Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Twilight (rewrite)
Twilight [edit source]
So yeah I rewrote it. Honestly, considering the terrible abomination that was there, it was completely necessary. Plus, meteorological phenomenon! Huzzah! Ж Kalir where's my house? 19:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ok I'll take a look. Lets see whats been done to this abomination.--kit 17:24, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 4 | Basically your article went from waow; to hmmm; to mnei; to blah. I smiled and chuckled as I noticed the smart concept (meterological thingy event) and the witty first paragraf. It has some good well placed and well thought of jokes while you manage to fit in the vampire thing quite subtly.
A you go on with the historical paragraf you turn to mixing in Zelda references and jokes while still keeping to the japanese theme. You also mention the author (Meyer) and thats where it starts to be a bit too much. I didn't even get the "wrong date"/"citation needed" thing. You then go on with a small battery of effects, all more unexpected and weirder than the previous one. That could be a good thing but I dont think it is in this case. Nullification, low light = heavenly bodies; stargazers are perverts; you can see far (including cool explosions); and you get a luster but something something about computer and teenagers. This may sound a bit harsh and please excuse if it is but that is basically what I got from that paragraf. Not that boring and unfunny but not particularly funny either. As for the last paragraf; here comes the wizards, the noobs, the jackasses, some "haters", Peta and doctors. *Boom* And there my head exploded. Nah, now I'm being too harsh again, but seriously thats just to random and too much to take in from long and complicated sentences. I comment your prose further down but as for the humour; in short its a bit too random. Most of your points are interesting and original ideas but pick your favorites, improve and develop them and plz remove the others =) I barely understood what the controversy was if there even is one. So 4 - because you went from a 8 to a 0 along your article. |
| Concept: | 8 | I loved the cocnept. Thats what got me hooked up in the first place. Try keeping the whole meteorological thing as a main theme/thesis and try to subtly fit in the whole vampire thing in each paragraf. That way you can make jokes on both and you get two articles in one! W00t. |
| Prose and formatting: | 7 | I myself had the same problem you have here in a recent article. Long, badly punctuated sentences. Sometimes a verb could be added, sometimes one could be removed. Some other times you could merge smaller sentences into a bigger one. More often though you could separate a big one into several small ones. One thing I can point out on the spot - when you use the name Stephenie Mayer you use the word "by" twice separated only by two words. Other than that, I must say your english is good and even though some sentences are a bit long and complicated your prose is really impressive. You might want to try to move the lower picture to the left side, jsut to create a nicer look but other than that it looks just fine. |
| Images: | 7 | At first I had my doubts about the first image but the whole bird comment was really funny =) The second picture sure has a purpose and a good comment. Just curious though why you wrote "link sausage" and not just "sausage". Where does link come in?? |
| Miscellaneous: | 7 | +7 points cuz you took the time to make a rewrite! People like you keep this place running you know =D |
| Final Score: | 33 | I Sure hope my critics havent demoralized you. Even if it may not show enough there sure are paragrafs and ideas I appreciated. I look forward to see what mroe happens to this article. Cheers to you! |
| Reviewer: | --kit 17:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC) | |