Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Nick Drake
Nick Drake[edit source]
Hey, here's another one it's my second article and it depicts Nick Drake as a communist, enjoy. The Truth of Matheus 01:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
|
A big mug o' reviewin' strength tea? Why, that must mean this article is being reviewed by: UU - natter  (While you're welcome to review it as well, you might like to consider helping someone else instead). (Also, if the review hasn't been finished within 24 hours of this tag appearing, feel free to remove it or clout UU athwart the ear'ole). |
As this request has been up since June 4 and still hasn't had a look, I'll remove Fag's tag, add my own, and get this one. Probably tonight, but it will be done. --UU - natter 13:24, Jul 7
| Humour: | 3 | Sorry, but I have to say, I'm kinda disappointed. This doesn't open too badly, and I thought I may be in for a decent enough read, but the rest of the article degenerated into something more random thereafter.
I liked the line about the record company regularly relesaing remasters, that was good. Not so sure about the KGB spy thing, that feels a little random, and kitten huffing is somewhat overdone these days - oh, and quotes with "nuff said" in them normally mean the author is actually struggling to find anything to say, so I'd get rid of that. After that, let's see... A Russian Reversal, Awesome Land, mailed to Michael Jackson, inventing reggae, the Scarface quote, Robot JFK, time machine, Karl Marx, radiation poisoning, more kitten huffing. How does any of that fit together? It doesn't, which is where the "random" bit comes in. None of that is even explained, really, and certainly not in a way that makes any kind of sense. Nonsense seems, on the face of it, an incredibly easy approach to humour, but it's actually one of the hardest things to pull off well, and mostly, it ends up a random jumble of disparate concepts such as we have here. You need to return to the drawing board, my friend, and start off with a clear concept in your head. Which leads me nicely on to the next section. |
| Concept: | 2 | You don't really have one, do you? I thought the KGB spy bit may have been one, but you flit all over the place without really settling down at any point. The best articles start out with a clear idea, and use that as the hook to hang the jokes from. Once you have a good central concept, an article will often write itself. So you need to pick one, and work with it.
Possibly the KGB spy angle may be one method - as long as you stick to it. Perhaps his albums contained coded messages in them? It's a weak thread at best, but there you go. Possibly a better route would be to more closely follow his story - there's plenty there. From the battles with depression/spoiled boy with a silver spoon who felt sorry for himself to the lack of connection with his audience or indeed pretty much anyone else, there's potential to have fun with his story. Take a look at the likes of David Bowie, Buster Keaton and even Simon and Garfunkel to see how you can have fun while staying somewhat true to an artist's life story. Once you've got the idea, the rest should follow, although it won't hurt to take a read through good ol' HTBFANJS - many of our best writers still do this, and it helps more than you'd think. |
| Prose and formatting: | 5 | Writing style gets a bit random, as mentioned, and there are a few typos, particularly with names (it's "Lennon" and "McCartney" for starters). But the formatting is fine, and there aren't many other problems, so you get a solid, average 5 here. |
| Images: | 5 | 2. Of which one is relevant, and one isn't really. I dunno, the caption could kinda work if it related to anything in the article, but it didn't, so it didn't (if you see what I mean). For an article of this length, that may be about the right number, but ideally the second should be a bit more relevant, or at least fit with the text better. |
| Miscellaneous: | 3.8 | Averaged. |
| Final Score: | 18.8 | Well, that's not a great score, but don't get discouraged - if it's only your second article, there's plenty of time to improve. The only way to get better at writing is to write more, and take feedback on board. To sum up my feedback above: get a coherent central thread for the article, then write around that. Leave out the random elements, and try to make it all hang together. Have a good look at other articles and HTBFANJS for inspiration, and just enjoy yourself.
Lastly, this is only my opinion, others are available. And good luck! --UU - natter |
| Reviewer: | UU | |