Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Tower of Terror

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Tower of Terror

It's my first article here, yet I'm still thinking of ideas for it. It does have some potential, I guess. Blakegriplingph 09:08, September 2, 2010 (UTC)

There's no point in putting up an article that short for a reveiw. Expand your article a bit and it will more likely be reviewed.-- 08:41, September 5, 2010 (UTC)

OK, expanded. Blakegriplingph 03:08, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

I'll do this one. --ChiefjusticeDS 08:23, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

Humour:	2	Right, the very first thing I will say to you here is don't worry about the scores too much, what is vitally important is that you have the ability to improve this one. The main issue here is not with your ability to write but rather rooted in needing to understand how a lot of people who edit here will read this one. The very first thing I recommend you do is take a look at How to be funny and not just stupid. I am not telling you to go here because I think you are unable to write but rather because it will help you understand why some things will be rejected by the community on uncyclopedia. If we consider your first section, you have a whole host of things that are obviously untrue, now I have seen this used superbly in the past and it really adds something to the article it is used in, however you should be aware that a whole host of random things does not automatically provide a laugh. Consider it in this way; if I say "Darth Vader was a Sith Lord who achieved notoriety by simultaneously slaughtering Justin Bieber and Barack Obama with the Death Star laser" my jokes aren't really leading anywhere nor do they have much scope for humour because they are obviously and untrue and unrelated to the Star Wars universe which is what Darth Vader is most closely associated. The same principle applies to your article, while saying "It was considered to be the most state-of-the-art sentry at the time, as it was equipped with all the latest defense mechanisms such as eye beams" is good for a quick laugh it won't provide the wide scope of laughs a joke that is more closely associated with the truth will. What I'm trying to say is that you should try and stick to satirising reality rather than simply making things up; consider who will be reading your article and the likely answer is people who are looking to read a humorous take on the popular ride at Walt Disney World, thus you should write your article with this in mind. A good starting point for this is to investigate the Wikipedia article and simply rewrite it and add your jokes in, saying things like "The Tower of Terror is described by Disney as leading the world in lift crash simulation and has won hundreds of awards for having an attractive queue area" while you may not see this as the zenith of good humour it will still appeal far more to the people who will be reading this one. If we go into a bit more depth with the article we can consider the structure, you have a reasonable idea of how you want your article to go but the jokes just aren't following on. If you take a look at articles like this you will note that the author takes time between the jokes to ensure that the article is going places, this allows them to build for their next joke and avoids the danger of overwhelming the reader. If we once again consider your "History" section we can see that you introduce a lot of different themes very rapidly, this is nothing to be ashamed of and is done by a lot of writers on their first attempt, what you need to realise is that you should try and keep the article's jokes spaced out, and I would wholeheartedly recommend that you look at some of our featured articles in order to find out the best way to do this. Something for you to focus on initially is the wikipedia article, especially if you are struggling for content, use their article to help you research the attraction and thus write a more effective satirisation, you should also try to reduce the number of themes that you are making use of in the article, which essentially means try to make the article so anything that is important is explained; you mention a secret society known as Club 33, this would be far more effective if we had some background on the group and what it is they do that makes them relevant here. I would really encourage you to try and stay original with your humour and avoid incorporating characters and themes unrelated to Disney into your article without explanation. I will avoid belabouring my point here any further as you will be able to find existing help in HTBFANJS, remember that you can always ask if you are unsure about a specific one. Despite all this criticism I would urge you not to be discouraged here, you show a real ability to come up with something good and the part where you say "To this day her soul still roams around the Disneyland Confederation grounds, staging protest marches over the Tower's safety." made me smile; there is real potential in jokes like this and it demonstrates you have the ability to make this work, it is that kind of originality that you should aim to replicate, even I am taking this joke in a way that I should not, consider why it is funny carefully. I know there is an awful lot to do here but I fervently hope that you are prepared to stick at it, devote some serious time to this one and you will reap the benefits, remember, Rome wasn't built in a day, if it had been there would almost certainly have been more drinking.
Concept:	3	I am very pleased to see someone taking on a Disney related article as I must confess to being something of a fan. What struck me most was that you have chosen a very difficult way to try and relate this article, that is by taking something well known and then describing it as something different entirely. The same style is used in some of our featured articles and you should take note of the way they do so. While I recommended above that you try and stick to reality this is a possible way to present your article. If you want to do so then you need to ensure that it still works for it's actual function, that is to say it is fine to say that The Tower of Terror is in fact a super powered robot but it should still carry out the function of a theme park ride. Beyond that you need to make sure the article's tone is consistent, currently your tone is somewhat informal saying things like "The said actress was last seen playing Russian Roulette at the base of the tower, only to be gang-raped by Winnie the Pooh's army". The problem with this sentence is that you are attempting to merge two tones together, you are trying to be formal and encyclopaedic, however when you do so the sentence sounds somewhat out of place. Since Uncyclopedia is a parody of Wikipedia you should remember that the article should sound like a Wikipedia article and you will notice that these never contain the authors opinion of a subject and very rarely contain colloquialisms that are not in quotes. Your article should either sound like an encyclopaedia article or be completely informal, I would recommend that you go with the encyclopaedic tone. In line with the encyclopaedic tone you should avoid putting opinions into sentences, there are lots of ways to still do this however, try things like non-sequiturs, which would be something like "Disney is a totally open and peaceful organisation". This allows you to make a point that would not otherwise fit the article. Take a look at some featured articles to see this technique in practice.
Prose and formatting:	5	Your prose are usually found in short sections and ideally your article could expand on some of these a bit more, try increasing the size by adding more context to what you are saying. Your spelling and grammar is of a reasonable standard, though I could identify some mistakes. Currently I don't see any need for you to ask for help with your spelling and grammar as it is of a good standard already, though if proofreading is not your idea of a good time you should remember that the proofreading service is there to help out, as you should proofread regularly when writing. Your formatting is pretty good and for the current size of your article you need not add any more images, though if you do expand it, as I suggested, another image might not be a bad idea. Otherwise this is pretty good at the moment.
Images:	4	Your images are fine for an article of this size and you seem to have a reasonable idea as to what you want to achieve with them. However I would caution against not using any images that aren't of the actual attraction as without one there isn't much of a backdrop to what you are saying. Be creative if you choose more images and remember that, ideally, they should link to the article and should fit in with the tone you are setting. Your image captions should also reflect the humour in your article, bear in mind that they are of more importance to an image than they seem, so they are well worth spending time on. My recommendation is that you leave sorting out your images until last and then work on them once you have an idea of where you want to go with the article.
Miscellaneous:	4	My overall grade of the article.
Final Score:	18	I know there is a lot of criticism and advice here for you to take in but I would encourage you not to feel that the task of fixing this is not insurmountable, there is work to be done, but it is manageable. I feel you have real potential as a writer and with a bit of work this article could be excellent. Remember also that this review is my own opinion and that there are others available, there are also other people who would be happy to give you a hand making this article better, myself included, all you need to do is ask around. If you have any questions about improving the article or any comments about my review then you can leave them on my talk page. Good luck making any changes.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 14:47, September 13, 2010 (UTC)