Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnBooks:Alibaba And The Forty Bikers

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

UnBooks:Alibaba And The Forty Bikers

The article is pretty rough, no images, no formatting, no hyperlinks, bad grammar and so forth, don't bother with that stuff. All I want is Concept and Humour... And a couple helpful tips. Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 18:50 June 23 '09

Just so you know, your sig is spilling text. Saberwolf116 14:51, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Fix'd. Now, are you gonna do the review? Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 15:01 June 24 '09

Middle Eastern humor goes over my head. Ask 'dillo Saberwolf116 15:13, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

It is too rough and also a bit silly crude as well . I don't think the text really makes much sense. Sorry. --RomArtus*Imperator ® (Orate). 21:25, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

yeah, I know. That's why I put it on pee review, I want some detailed feedback. I am not waiting for any sort of praise, I am waiting for an advice to improve the less-than-two-hours-effort that is the article Colour Sig For Make Mahm00shA Look Cool 21:30 June 24 '09

Concept, which must be the basis of your article if I'm using this template:	9	Well, your concept is certainly original. Overwhelmingly so, actually. In fact, your article essentially is concept. Whether that's a good or a bad thing, I'm still trying to figure out. I'm also not really sure how well the "book" format fits here, since it obviously takes place in modern times. However, I can honestly tell you that I didn't anticipate a single thing that happened, so you get bonus points for unpredictability.
Humor, without a second u, because I'm American:	6	This isn't to say that the humor in your article is bad, it's just not my kind of humor. I've always disliked toilet humor, and that seems to be the bulk of this article. What isn't toilet humor seems to be along the lines of the incredulous "he just did what?", which is another thing that I've never been fully receptive toward. I really have no suggestions for "improving" (note: changing) the humor, because to do so would change the entire article completely.
Your spelling and grammar, which probably sucks:	7	I'm aware that you asked for only humor and concept, but damned if you're going to ruin my %100 review streak! As you're clearly aware, the grammar in this article could use some work. Especially spotty are the dialog sections, so much so that I think you'd be better served to just use the traditional quotation system. The article also jumps far too frequently between a narrative and a conversational tone. While the article overall tends to be narrative, there are parts that use terms like "Anyway,", "So, basically,", or even just the word "got". All of these are more or less slang terms, and therefore break from the narrative tone of the article.
Images, or lack of:	8	The images present serve the article well, and they directly fit with the narrative. I think the article could stand to have one or two more images, but it doesn't suffer for lack of them.
Miscellaneous, not averaged, despite what some would have you believe:	9	I'm boosting your score here because so much of the review is based purely on my personal taste.
Final Score, totaled, as most would have you believe:	39	This was a difficult review. I'm clearly not the target audience for this type of article, but it seems that none of the active reviewers are, either. All I can recommend is to work with what you have. If you want to keep working on the article, keep it just as vulgar as it already is, come hell or high water. I really doubt you'll be able to turn this into a feature, but you can at least turn it into an article that you're satisfied with. If this review makes you choose to pursue other avenues, fine, but I truly don't believe that this can survive VFH without a complete shift in tone. As always, the choice is up to you. Good luck.
Me:	Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 19:15, 3 July 2009 (UTC)