Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/MythBusters

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

MythBusters

ScottBurnan 15:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Humour:	7.75	Ok, I'll go section by section here: Intro - 6.5 - Good, but I felt like you could do a bit more with this... check out my suggestions below. Who are the Mythbusters? - 7.5 - A tad listy, which will turn off some readers, but I like how it follows the show's opening. Early History - 8.5 - Solid, amusing section that made me chuckle. Myths tested - 8.5 - Listy, but consistently amusing, and the last entry gave the article what felt like a little bit of closure.
Concept:	8	You have some great ideas floating around in this article, which is great. They do feel a bit disjunct at times, though, so try to work on more continuity. It might help to make the 'who are the mythbusters' section your opener, and then go into talking about the show, but it's up to you, so play around with it until it feels right to you.
Prose and formatting:	7	Generally good, though like I said some may be turned off by the list format. Also, I believe (and I could be wrong here), that you need commas before the ands when you're naming three or more things, like baseball, basketball, and football.
Images:	7	Decent, relevant images.
Miscellaneous:	8	In all, I'd say I enjoyed reading the page. It could've gone a bit longer, so feel free to add to it; just don't force yourself. That could make the page drag, which is always bad.
Final Score:	37.75	Solid work! Check out some of my additional notes below, give this page a bit of spit and polish, and see where it goes! Good luck!
Reviewer:	- P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 20:55, Oct 28

Likee:

• The template at the top: excellent example of using a template for comedic effect
• "middle-aged infant" -- good use of oxymoron
• Ok, looks like you're starting by following the show's opening. Cool concept, I like it.
• The list thing at the end, while it was a list, was also hilarious.
• To be perfectly honest, I enjoyed the Chuck Norris thing in spite of myself, though I guarantee you that others will hate you for including it.

No likee:

• "The show received viewing figures of 42, a record high for the Discovery Channel." -- What do you mean by this? 42 viewers? Try to clarify things a bit.
• The section on the show format, with the ghostbusters theme, doesn't feel like it quite fits with the rest of the article. Try to either remove the references to ghostbusters in that section, or introduce more references earlier in the article so it makes more sense.

Things to fix:

• Perhaps make the blowing things up part of the intro more repetitive, redundant, reiterative, and generally more redundant. You have this: "The show follows five people who get paid to blow things up, surf, skydive, waterski, fire guns, wreck cars, set things on fire, drop things from massive heights, travel the world, launch frozen chickens, and blow more things up, all "in the name of science."" Maybe try something like this: "The show follows five people who get paid to blow things up, surf, skydive, blow things up, waterski, cause explosions, fire guns, wreck cars, set things on fire, blow things up, drop things from massive heights, detonate bombs and other explosive devices, travel the world, launch frozen chickens, and blow things up, all "in the name of science."" Or something.
• Who's Hayley? Do you mean Kari?

Yeah, that's about it, I think... Hope this helps! - P.M., WotM, & GUN, Sir Led Balloon (Tick Tock) (Contribs) 20:55, Oct 28