Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Nike

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Nike

Omnifluff 23:58, January 9, 2011 (UTC)

Methinks I shall review this. Soonish, very soonish, it shall be done. 1234 ~ 23:34, 14 January 2011

Concept:	2	This article has a problem, a large overarching problem in that it seems to be missing something rather important. In the place where most articles have a subject and a direction from which they approach that subject, an overall angle, or joke, which makes the article as a whole funny, this appears to merely have nothing save for a great deal of randomness... and that is a problem. In fact, never that I noticed did your article even concretely say just what 'Nike' is - a little odd, given that this site is an encyclopaedia; parody though it may be, articles still tend to follow the usual structure of saying what things are. They can just be entirely wrong, or more often twist things in unusual ways, but they still say what the things are, and they stick to whatever it is that they say the things are. You need to decide what this is actually about, for randomness won't do it alone. Is it the goddess, or one of the many things probably named after her? Wikipedia has a nice disambiguation page listing a whole eight options; you could reasonably spoof any of them, probably. And then actually say which, write an actual introduction, as all you have currently are some quotes, and build off that, approach what you introduce in some way that can be funny. Even random, it can be funny, but it still needs to stick to its subject, really stick to it. Take for instance Salamander - it's random, very random, but it is also definitely about salamanders, and what people recognise as salamanders, and it remains about them throughout the entire piece. It keeps consistent that they are at very least animals, though they look like that, or that, or that... It also starts off saying very specifically what they are, however, with an introduction that introduces them and the randomness of the overall piece, and each section follows from that, covering a distinct something about them, even if it is entirely illogical. That's what you need to do - take some topic, some idea about it, and flesh it out, stick to the topic. Your approach can still be as random as Salamander's, but it needs to make sense - coherence is important, and stuff. But you can also go about it many other ways, as at this point, I don't believe you're really bound to any angle - look at how some of the supposed best articles approach their topics as well; perhaps you will get some ideas that way as well.
Humour:	3	Amidst the random and the fact that there seems to be very little way for the reader to actually sort out just what is going on in this article, it is a little difficult to assess what humour there may be at this point... ah, well. There is some. General note, though - do read HTBFANJS; that should also help. Anyhow, article itself - starts off with quotes; not generally a good idea. Quotes don't usually help matters that much, and here they seem to be as random as the rest of it, though the first makes it seem like the article will be about some person, that unborn son... except it ain't. In retrospect, the “What the...?” is kind of funny, but not really sure it's in a good way - that was pretty much my reaction to the article, as well. When used well, quotes will set the tone for a piece, both introducing the subject at hand as well as making their own jokes. Do these do either? Hard to tell at this point, but the things very rarely do and are usually more trouble than they're worth, so in general, take care with them. Eat-e-mology - why the spelling out of the word? Nothing else here does that, and consistency is key in such things. If you're making a joke dismantling wordage, don't just dismantle wordage of the section title, perhaps? Dismantle the whole thing, especially what you're actually talking about... literally? Although what you do is just more random. Go from phalli to swastica-y thingies... not really seeing the connection. The Olympics - what have these got to do with... er, what? What are we talking about, again? Now Nike is an action to be practiced? Interesting categories, though... where did those come from? American Way - American way about what? And, er, tubers? Again, this is just so random. Ideas need to flow, one to the other, but they also need to be connection, and this reads almost like an acid trip, which I've apparently written a few, myself. Oooh, is Nike something homosexual, then? The link would indicate that it is, and that makes for an actual joke in the texas reference - finally, something that relates to reality... for that is where humour generally comes, from connections to things, relations between the expected and the unexpected. There needs to be something expectable in the first place, however, and a connection with a place with known stereotypes and building off those stereotypes is a start. Other facts - Oh, yay, more complete random. Yet again, huh?
Prose and formatting:	4	Articles consist of words and space and images. This has those. Good. The body of the text consists of sections, generally grouped as beginning, middle, and end... or not. Not so good. I said this already, but you need to have some sort of introduction to introduce the thing - doesn't matter so terribly how, but draw the reader in. Introduce your main idea, and be funny. Then get into the body of it - the fleshing out and development of the funny... and then end it, with some sort of bang or tying up of ends or what have you, but end it well; articles that just trail off are almost never as good as ones that properly conclude themselves. The sections themselves should be in a logical order, one idea leading to the next, or shifting through use of some transition, at any rate. Sudden shifts in ideas will often lose the reader, in general, though it's hard to say what qualifies as 'sudden' in such a thing as this. You have the gist of grammar and paragraphing and whatnot, at least... No need to capitalise every word in headers or titles unless they are proper nouns - these are articles, not books, and section headers don't need it either. Same goes for the speakers to whom quotes are attributed - no need to capitalise the entire thing. 'Crazy lady behind shopping mall' works better. General note, people tend to hate lists here. They're not always bad, but unless they actually need to be formatted as lists and make some important point to the article as a whole, they're not generally a good idea.
Images:	5	Strangely, the images actually fit with what the body of the text says. Since the text appears to be almost completely random, however, the images don't really help it any, either, as they are subsequently just as random. Once you have a better basis for an article, get some images that fit with that and illustrate it and that should help matters. You'll also want stronger captions, mind - these label the images, but do more. Make some sorts of jokes with the captions, especially if the images themselves aren't that funny. Something about the images, perhaps something about how they relate to the subject, or about how they don't... play off the angle from which you approach the subject.
Miscellaneous:	2	So... random.
Final Score:	16	Anyhow, here's your review, primarily telling you to not be so random and also saying you need to sort out what you doing with your subject, once you sort out which variation on it you are even working with. This may seem bad, but... okay, it is kind of bad. Still, don't give up - you should be able to pull it together if you work with it; I know you are capable of coherence. Do that, pull it together, work from there, and you should find yourself in a much better situation, article-wise... I wish you luck, and hope this helps. If you have any questions/complaints/death threats, don't hesitate to come by my talkpage and leave a message. Also, this may seem incredibly odd, but you might find reading the {{ICU}} subs interesting - here' s the list. Folks tag bad new articles with those, and while they do reiterate some of what HTBFANJS has to say and what I've said here, their messages may prove illuminating... or not. Sometimes reading things written in different forms can make a bit of a difference for understanding, though.
Reviewer:	1234 ~ 06:52, 15 January 2011

2	Concept The idea, the angle, the grand funny of the article...
	This article has a problem, a large overarching problem in that it seems to be missing something rather important. In the place where most articles have a subject and a direction from which they approach that subject, an overall angle, or joke, which makes the article as a whole funny, this appears to merely have nothing save for a great deal of randomness... and that is a problem. In fact, never that I noticed did your article even concretely say just what 'Nike' is - a little odd, given that this site is an encyclopaedia; parody though it may be, articles still tend to follow the usual structure of saying what things are. They can just be entirely wrong, or more often twist things in unusual ways, but they still say what the things are, and they stick to whatever it is that they say the things are. You need to decide what this is actually about, for randomness won't do it alone. Is it the goddess, or one of the many things probably named after her? Wikipedia has a nice disambiguation page listing a whole eight options; you could reasonably spoof any of them, probably. And then actually say which, write an actual introduction, as all you have currently are some quotes, and build off that, approach what you introduce in some way that can be funny. Even random, it can be funny, but it still needs to stick to its subject, really stick to it. Take for instance Salamander - it's random, very random, but it is also definitely about salamanders, and what people recognise as salamanders, and it remains about them throughout the entire piece. It keeps consistent that they are at very least animals, though they look like that, or that, or that... It also starts off saying very specifically what they are, however, with an introduction that introduces them and the randomness of the overall piece, and each section follows from that, covering a distinct something about them, even if it is entirely illogical. That's what you need to do - take some topic, some idea about it, and flesh it out, stick to the topic. Your approach can still be as random as Salamander's, but it needs to make sense - coherence is important, and stuff. But you can also go about it many other ways, as at this point, I don't believe you're really bound to any angle - look at how some of the supposed best articles approach their topics as well; perhaps you will get some ideas that way as well.
3	Humour The implementation, how funny the article comes out...
	Amidst the random and the fact that there seems to be very little way for the reader to actually sort out just what is going on in this article, it is a little difficult to assess what humour there may be at this point... ah, well. There is some. General note, though - do read HTBFANJS; that should also help. Anyhow, article itself - starts off with quotes; not generally a good idea. Quotes don't usually help matters that much, and here they seem to be as random as the rest of it, though the first makes it seem like the article will be about some person, that unborn son... except it ain't. In retrospect, the “What the...?” is kind of funny, but not really sure it's in a good way - that was pretty much my reaction to the article, as well. When used well, quotes will set the tone for a piece, both introducing the subject at hand as well as making their own jokes. Do these do either? Hard to tell at this point, but the things very rarely do and are usually more trouble than they're worth, so in general, take care with them. Eat-e-mology - why the spelling out of the word? Nothing else here does that, and consistency is key in such things. If you're making a joke dismantling wordage, don't just dismantle wordage of the section title, perhaps? Dismantle the whole thing, especially what you're actually talking about... literally? Although what you do is just more random. Go from phalli to swastica-y thingies... not really seeing the connection. The Olympics - what have these got to do with... er, what? What are we talking about, again? Now Nike is an action to be practiced? Interesting categories, though... where did those come from? American Way - American way about what? And, er, tubers? Again, this is just so random. Ideas need to flow, one to the other, but they also need to be connection, and this reads almost like an acid trip, which I've apparently written a few, myself. Oooh, is Nike something homosexual, then? The link would indicate that it is, and that makes for an actual joke in the texas reference - finally, something that relates to reality... for that is where humour generally comes, from connections to things, relations between the expected and the unexpected. There needs to be something expectable in the first place, however, and a connection with a place with known stereotypes and building off those stereotypes is a start. Other facts - Oh, yay, more complete random. Yet again, huh?
4	Prose and formatting Appearance, flow, overall presentation...
	Articles consist of words and space and images. This has those. Good. The body of the text consists of sections, generally grouped as beginning, middle, and end... or not. Not so good. I said this already, but you need to have some sort of introduction to introduce the thing - doesn't matter so terribly how, but draw the reader in. Introduce your main idea, and be funny. Then get into the body of it - the fleshing out and development of the funny... and then end it, with some sort of bang or tying up of ends or what have you, but end it well; articles that just trail off are almost never as good as ones that properly conclude themselves. The sections themselves should be in a logical order, one idea leading to the next, or shifting through use of some transition, at any rate. Sudden shifts in ideas will often lose the reader, in general, though it's hard to say what qualifies as 'sudden' in such a thing as this. You have the gist of grammar and paragraphing and whatnot, at least... No need to capitalise every word in headers or titles unless they are proper nouns - these are articles, not books, and section headers don't need it either. Same goes for the speakers to whom quotes are attributed - no need to capitalise the entire thing. 'Crazy lady behind shopping mall' works better. General note, people tend to hate lists here. They're not always bad, but unless they actually need to be formatted as lists and make some important point to the article as a whole, they're not generally a good idea.
5	Images The graphics themselves, as well as their humour and relevance...
	Strangely, the images actually fit with what the body of the text says. Since the text appears to be almost completely random, however, the images don't really help it any, either, as they are subsequently just as random. Once you have a better basis for an article, get some images that fit with that and illustrate it and that should help matters. You'll also want stronger captions, mind - these label the images, but do more. Make some sorts of jokes with the captions, especially if the images themselves aren't that funny. Something about the images, perhaps something about how they relate to the subject, or about how they don't... play off the angle from which you approach the subject.
2	Miscellaneous Anything else... or not...
	So... random.
16	Final score 1234 ~ 06:52, 15 January 2011
	Anyhow, here's your review, primarily telling you to not be so random and also saying you need to sort out what you doing with your subject, once you sort out which variation on it you are even working with. This may seem bad, but... okay, it is kind of bad. Still, don't give up - you should be able to pull it together if you work with it; I know you are capable of coherence. Do that, pull it together, work from there, and you should find yourself in a much better situation, article-wise... I wish you luck, and hope this helps. If you have any questions/complaints/death threats, don't hesitate to come by my talkpage and leave a message. Also, this may seem incredibly odd, but you might find reading the {{ICU}} subs interesting - here' s the list. Folks tag bad new articles with those, and while they do reiterate some of what HTBFANJS has to say and what I've said here, their messages may prove illuminating... or not. Sometimes reading things written in different forms can make a bit of a difference for understanding, though.