Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Runcorn

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Runcorn

Freedawhales 12:07, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I've got this one.--ChiefjusticeDS 10:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	6	OK, you have a reasonable writing style and your jokes aren't of unbearably low quality. What you do need to focus on is the placement of such jokes. Have a read through your second paragraph and you will see what I mean. You run punch-lines into one another and the end product is confusing. Remember that the humour in an article is not totally derived from jokes and also that where humour is derived from jokes they feel necessary to the article and do not repeat or last longer than necessary. I would suggest that you go back and have a look at some of the jokes that you do make and see how necessary they are to the point you are making. If you want to say that Runcorn has horrendous housing do so, but don't dedicate 3 jokes, simultaneously to the point and expect the punch-line to be obvious at the end. You definitely have potential but organisation of jokes is as vital as making them in the first place. Also take a look at HTBFANJS as you frequently verge into stupidity as you finish a section, this is a shame as otherwise you are writing well. An example of one of your better points is under transport where you mention driveby shootings from buses, this is the type of comment that you should aim to replicate, one of your less successful ones is where you talk about council housing or where you verge off into utter rubbish in the latter part of the transport section.
Concept:	8	You have a good concept and this could be made into a good article. You do well to stick to the encyclopedic perspective throughout and this tonal consistency is to your credit. However if you are writing about a real place then you should satirise that and not make things up. Since people are here to read a satire not to read made up ideas. You generally do this well but do veer into fiction regularly. The comments about the population are fine as you have grounded them in something close to feasible, the other comments should receive your full attention.
Prose and formatting:	4	OK, you have two major problems here. First there are a lot of spelling and grammar issues, you should proofread it yourself or let one of the people from UN:PS have a look to weed these out. Secondly you need to paragraph. Nobody likes to open up an article only to be confronted with wall to wall writing, putting small breaks in the text just makes the task of reading seem less insurmountable. Your image to text ratio is fine but one suggestion I have is that you make the picture that is captioned "Typical Runcorn" a bit smaller as it currently dwarfs all your other images considerably. You could also considering adding another picture just to avoid having too much text without anything to break it up.
Images:	6	Your images are pretty average, captioning is fine but some better images for the shopping section would be desirable. Otherwise the images are OK, but I would recommend finding a different one to replace the picture of a light at the bottom as it compliments a joke that is stupid rather than funny.
Miscellaneous:	5	My overall grade of the article
Final Score:	29	A good solid article that you can make better with some work, remember to organise your jokes correctly to maximise their impact and also to make sure your formatting is up to standard. While a lot of the comments in this review are very negative, you should be encouraged that a lot of the changes are simple and that the article is otherwise pretty good. Good luck with any editing.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 10:36, 24 July 2009 (UTC)