Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Tropical cyclone (sort of)

The version I want reviewed the current version

I need to do a few things to the current article to tidy up the format and improve the effect, but I also need to have a well written article to mess up, and this needs a little work. So I'd like a second opinion on the original text to get this right first, and then I can mess with peoples heads. Pup 00:02, 13/02/2010

sorry about the confusion with the first review. If you'd like, I can go back and redo it and comment on the text. --Sir Skinfan13 Talk {< CUN RotM FBotM VFH ΥΣΣ Maj. SK >} 20:11 EST 12 Feb, 2010

No issues with the first review - everything you mentioned in there I'm going to take into account. Can't quite set it up to refresh with the image starting over again due to the nature of it, so what will happen is that it will swirl out and then swirl back, so people will be able to read it. But that means I'll have to improve the text, and also clean up the few issues you mentioned with the effects. I'd prefer a different reviewer for this one, just because while I know you'll be able to give more constructive feedback, I'd like to get a fresher perspective on it. Pup 01:20, 13/02/2010

That's perfectly fine. --Sir Skinfan13 Talk {< CUN RotM FBotM VFH ΥΣΣ Maj. SK >} 21:40 EST 12 Feb, 2010 edit: you may want to edit this page so people don't assume I'm reviewing it when they see I made the last edit. (14 Feb 13:12 EST)

I'm in here, per request. --ChiefjusticeDS 23:16, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

Humour:	7	Having been a fan of your work for a while I have had my eye on this one for a while. The version that you have presented to me to have a look at here I deduced has been changed only in that it is the original text and thus does not swirl away into nothingness, I thus assume that it is the text that you want me to take a look at, I'm happy to oblige. The humour isn't bad and puts me in mind of Orian's little Joshy articles, though there are a couple of things I recommend you take a look at if you want the text to amuse along with the idea of having the article swirl away. The very first thing that struck me about your humour was that it doesn't have much of a direction to it, I realise that such a problem comes very much with the style but I thought that even when you take this into account the article talks itself round and round a lot. If you take a look at some of the featured articles that are written in this style you will notice that they tend to employ various means to drive what they are talking about, in Lazy Town for instance the author uses the speaker's family and friends to keep the article on track and all the jokes in the article follow a very loose direction. In your article a lot of the parts wander off on tangents of their own, the visit to the trailer park for instance, does bring up the fact that the narrator's Aunt lost her home and that cyclones are supposedly an act of God, but then tacked onto this is a part about an old man in the trailer park who "lets all the boys and girls have lollies". My feeling with such humour in this article at least is that it distracts from the general storyline as we hear no more of this joke later in the article and it isn't the most original idea in the world, I felt that you would have been better off exploiting the humour that is gained when a child fails to understand what an adult means. Permit me to expand, the later part of your article where you say: "My daddy said that when my mummy was alive she could do some amazing things with ping-pong balls. I asked my daddy if she would have been able to blow away all those balls and he laughed so hard his beer came out his nose" This is much better as it pulls together an idea from the article and one of the aspects that make this type of humour excellent, now I'm not suggesting that you should only use this technique, but rather that you should carefully consider which techniques to use, the idea of having the child fail to understand may have been done before but has much more scope for variety than others, the joke above made me laugh whereas the suggestion of the old man being a paedophile had a less desirable effect on me. My recommendation is that you consider the ways you exploit the child's view in this one carefully, you should be careful to avoid rehashing things that have been done before and thus should seek to use the novelty that your concept grants you. I'm not expecting you to make the entire article completely original, just that you try for a bit more novelty. I am overstating the magnitude of this one slightly as you do pretty well here, all things considered. Beyond the above the humour is pretty good and your general ideas are good, the main thing you need to think about now is the best way to present them.
Concept:	6	I was in two minds how to score this one, the concept is not very original if we consider what we have here but it is executed well and did almost enough for me to feel that the lack of originality was not that important and it certainly didn't damage the article as badly as it could have. The tonal consistency is good and the article sounds exactly as it should, the child's characterisation could be a little bit better as we know very little about him, however since this is supposedly a school assignment that is unsurprising. You may wish to consider a bit more characterisation, just allude a bit more to a wider life for the child, if you look at some other articles in this form they say things like "that’s not good because he might leave me in the Tesco car park again by an accident" this simply suggests to the reader that the child is drawing, albeit incorrectly on past experiences where his parents haven't been particularly good parents. My other feeling about this one was that with the changes you have made, with the article swirling away, the fact that the article is unoriginal is completely excused as that is very new and interesting and I felt it may have been included in order to excuse a difficulty in bringing originality to this concept. However I did not take this into account scoring this section, but would encourage you to work with the idea in the final product.
Prose and formatting:	9	These ones are always pretty difficult to check for spelling and grammar as it is quite challenging to determine deliberate errors from the ones that are not; thus I cannot offer any guidance on what to look for but can only recommend that you proofread the finished product carefully yourself to determine that everything is as you want it to be. The only other suggestion I have is that you may wish to consider making the second of the two images slightly larger, you have plenty of room to facillitate such expansion and it would just help viewing clarity, not much of a complaint, granted, but worth taking a second look at, if only to conclude you are happy.
Images:	9	No real problem here, just the formatting issue mentioned above to consider. I won't go on at length about your captions except to say that you shouldn't neglect them if you make major changes to the humour. I doubt you will make such changes, so generally well done here.
Miscellaneous:	7	My overall grade of the article.
Final Score:	38	Good work here generally, the article could use a bit more attention to the aspects of the concept that form the basis of the humour but beyond that this is a pretty solid piece of work. Your concern should be making sure that your humour isn't dismissed by readers and you end up relying on the cyclone effect on the page to draw people in (ha ha). If you have any questions or comments for me then feel free to leave them on my talk page. Good luck making any changes.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 13:15, February 15, 2010 (UTC)