Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Jocke Pirat/Presidents with Rediculously Accentuated Facial Hair

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

User:Jocke Pirat/Presidents with Rediculously Accentuated Facial Hair

I'M BACK BABY ~

Jacques Pirat, Esq. Converse : Benefactions : U.w.p.

2/07/2008 @ 17:32

Sycamore is reviewing this, you'd noramlly get a template, but faith alone cannot do HTML--Sycamore (Talk) 16:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Im sorry Jocke I have lots on and I'm not gooing to be able to do this review--Sycamore (Talk) 11:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll do it. -- contrived Ape () (Riot Porn) 21:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Humour:	6	This article is very hit and miss when it comes to humour. The images, as discussed below, aren't particularly funny. The quotations work very well, IMO, especially Adams and Jefferson. Madison and Nixon's quotes need revisiting to make them work better. The beauty of the others is that they make sense with the changes, whereas, for example ““No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual facial hair warfare” is jarringly nonsensical. Other things I liked were throwaway (usually psuedopolitical) lines such as “future presidents would attempt to replicate the practice, either as a sign of respect, or ignorance of what made Washington a good president,” (BTW that should be “out of” or “due to” ignorance...) “By slapping Napoleon as Jefferson paced near Napoleon, it helped the president gain the Louisiana purchase,” “It has toured over twenty countries in museums around the world and currently holds the title of "most travelled cryogenically preserved moustache", dethroning Stalin's moustache from the title in 1995.” etc. Hopefully from that you can figure out that what works best is when ridiculously accentuated facial hair is bought into an historical context.
Concept:	4	Ok, when I read the title I thought I would get something about Presidents who really had giant moustaches in real life – for example, I believe Taft had a fairly crazy moustache. However, it seems what you have done is simply gone nuts with Photoshop and Google Image Search (possibly while high). While there is nothing wring with this per se, I think it would only work if the photoshopping were of a high quality. This means,, I think, toning down the accentuation, if possible, and trying to make sure the images don't look photoshopped. Otherwise, the rest of the article will tend to fall flat.
Prose and formatting:	6	Ok, I have spotted a few issues with prose. “John Adams did not undergo this procedure in order to women (Adams was in fact cynical at the time).“ In order to women? Also what was he cynical of? That whole sentence doesn't make sense to me, even if I put “attract” into it. Also, at the end there are some issues with tense: “Although many people believed that Nixon should be impeached for the abominations that hung from his ears, Gerald Ford would pardon him of all charges of absurdity in a highly controversial move. Nixon would die in 1994 when his ear hair violently spread to his heart and brain.” The “would” in the first sentence is unnecessary and the “pardon” should change to “pardoned”. The “would” in the second, though technically correct, does not read well and should be removed (I can't do this myself as I am typing this while offline) and “die,” then, should be “died”. Those are the most glaring examples. Overall I think the article must be read over carefully and edited for mistakes.
Images:	4	These are clearly supposed to be the focus of the article. They don't work for me. Others might like them, I don't. The problem is that they are very obviously photoshopped. This may be intentional – I am not sure, it is not clear from the article – but in any case, badly photoshopped images are basically a cliché on this site. The ones that work best are Madison's Top Hat, Martin Van Buren's sideburns and Woodrow Wilson's Spectacles because the photoshopping is not quite so obvious.
Miscellaneous:	5	Ok, well, in terms of miscellaneous issues, the title requires a few modifications. Firstly “ridiculously” is spelled “ridiculously”. Also, the title refers only to accentuated facial hair whereas the article talks about features. So the title should read “Presidents with Ridiculously Accentuated Facial Features” Mscore averaged using {{pee}}
Final Score:	25	I've said most of it above. However, I am not saying this is a bad article, though this review was very critical. It isn't (a bad article) by any standard but it needs fixing up.
Reviewer:	-- contrived Ape () (Riot Porn) 19:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)