Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Québec

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Québec

It is an article I rewrote 90% of the content, I realize it is a bit long, give me your opinion! Mattsnow 05:50, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

I'm on it like a bitch in a cheese factory. --Black Flamingo 21:53, June 10, 2011 (UTC)

Humour:	6	So first of all, good work on this so far. There are a few areas I think you should take another look at however. You say this is a rewrite; well, I can tell. There's still quite a bit of what we call "city-cruft", and just other weaker things that I'm guessing are left over from the old version. To begin with, there are too many opening quotes. It's hard to get an opening quote to work well, because they don't have much of a set up. It has to be a very specific kind of joke that you can tell in just one line. It requires a hell of a lot of wit. None of these are really worth keeping in my opinion, although the one about ancestral lands was mildly amusing, I guess. Generally, the intro is a bit all over the place; it's confusing and reads like it's been written by several people - which may in fact be the case. It's definitely the weakest part of the article. A lot of the time it's hard to know what you're talking about; you assert several things but the problem is they're all a bit vague. Eg. you say the population "had a rebellious attitude", but what do you mean by this? And also that "they tend to see themselves as a distinct society" - how so? Again, it's vague. Then we have a big list, I'll spare you the lecture on how lists are lazy and unfunny and just jump straight to the "city-cruft". This list epitomises that very well. It's all stuff that doesn't really make sense to people who don't know the area, and even to those who do it's nothing more than a cheap dig at the citizens/neighbours. Jokes about the hotness of the women and "the way people walk" - do you know how many cities you could say that about? The article does it in such a generic way that it isn't funny and really could apply to any geographical location. It's not a million miles away from the old "black people drive like this and white people drive like this" routine really, is it? It's a common error in comedy that simply mentioning drugs is funny (although a lot of pot-heads seem to agree), but it's not, you have to make a joke just like with all other subjects. Throughout the article, but especially in the intro, there are unhumorous references to drugs that aren't as successful as they could be. Just saying "it will stone you for days," for instance isn't funny. I really enjoyed your later line "he started producing more smoke than a dragon", for an example of how to do this well. So go back and have a look at the drug references, and either rework them or remove them if you can't. Another thing I want to talk about is parenthesis (brackets) jokes. These don't really work either, at least, not as much as a good prose-based turn. Shoving the "funny" bit at the end in brackets is predictable and has no flow at all, which is ridiculously important for comedy writing. To use my stock example, it's better to say, "John Candy was a kind man; the size of his heart was only matched by the size of his stomach," than it is to say, "John Candy had a big heart (because he was fat)". Not a hilarious example, but I hope you see what I mean (although he was Canadian so it is strangely apt). A good bit of misdirection, or an unexpected twist, is far more effective than lugging the punchline in a set of brackets. After the intro, you really hit your stride. Some of the stuff I say above still applies but generally it is much better. I will take you through section by section because I have a couple of comments I'd like to make. First Contact Better, clearer and more focussed, although the Sparta joke is a bit too meme-ish in my opinion. After a scattergun intro this article is starting to show promise. Quebec City Founded Again, more good work, I like how straight and focussed you've suddenly become. The only thing I'd say here is that you could get a bit more stereotypical with the pot-smoking jokes (building on what I said before); like perhaps they could stop off in Maya for a crate of chocolate on the way home. Or something. The British Victory When you say "rightfully owned" I can't help but think this should be "rightfully appropriated from the Amerindians by the happy people of Quebec city". There's another brackets joke in here too. Patriots This is a bit weaker. Again, I feel you're failing to make jokes here. I like the straight\dry approach but this may be a little too much. Instead of saying "Armed with pitchforks and slingshots against rifles and cannons, they managed to hold on to their positions until the British finally sent all their forces in the mosh pit, outnumbering the rebels 246 to one", which is slightly confusing and not particularly funny to say the least, try inserting a punchline like, "armed with pitchforks and slingshots against rifles and cannons, they managed to hold on to their positions until about tea time, when the British decided they'd humoured them long enough." Twists like this are what makes a joke; it's the difference between just talking about something funny and making actual gags about it. Think about other straighter sections where you could do this, because I feel there are a fair few. Montreal Seems like a lot of stuff I don't really need to know. You have a big section about the stadium but then don't really crack any jokes about it. A wiser user than me once said that if a line doesn't have a joke or set up a joke then it has no place in an Uncyc article. While that might be a bit over the top, I think Mr Hyperbole had a point there. Perhaps take some time to trim things like this that are slightly irrelevant, unless you can get some jokes in there. One point I'd like to make is that the article is a bit too long, so some trimming might help. Quebec City Some more good stuff, although again I think a trimming of the less joke-laden stuff might help, if only to shorten the article somewhat. Chicoutimi-Jonquière Magic snowmen? Sounds a bit random to me; doesn't really fit in with the rest of the article either. Maybe I'm missing something. River of the Wolf One to trim? It's all a bit random. Gaspé peninsula I like the joke about there being little to gasp about, that was clever, but the one about paying for gas seemed a tad forced. Any way you could use the good joke somewhere else and excise this paragraph (it's a bit short anyway). Politics/Les Mensonges Seems to make very little sense; people being killed by pucks, retiring from 1940-1975 - what is this? Quebec-France relationships I like the beginning but then it gets listy and feels a bit like padding. Might be another one to trim. The first paragraph, which is good, can probably be worked into another section where you discuss relationships, perhaps the intro? Finally, I would lose the big language section. It doesn't really make much of a joke (unless you want to revise it, but I don't think there's much potential in it myself).
Concept:	7	I think I've said enough about this already. What you have is pretty good, there isn't a finite concept but for such a broad entry you don't really need that. There are recurring jokes about drugs and the language barrier, which are good, and then less successful ones about the beauty of the women and communism, which don't really work. The "hotness of women" jokes could apply to virtually any place in the world and aren't funny anyway, and the communist jokes have been done to death and don't really make sense upon close analysis. All the article really needs is a bit of a tidy up in respect to things like this.
Prose and formatting:	8	Generally you have quite a loose, informal tone that works quite well. I would be careful to keep it consistent, however. Occasionally you swear suddenly, or address the reader directly, and things like this ruin it. First Contact The phrase "lovely relationship of friendship" is a bit cumbersome. Patriots The prose here is a bit weaker. For one I don't know what you mean by "djihadists companions", take another look at that because it seems to contain both a spelling mistake and a grammar error. Then the "two for $350!" bit breaks the tone a little. Apart from those, there were a number of spelling errors and typos, some of which I corrected. There are bound to be others though because I wasn't looking all that closely; give it a thorough proofread, and don't forget to proof any new parts you write. Ok, so formatting next. Is there any reason you didn't use subheadings for the cities? Looks a bit messy. Then there's a bit where you do these weird little arrow things - "Maurice «Rocket» Richard" - what are they? I've never seen them before in all my days. The first list about agriculture in the Economy section isn't very well formatted. Try to simplify this or perhaps use a table. You might also want to take another look at your "end products" jokes, as some of them seem a bit silly (hmm, that comment should really go in the humour section).
Images:	8	The images are good, but you could use a few more considering the length. My only gripes are with the first few images. The poutine one is nowhere near grand enough for an opening image, you need something that establishes your concept. Also, you don't really explain what poutine is until about ten paragraphs later so it doesn't make much sense here. The one of the girls is a bit generic, if you had a section specifically on women it might work there but I wouldn't put it in the intro.
Miscellaneous:	7	Overall quality, not considering the unreached potential. Sorry if there are a lot of typos in this review, the computer I'm using is shite.
Final Score:	36	Overall a solid effort, and it's great to see an important article getting the care it deserves. I would say you carry on with what you're doing; sort out the intro and perhaps trim some of the weaker sections. It may also be worth getting some more jokes in there. If there's anything I've said here that you want me to explain better, or if you want my opinion on anything I might have missed, or even if you're just lonely, please let me know on my talky page and I'll try to help. Keep up the good work and I hope the review is ok.
Reviewer:	--Black Flamingo 11:26, June 11, 2011 (UTC)