Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Todd Rundgren
Todd Rundgren[edit source]
I have re-created the Todd Rundgren page. Now I need some help, and if it's about paragraphs, then don't bother! MrCleveland 17:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)i
(the article is incomplete and therefore I will provide a short review and do a full one later. Also, I just found this website 5 minutes ago so don't let this sentence convince you that I am in any way someone of importance, influence or even a 6th grade reading level).
- Personally, I've never heard of Todd Rundgren, and I am probably not the only one. You need to find a way to make him relevant or interesting to people who know nothing about him, i.e., interesting facts, lyrics or anything TRUE about the man that either did or "could have" led to innovations (in music and beyond) that people in general actually ARE familiar with.
Impersonally, I see very few things that could be classified as "jokes." No offense, but "he made the song because the band told him to get a woman" is not only a commonly used (i.e. overused) joke format, it isn't even a joke. It's just using a figure of speech known as Repetition. It has the potential to be funny, but very rarely, and also it is the only thing I can see which objectively could make a "normal" person laugh ("normal," i.e. someone who doesn't already owns very single album he ever made...i.e. you and 5 other people). Please fill the article with jokes to make it funny instead of a wikipedia article with a couple of rhetorical devices and no jokes. Sorry but I don't know any nicer way to say this so sorry if I might potentially sound like a total asshole with an STD to you. Also, i am a total asshole with an STD, but this is irrelevant (REPETITION BABY, YEA! SEE, YOU SEE, YOU SEE WHAT I MEAN?!?!)Projectjulio 19:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 2 | Daang this is tough. Even though it was about 11 sentences long and just one line paragraphs, the writing style and humour combine to just make the article boring. There isn't really much I can say though because I can't even tell what is supposed to be funny or not. Maybe if I read more of your stuff I could decide where your flaws with humour are, but one for sure it is like reading an actual encyclopedia article, with too many dates and names. Keeping it simple helps. Even so, all of what goes wrong and what leads your humour into a deathtrap is the way you write. |
| Concept: | 4 | The concept wasn't even your problem, yet I can't give you a good score on it because the direction you took it to amounted to be very weak and overall boring. I suggest fixing it up and directing it to a theme, although topics like this have a tough time succeeding. But even so, all of what goes wrong and what leads your concept off a cliff, even if it was an amazing one is the way you write. |
| Prose and formatting: | 0 | This is where your article just crumbled. I don't know about what you have done in the past or what the whole don't tell me about full paragraphs, but every last one of your articles are gonna suck if you don't write in paragraphs! But apparantly you know that. There are a few misspellings that are a real slap in the face that a simple spell check would help a ton. |
| Images: | 0 | No images |
| Miscellaneous: | 1 | Averaged |
| Final Score: | 7 | Ya, this article was very boring and ultimately unfunny, and I am sorry for doing this but it ALL points to not writing in paragraphs and in little one lined sections. That's it though. Sorry. Good luck! |
| Reviewer: | --Tagstit 04:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC) | |
Fuck this article, I'm in a very bad mood since I can't pass my Driving Test! >:(MrCleveland 18:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
If anyone can write a better Todd Rundgren article, please tell me.MrCleveland 17:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)