Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/The Wizard of Oz Movie (quick)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

The Wizard of Oz Movie

Nameable 21:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Tagstit   doesn't believe in new fancy-pancy toilet systems with running water and all. Just a hole in the ground with a lil' cover will do. Now gimme' your article and I'll be done in a few minutes. While you are welcome to review this, I suggest you find another article in need of help so that we can clear the ever growing Pee Request list.

I will get to this by today. ~SirTagstit • VFH • NotM • PEEING • CPT • RotM • BFF 14:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	7	Long time no review for me, in all honesty. I like doing reviews of newer people because they are the ones with the freshest minds which I can then twerp and twarp for my own gain and of course to improve this site, assuming my advice is decent...which as we probably are expecting, won't be. ANYWAYS I am not going to lie. I thought this article was pretty bad. I mean, I REALLY thought it was messy, lacked flow, and a real humorous theme, but for some reason, as amateur as this really came on, I was laughing. I REALLY thought some of the more basic and potty humor in here worked. But, with that being said, I am going against my better judgment to give you such a high score. I will start off with what I liked, then some areas which can be improved on. But my biggest problem can be found in concept. Alright, like I said, I was laughing. Assuming this is one of your first articles, which I may be completely wrong but am refusing to check, is impressive. I hardly laugh at newer attempts. I think a few good aspects can be attributed. For example, you didn't use inside jokes! THANK YOU! Leaving out all Oscar Wilde, Chuck Norris, and AAAAA! comments really put this a step ahead of half the crap on this site. So congrats. Another thing, is that you kept consistancy in some areas. For example, the TWIST ENDING was effective and you stuck to it. Now for the bad...This isn't going to become a classic. It isn't original or anything. This is very preschool type humor though keep in mind. Saying penis instead of a heart or whatever the tinman really wanted isn't too deep. There are PLENTY of articles on this site that take a normal movie, and change the main character with Oscar Wilde or Chuck Norris or some other retard injoke. I am glad you didn't do that. You did namedropping, which I will explain in a second. They also take every item in a book and say penis, which is what you did in one occasion. Look, what I am trying to say here is that you need to direct your humor in an original way. If you don't understand, go to concept. Now, your BIGGEST PROBLEM LIES... HERE! Namedropping...dun dun dun... What you did was what we like to call namedropping around here. This is where you simply put common celebrities EVERYWHERE in your article. I think thats what it is anyways. Well, I have been calling it that for a few months and no one has stopped me. But in TOOO many instances you full on just out of the blue drop a random name down. Like Ron Weasly... WHY? You don't need to! Ron Weasly has nothing to do with anything! And i know you may think that is what makes this so funny, but it REALLY isn't. Please get rid of all references to Ron Weasly, Tom Cruise, ET, and John Trovolta, unless they are relevant. If they are then my apologies.
Concept:	3	WEAKKKKK concept dude. Very weak. All you do is take the storyline of Wizard of Oz and throw in a few celebrities, a twist, and a penis. Think of better stuff my friend! For example, in an article about Al Gore, you don't just have to give a biography of him with penis and gay written everywhere. You could say he doesn't exist and is a myth, as done by our colonizers, who have recieved more than a thousand pounds in gold, 50 virgins, and an everlasting life, aka feature on uncyclopedia. Maybe say Wizard of Oz is an arguement against the highly popular Wicked musical. And have arguements as to which one is true. Not a BRILLIANT idea, but think about something before you write an article. Be creative and different!
Prose and formatting:	5	Meh I will make this a quick list of what to fix up as to not bore you...or me. Mostly good spelling and grammar, but a spellcheck could be used in a few places. That big box in the beginning is very messy, consider removing it. Get rid of all red links Add more picture Balance your material so it isn't just a giant section in the beginning and a ton of three liners at the end. Personal preference here, but get rid of the slashthroughs. Personally, I find them to be an overused joke and not effective.
Images:	1	What the hell man! Way to throw off a halfway decent article! All you need is a few good dorthy pictures or the lion or something. Instead, we get the butthole of a dog that isn't even physically similar to Toto. AND it is at the beginning. A bad way to start any article my friend. For shame... Also, add a few more please! It will make it pretty. BUT GET RID OF THE DOG'S BUTTHOLE!
Miscellaneous:	4	Averaged
Final Score:	20	Decent, very decent. Improve the pictures and concept and I would give you a high score. I am impressed. It made me laugh. I wouldn't vote for it yet but a little fix up may change my mind. Maybe a big fixup. I am interested to see what you do in the future. If you have any questions feel free to ask me on my talk page. Good luck!
Reviewer:	~SirTagstit • VFH • NotM • PEEING • CPT • RotM • BFF 04:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)