you've got well educated marketers form the south east and the states coming p with all of the ads and marketing - these a re a riper target. Trivia sections aren't so cool there listy and t be honest not really funny, the Prohibitions is a bit of a one liner, sections should have paragraphs that flow. Throughout the lack of focus comes across, name dropping should be contained and limited if possible. I also think that you could have an underlying message within the piece - cooperate greed and homogeny being the most obvious and most easy to work in form here |
| Concept: | 5 | Needs a lot more work - though it could be very good indeed- I think focus and writing need to be the focus from here - as it stands I don't think there is much of concept to work from |
| Prose and formatting: | 5 | Weak, poor trivia one line sections - I’ve tided it up a little, but more work is needed. Noting glaringly bad, but definitely more work is needed. For example: "Axe can be bought in the United Kingdom from £1 shops and more recently 99p stores" is kind of orphaned, there a number of these errors that come from not spending time with an article. |
| Images: | 6 | Alright, could probably do with another, not really funny -which is problem with the article - humour is difficult to define, I’m not sure this is funny and this is captured in the image. Nothing major here, Often in reviews I’m keen to stress that writing should be the major factor. |
| Miscellaneous: | 5.5 | Not too bad, but not great - there’s no solution but to spend time with the article and develop a consistent focus and discard clichés and poor stereotypes or proved interesting twist on them. I would advise reading HTBFANJS – it’s a handy guide for how to seriously improve an article. |
| Final Score: | 27.5 | I hope I’ve been helpful for any questions or quires, don't hesitate to leave a note on my talkpage:) |
| Reviewer: | — Sir Sycamore (talk) 10:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC) | |