Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Spontaneous Combustion

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Spontaneous Combustion

So, I'm rewriting this one, and I've had a bit of fun with it so far, but while I'm kind of enjoying it, I'm not that sure about it, so I'd like to know if this is moving in a good direction, and if there are any suggestions for steering it to a more satisfying conclusion (I have considered having the author explode, but figured that was just too predictable). Thoughts, comments, suggestions welcome, an in-depth review would be preferable, thanks. --UU - natter 12:51, Jun 24

I'll take this one. It'll be done later tonight, but from what I've seen so far it'll be an enjoyable review! ~~Hv 24/06 14:51

Humour:	7.4	First off, sorry for not doing this last night; I got caught up in food tech revision. Anyways, onto the review: top: -7- - A decent start. It doesn't have that many jokes in it, but it helps give a general overview of the topic as well as setting up jokes later in the article. Perhaps an extra sentence at the end about how not being able to mend is a bad thing could get an extra joke in there? Good start. Why does spontaneous combustion happen?: -8- - This is good. Lines like "You suddenly bursting into flames and dying horribly in a matter of seconds, however - that's an attention getter " almost make me laugh out loud. It could do with a little more coherence, as it can get a little bit confusing what you're talking about. The last little paragraph is excellent - I loved that little dig at listcruft you had. Just a little straightening out needed here. What happens during spontaneous combustion?: -8- - Another good section. "The whole experiment was carried out scientifically - we all wore nice white lab coats, and safety specs, and we even found a bunsen burner to stand in the room while we did it " – brilliant. The "plot" behind this section is good, too, if a little too prominent - it's definitely helped by its length. One thing I would say: I'm sure you could come up with something more inventive than goatse for a trigger. Frequency of Spontaneous Combustion: -7.5- - Not as good as the above two sections, but still above average. It's a list, but it's a good example of a list. Short, concise, and to the point. I feel it could use a bit more prose round the edges, but it's still funny. Loved the last list example. Legal Aspects of Spontaneous Combustion: -6.5- - This section feels weak to me, What you've got there is a good start, but it feels like it could use another paragraph or two going more in-depth. It also doesn't feel like the kind of paragraph you'd end on - you may want to consider my idea in the concept section. Or you may not, Meh.
Concept:	9	Excellent concept. I like how this actually tries to be serious; this sort of page on Uncyc would normally resemble something like This Page Is On Fire, but I applaud you for going the encyclopedic route. One thing that I think would work is that, rather than having the author explode, because, as you said, that'd be predictable. Instead, have the article suddenly explode, possibly from trying to be serious for so long? Meh.
Prose and formatting:	8.5	Nothing major here. The prose is really good, nothing to report, and no spelling errors I could find. Formatting's also fine, although a bit messy at the bottom of the page with the template propping up the image, but not much wrong with it at all. Just a bit rough at the end, but meh.
Images:	8	All contribute well. I especially liked the flaming car image - especially the caption (thirteen seconds is bloody slow, isn't it?). I do, however, think they could stand to be a little larger, all of them. You may want to to hold off on the last one until the bottom's cleaned up though, as resizing it would probably make it worse, but meh.
Miscellaneous:	8.2	n/a
Final Score:	41.1	This is really good, I must say. Just needs a little cleaning up towards the end of the article and it should be very good. Of course, that's just my opinion, but "meh".
Reviewer:	~~Hv 25/06 10:49

Heh, interesting thoughts on the final section - that was added by someone else last night, and I wasn't sure about it myself, but don't want to be the precious kind who reverts edits on "their" articles. I'll probably try to merge any good lines in it into the rest of the article. Thanks Hv, you've given me plenty to be going on with... --UU - natter 10:59, Jun 25