Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Oliphaunte/A Pragmatic Affair
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
User:Oliphaunte/A Pragmatic Affair[edit source]
I am aware there are no pictures in here yet, but I am looking for a first glance view of the article; the pictures are not as important. I've noticed that I have a tendency to make an article worse as I try to perfect it before a review. --Sir Oliphaunte (განხილვა) 
19:07, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
Sir Oliphaunte (განხილვა) 19:07, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
- I shall finish this review right away.--User:CandidToaster/sig 02:49, June 17, 2011 (UTC)
| Humour: | 9 | I loved this article, both as a humorous story about a detective with equal parts suave, intelligence, and pervertedness, and as a parody of other private detectives. Your character, Detective Cook, is a nice subversion of the detective archetype, and an excellent deadpan snarker. The story is also a wonderful parody of other detective stories. It wasn't a compelling, mind-numbing, heart wrenching story of political intrigue and espionage, but it was funny, and that's all that matters. The constant sexual comments made by our unlikely hero are humorous, though at times they can get tiring at times; I believe he should have made more non-sexual jokes. The fact that you made this detective into a dead pan snarker makes him more into a likable character, and also more realistic. |
| Concept: | 10 | The concept is wonderful, and I would love to see more adventures of this character you made. The execution of your concept was excellent. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | Currently, the article looks simple: no headers or fancy fonts. Keep it that way. I noticed that one sentence was a bit too long ("I also realized that the bouncing betty outside my window was far more talented with jumprope than physically possible for someone's who's breasts would cause any normal person to fall down as gravity brings that melons back to their original position"), but other than that, your article is good grammar wise, and their isn't much else that interrupts the flow of your narrative. |
| Images: | 7 | You don't have a picture, so I put a 7, which I consider a standard "good" score. I could help you with the pictures if you want. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8 | The level of enjoyment I got from this article. |
| Final Score: | 42 | I was originally going to comment on how the story doesn't continue, but I recently had an idea about a part two. I've been formulating it in my head ever since I read your story, and so far I've got the basic plot down. Though I think it is sort of wrong for a reviewer to expand on the article they're reviewing, I can't stop thinking about the idea.
You are a great writer, and I hope to see wonderful, well written things in your future. |
| Reviewer: | --User:CandidToaster/sig 03:36, June 17, 2011 (UTC) | |
I'm still new to reviewing, so I apologize in advance if the review wasn't very good.--User:CandidToaster/sig 03:36, June 17, 2011 (UTC)