Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Guildensternenstein/Sans-culottes
User:Guildensternenstein/Sans-culottes[edit source]
My first full article here in a while. Hopefully all the jokes about the French Revolution aren't lost on everyone. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 17:59, May 29, 2011 (UTC)
- I've read this already, so I'll see what I can whip up for you. --Black Flamingo 23:19, June 11, 2011 (UTC)
| Humour: | 8 | Okay Guildy, as I would expect from you this is a pretty perfect article. I guess I should thank you for making my job easy, but I digress.
I should also say that the jokes about the French Revolution were by no means lost on me, and I barely know anything about it, so don't worry about that. All in all there isn't much to say. The first paragraph of the section titled The Sans-Culottes feels a tad muddled. It took me a couple of reads before I really knew what you were trying to say, and although most of it now it quite clear, I would suggest taking another look just to make sure you're getting your point across properly there. The part about the Girondists, for instance, was especially puzzling. I do not understand why they would be opposed to calling themselves 'Jacobins', nor why anyone would even call them this if they were called the Gironists. It's likely I'm missing something here, but again it might be something you want to take another look at. The reason I am missing it may be because you're not fully establishing who these people are. Also, there may be the minor issue of repetition. Generally speaking, you do a terrific job of keeping an almost one-note article surprising and funny. The only reason I bring this up though is because it feels like your recurring gags of pantslessness are worded too similarly in places. In one section you say Jacobins vehemently supported the wearing of leg garments, and in the next you say the sans-culottes resented them. I don't know, it just kind of feels like you're using the same punchline. It's not a major issue obviously, but a bit more variety would be better, if only marginally so. Perhaps when you say they "opposed the damage wrought to the traditional social order by the Jacobins and resented the confining leg garments they were forced to wear because of them", you could instead try something like "opposed the restrictions on the freedom of their limbs", or something less cumbersome than that. I'd like to see you misdirect the reader; make them think they're going to be opposed to some social restriction, but then it's just pants again. A similar symptom of this issue is a slight overuse of the words "pantsless" and "leg garment". Obviously it's up to you what you do about this, if anything, but it might be something to think about. Another joke I'd like to talk about is the one about them fighting naked in battle. It's a decent joke, but I don't think you tell it as well as you could. There is one line in particular that I had a problem with: where they "take up their bare other rifles into their hands". First of all, is the word "bare" supposed to be there? Because it doesn't seem it should. Secondly, the joke is a bit predictable - not because of the quality of the joke but because of the setup. I think mentioning rifles before a penis joke makes it slightly obvious where you're going here. Perhaps it would work better if you just refer to the penises as rifles - maybe without the link joke - and let the audience read whatever they want into it. Whatever the case, I would say it needs a minor revision. |
| Concept: | 10 | A really good one. Not much else to add really. Sorry. |
| Prose and formatting: | 10 | Again, spot on. There was at least one instance of sans-culottes not being italicised. I would have fixed it but with the noeditsection thing I couldn't be bothered. Try to find it! It'll be so much fun. |
| Images: | 7 | Your images are okay. I like the first one, but the second two are kind of similar in that they're both of women who weren't really involved with the sans-culottes, demonstrating something only somewhat related to sans-culottes. You may have already gathered here that I would like to see some actual pictures of sans-culottes... with the no-pants and everything. Could you manage that? I know it sounds like a tough one but it would help the article exponentially. Overall I would say there are too few images as well, ideally I recommend you have four, but I appreciate the difficulty in finding ones that fit. |
| Miscellaneous: | 9 | Overall quality. |
| Final Score: | 44 | Overall I’d say this was damn fine work. There are a couple of little issues but I’d nom it right now if you wanted. As usual feel free to contact me with any other questions. |
| Reviewer: | --Black Flamingo 23:51, June 11, 2011 (UTC) | |