Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Mrthejazz/The Buttsecks Tax
The Buttsecks Tax[edit source]
Just need some feedback to de-stub this. I thought it was a good concept and had good initial ideas, but it sort of petered out. Any feedback would be appreciated.
User:Mrthejazz/sig 16:43, May 24, 2010 (UTC)
I'll try to hit this in the next 12 hours. --—John Lydon 16:52, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
- Make it 24 hours please, 48 is too long to prevent others doing this if they want to, a day is the most you can have before the booking is cancelled. --ChiefjusticeGameBoy 17:00, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
| Humour: | 5 | I'm not sure if you want some input as to how to expand on this idea or you just want feedback on what you have. So I'll give you both. You can take whatever you want and throw the rest away.
I found what you have to be humorous. Not Laugh my ass off funny, but it made me smile. I think it would be much funnier if you expanded it. The reason I say that is because before one joke sinks in, you've already thrown out two more. For example, in the first paragraph, you mention an Aids tax and an assless chaps tax in the same sentence. While my feeble mind is trying to wrap itself around how an Aids tax might work, you've moved on. Expanding on these two items would not only add to the funny, but increase your article length. |
| Concept: | 6 | As for expanding the length of the article, aside from the Aids and assless chap taxes I mentioned above, you could work on describing the crazy ways this law could be enforced or what penalties it could bring. I saw that you touched on both of these briefly, but there is a lot more there. You coul dsite fictional cases, describe insane punishments, or detail crazy ways the government has caught certain people violating the law. |
| Prose and formatting: | 6 | Its hard to get a good grasp on the formatting of an article that is this short. I did notice that you don't have a category header for your citations. Other than that, I didn't see anything wrong with the layout. |
| Images: | 5 | Again, We only have two images to work with, so it's hard to be really detailed in my evaluation. I think an article this short definately doesn't need more than two photos in it, but if you expand the article consider adding more photos. The pee chart image kinda threw me off track until I actually read the the article. I tend to lok at the images before reading the article and I couldn't figure out how the color of your pee tied into a buttsecks tax. You may want to consider replacing that image with one that has a little more to do with the overall idea of the article. |
| Miscellaneous: | 5.5 | I definately think this has the makings of a good article, as long as you work on expanding it. Right now it's too short for any of the humor to really sink in. |
| Final Score: | 27.5 | Final Score |
| Reviewer: | --—John Lydon 13:27, May 28, 2010 (UTC) | |