Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Massacre at Brookfield Zoo (once more)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
UnNews:Massacre at Brookfield Zoo [edit source]
I recently did a bit of work on this and would like to know where I stand with this UnNews.
—Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk)
GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 22:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Note to reviewer: There's a possibility that because of certain settings on your computer and the internet browser you're using, the images might look as if they are out of place. If so, please notify me. Pressing "Print Screen" and showing me the resulting image would be very helpful in that case. —Sir Socky
(talk) (stalk)
GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 22:29, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 8 | Hey there, Socky. It's been a while since I last saw this article, and i'm glad to see that you've been working on it. It's gotten much better, however, there are a couple of things that you still need to work on. First, since this is presented in the style on an UnNews article, why are the animals talking? That just seems a little odd. Normally, logic shouldn't need to apply to Uncyclopedia, but when you're writing a supposed news report, you need to make it believable. I'd recommend replacing the dialogue with emotion- for example, change "The boy was so scared... Man, I so enjoyed that look on his face, and I enjoyed shredding him to pieces even more." to The little boy was terrified, and the animal seemed to enjoy ripping him to pieces. Second, I think you rely a bit too heavily on jokes mid-way through the article- instead of explaining how the animals killed the humans, try to trim it down to just a paragraph or two- it was funny the first time, but I got a little tired of hearing every little method of disposal. |
| Concept: | 8.5 | Ahh yes, good ol' massacre at Brookfield Zoo- if I remember right, this is the article you got caught vote rigging. Anywho, I don't have any problems with the concept here- my complaints are mainly centered around the execution. You've got a good concept, but like I said above, you're stretching it awfully thin. Trim down some fat a bit, and your article will look nicer. |
| Prose and formatting: | 9 | The article looks fine on my screen- the images look aligned right, and I see you've also avoided any major .5spelling errors. My only little complaint on the prose is that the beastiality line was uncalled for, and a bit random. I'd recommend getting rid of it, though someone else might find it funny. |
| Images: | 8.5 | I like em'. I enjoyed the newspaper headline, as well as the picture of the mad tiger. My only complaint is that the second image (despite being featured) is a rather bad photoshop- you might want to ask someone to help you come up with a better one. A more minor complaint is that four pictures seem a bit much for an UnNews article- you could stand to get rid of that picture of the little girl. Also, a newspaper headline in a newspaper is kind of strange- you might want to put a picutre of the animal rights guy in there, as opposed to a newspaper article. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8 | MY overall grade of the article. |
| Final Score: | 42 | Excellent cleanup, Socky- there are a couple of minor flaws you need to correct, and then i'm fairly confident this will land on VFH Bottom Line: Great article, fine tune it a bit, then put it on VFH. Good luck! =) |
| Reviewer: | Saberwolf116 23:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC) | |
- Thanks Saberwolf. I'll consider your suggestions. The talking animal bit is actually present in all Ruffles installments, as well as in Animal Farm by George Orwell (which it is partially inspired by), so I think I'll keep that the way it is. One thing I'll certainly do is request a photoshopped version of that Giraffe image at RadicalX's Corner. Before making a final decision concerning this article, I'm gonna ask for one last review. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 00:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)