Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Lyre (2nd review)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Lyre

The article for lyre has already been reviewed by User:Siddhartha-Wolf, but he suggests that I get an alternative viewpoint from a second reviewer before submitting this article for Featured status. Whoever wants it, get it now! While the reviewing process is still fresh.PericlesofAthens 00:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I should just say that I think this article is very good and only suggested sending it for another Pee Review due to my persistent neuroses. --El Sid, the lazy one • parlez-vous franglais? 01:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm Sid's usual alternative viewpoint, self appointed by the way, I've got this one. 24 hours. --ChiefjusticeDS 18:46, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Cool, can't wait to see the review!--PericlesofAthens 22:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Just dropping by to say that my review will be closer to the end of 24 hours due to some unexpected difficulties.--ChiefjusticeDS 05:59, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	7	OK, the humour is generally pretty good and the jokes are pretty well considered. I have a few problems with the article as it currently stands. The first is that while you do a good job of blurring the line between Lyre the instrument, and liar the personality trait I feel it does go too far at times. You need to focus on what you are trying to put across to the reader and you need to make sure that while the difference between being a liar and being someone who plays the lyre becomes unclear that it doesn't disappear, since this is a good joke in the article. Without the distinction between the two the joke doesn't work as well as it should, and some of the later sections feel like disappointing falls from a promising start. My other complaint is that in explaining some of your points you go off in a totally different direction. what you do is just like this: "Darth Vader is a sith lord who likes shiny surfaces, who did this, and this as well, and that is how he came to like shiny surfaces". Essentially it is not too much to ask that the reader take some things on faith, it would be better to say "Darth Vader likes shiny surfaces, which is why all the storm troopers regularly mop the floor of the death star." This focuses on the application of the affection rather than the reason for it. You need to take this back to your history section where most of these problems occur. My final piece of advice would be to use your initiative (HTBFANJS is also a great help here) and take a look at the final sections and reconsider some of the jokes, as your pleasing style of humour loses it's potency there somewhat, especially in the final paragraph, which really could use some attention.
Concept:	9	You have a superb concept and the idea behind the article is intelligent and well executed for the most part. My complaint in this regard is that you lose the excellent encyclopaedic tone a couple of times. The subtlety of your humour is complimented very well by this tone, and the places where you slip out of it feel like a bad departure from an article that had me thoroughly absorbed in it's subject matter. To get rid of these difficulties you should carefully go back through the article and remove the following should you find them: Opinions, prose where you address or ask something of the reader and profanity. These do not all apply to you but may be helpful as a check in any future articles. As evidenced by your score for this section your difficulties here are not undue and should be pretty easy to sort out.
Prose and formatting:	8	OK, you do pretty well here, though there are a couple of items that require a second look. The first is your spelling and grammar, your article is reasonably long and some problems are to be expected in this regard. However, now that your article is nearing completion a final proofread should be part of this finishing proofread. Spelling and grammar are not looked upon as vote winners on VFH (unless the user is in UN:PS), but can be important in deciding enjoyment of the article. Your problem is mostly in careless typos, words left in from old versions of sections and a few difficulties with sentence division. This is very easy to sort out yourself and your article demonstrates that you definitely have the ability to do so yourself. Otherwise your formatting is pretty impressive, though some of your images could do with being a bit bigger for the sake of clarity.
Images:	8	Your images are good for the most part, however you lose marks here because of a formatting issue and because the final image (the one of Jack Bauer) needs to be reconsidered as it currently compliments a pretty incoherent joke and has one of the less intelligent captions. I suppose the only reason this is worth a point on it's own is because it is such a disappointment to see it, especially after the rest of the article has been superb.
Miscellaneous:	9	My overall grade of the article.
Final Score:	41	Your overall score demonstrates the real impact of your article, I enjoyed it and I think others will too. The writing is intelligent and the humour is genuinely funny in all but a couple of places. You are definitely closing in on full completion of this one. Sid's comments are all valid and you should make sure that you take them into account as he has clearly spent a good deal of time on them. If you have any comments, queries, complaints or anything else you can think of then feel free to contact me on my talk page. Good luck on the final improvements, and well done.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 18:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC)