Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Severe Nasal-Specific Seborrhoeic Dermatitis
Severe Nasal-Specific Seborrhoeic Dermatitis[edit source]
Thank you in advance. This is its second run through of Pee Review. :) Nameable • mumble? 19:00, March 20, 2010 (UTC)
I got this one as well. I'll get this done tommarow once schools over and I'm done with the other review I'm doing (its short, so don't blow your top, or your mom) Once I'm here give me 10-12 hours.--
Director
WILL
YOU 333 03:34, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
One review at a time, book in only when you start the review, I am beginning to lose patience with these antics, follow the rules or don't review it's that simple. I don't want excuses about it, book in when you start reviewing, book only one article at a time. --ChiefjusticeXBox360 09:07, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
- Well it so turns out I have a fever and have to skip school today, so I'll get started on this right now. 5 hours
| Humour: | 7 | I believe it’s quite humorous, but something’s keep the score to a seven.
You tend to repeat yourself over the article. Try avoiding that because people will get pretty annoyed with reading the same stuff over again. If you want to mention stuff you already put down to state or prove something, saying things like “’’the symptoms as previous stated’’ or something would be wise. Also, the tone changing, contradictions, repeating yourself, and list are also what kills the humor, but I’m not going to go into detail with these again. It’ll be a waste of your time as well as mine to read/write down the same stuff again when I already explained these things. For the treatment section, it should be expanded. What you can do is explain whether if scientist is trying to find a cure to it would be acceptable. You can make humor in this section by saying the scientist always mess up, and think they’re smart enough to find the answer to the disease but screw up horrible would be good to put down in this section. |
| Concept: | 8 | The concept was brilliant and you executed it perfectly. You chose a topic and stuck to it. However, there are a few problems that keep this score from being 10. First, there are times when you contradict yourself. You say the disease is severe yet you said that it’s generally harmless. You should stick with one thing, either its harmless or severe, or say something like ‘’it is harmless as long as the person keeps away from ___.’’ Or something like that. You also contradict yourself with the symptoms, like at the beginning says only one know symptom but later one you gave a list of systems, and you said there is no serious symptom, but in the foot notes you stated people die from unexplained heart failure, and if it’s so severe and people have died from heart problems why would the person have nothing to worry about? Contradictions happen to everyone (including me) and are sometimes unintentionally. Reading through the article should help you figure out if something contradicts something.
Second, the tone changes at times, but I’ll explain about that in the Prose and Formatting Section. Otherwise a pretty good solid concept. |
| Prose and formatting: | 7 | Pretty good, but still has some things that need to be worked on. First would be the lists. Even though they state things out perfectly, HTBFANJS discourages list and people get quite annoyed of them. Instead make the list into paragraphs, and for the ‘’’Symptoms’’’ section, put more ways you have to do if you think or know that you have the disease.
Second would be the narrative tone. At times you draw away from the tone of the article For example, the last paragraph you put down you a couple of times, as if the tone is speaking to the person now. Another example, ‘’They shouldn't even finish reading the article. Go! Go! Go! No, seriously, time is of the essence. GO! ’’, would also count as breaking the tone. Unless it’s a quote, stick with the tone you are working with. As for spelling and grammar, there are a few mistakes I will point out that should be fixed.
I think that’s all. |
| Images: | 9 | All you images contribute to your article well, as they display what the articles says. However, the first two and the last one could be increase as they are smaller than how it would be desired. Also, once you do this, spread them out some because they would be cramp together when they are enlarged. As for the third images, it should be the way the other images are. What I mean is that it should be in the thumb prose like the others, along with a good caption. It still looks like that, but it would be wise to do so, but this is up to you. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8 | My overall grade of this article. |
| Final Score: | 39 | The article is pretty good, in my opinion, and can be worth at least VFH, it just need a few fix ups. If you have any questions/comments, just go to my talk page and I’ll be happy to answer them. Good Luck! Cheers! |
| Reviewer: | --DirectorWILLYOU 333 15:13, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
| |