Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Knucmo2/Why?:Allow Animal Testing?

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Why?:Allow Animal Testing?

Knucmo2 20:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I haven't done a review for a while. Need to keep my quota up. Got you covered. BlueYonder - CONTACT

??? When do you plan on having them covered?--Smokin' Cheddar BBQ: The King of the Triangular Snackfoods 20:09, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

As CheddarBBQ says... We don't allow "booking" of reviews. You either do it right away, or leave the review for someone else to do. . CheddarBBQ, if you want to review this, go ahead... Cheers. MrN 20:13, Mar 11

I don't neccesarily want it. I just thought it was bad to see it sitting there going un-peed on cuz I got claimed it a week ago.--Smokin' Cheddar BBQ: The King of the Triangular Snackfoods 20:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Aw, I might as well. I'll have it reviewed by the end of the day today, tomorrow at the absolute latest.--Smokin' Cheddar BBQ: The King of the Triangular Snackfoods 20:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

This article has been stamped for Pee Review by the Almighty Smokin' Cheddar BBQ.

Humour:	2.5	Divided into sections: Quotes- None. Always get in some good quotes at the beginning of the article. Intro- The sentence "Talk about the speed of progress!" should probably be removed. "Talk about" jokes are rarely funny. The last sentence of the first paragraph needs fixed It just doesn't sound right. The next "paragraph" is funny, but i would suggest getting rid of "so" and making this the last sentence of the 1st paragraph. For- Some parts of the first paragraph are funny, but it's way too hard to understand. Cut the bolding and the "..." and fix up somee grammars and stuffs and it should be goods. The second paragraph is funny, but, once again, work on the grammar a bit. SC- This section is sadly the worst thus far. The 1st paragraph doesn't make much sense. The 2nd is funny, but too much is in ( ). Refrain from composing the paragraphs with little not-so-funny side notes and focus on the basis of each paragraph. Stick to the facts (made up or not). The "follow science blindly becauseits science" thing is funny, and try to work around that idea for this paragraph. So keep things like, "Science already knows, or will know everything about anything some day. So why stand in the way of SCIENCE?" (w/out the caps lock) but get rid of stuff like "(in the future it will be science and order, not law and order...or maybe just SCIENCE Yes!). DGAOI?- This section is funny, in it's concept. The CONTENT is not funny. This needs a lot of work, I'd say scratch it after "God gave us dominion over the animals."Work off of that. it seems that your biggest humo(u)r flaw is that you don't concentrate on one thing per para. as you should. This leads to rambling, which isn't very funny. SRASTAOI?- Puns Aren't funny ever. So don't bear with me. It don't work. Don't streeeeetch out words. The stuff here is funny. "So long as there is a controversy about animal testing - more and more attractive women will be willing to get their kits off all for the sake of saying 'I'd rather go naked than wear fur'" is the funniest thing I've seen so far in the article. Write like that. Genuine humors. HAHAHAHA. But work on the formatting. Still needs work. Try to get in more jokes like that. Against- If you have a paragraph for for, you've got to have one for against. It's the law. Alternatives- You seem to contradict yourself here. Your saying that prison is bad, but that is what is being done to innocent animals, which is bad. This needs completely redone, sorry to say. It just doesn't make sense with the rest of the article. You contradict youself too many times in this section. Benefits- Don't say it will list consequences. Consequences sound bad. Cut the 3rd paragraph. Don't talk about your squah partner and stuff like that. It just doesn't fit. (see the stuuf about no side notes) Anyways, you don't really state the point of this article. Some of this section is funny, but a lot doesn't make sense. HWSTB?- It seems funny, but once again, rambles. Try to avoid rambling and make things clearer. Conclusion- The conclusion isn't funny, and is a bit too short to conclude anything. A conclusion is neccessarry, but make sure it goes along with your concept.
Concept:	5	You seem to have a concept, "Animal Testing is Good," but it's too simple. Try expanding it, and making it more specific. Also, only include information about your concept. Otherwise, it becomes amateur-ish. For ex. for the conclusion, don't allow the reader to choose. FORCE THEM TO AGREE WITH YOUR SIDE! That's really what persuasion is all about. Insult the credibility of your opposition and shit like that. You need a solid concept. Maybe "If you don't agree with Animal Testing, you're a racist" (not exactly that, but you get my point.
Prose and formatting:	2	You REALLY need to work on your grammar. There are a couple of spelling errors and stuff, but there is a lot of run-on sentences. You overuse many things, suc as bold, (parenthesis), etc. Read over this article a couple of times, looking out specifically for things that don't make much sense.
Images:	0	I'm giving you a 0 becuase you deserved ten points per image. But really, get some pictures in there. Put out image requests or make them yourself, whichever, just get them in there.
Miscellaneous:	4	It's okay, but it still needs a lot of work before it can become an accomplished article. Read over the stuff I said and try a different approach.
Final Score:	13.5	I'm not trying to be mean. It seems like you are probably new here, so try reading over other articles, specifically featured ones, to get ideas.
Reviewer:	Smokin' Cheddar BBQ: The King of the Triangular Snackfoods 21:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Um, CheddarBBQ, remember this, quotes are not obligatory. Even more so, they are generally depreciated. In the case of this article, a quote at the top might be appropriate if it contributes to the article's humour. About your review, overall it is a rather good review, though possibly a bit too harsh. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:05, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not new here: I've been here two and a bit years, on and off, I've written two features (Miles Davis, HowTo:Win an Argument) and some other good articles - so I know how to write well. Would you like to make any more ungrounded statements? The use of ridiculous type-face and run-on sentences is deliberate, as only a madman would use such devices - otherwise, as you say in your charming Oxford English: 'It don't work'. Since I admire your princely prose so much is it possible for me to have grammar lessons, or 'shit like that'? Will I finally learn how to 'cut the bolding' and stuffs? --Knucmo2 01:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)