Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:YesTimeToEdit/Pull Over

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Pull Over

Okay. I'd like to know how crap this is on a scale of one to crap and also I'm looking for picture suggestions. Thank you in advance for whoever marks this with their scent. - [17:08 28 January 2009] YYettie

Nachlader will review this article. So leave him alone. Honestly. You want to argue with a face like that?

Easy for me to realise this article isn't in the shape you have in your mind, so I'll mention even the most obvious suggestions, such as the red links and whatnot, that result in the common 'completed article'.

Also, I'm losing my touch for reviews (and my work at Uncyclopedia in general, a hiatus beckons), so I apologise if the review comes across unhelpful. --Nachlader 14:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	6	The kind of score for humour that still appropriates the intended potential in mind. I can definitely see where the article is headed, only that the intended comedy is hidden in the cluster of un-redeeming prose and lack of any controlled narrative (as it seems to go out of hand, causing several fires and destroying villages and farms in it's wake). Although, I can understand that this article isn't finished yet, I'll give the points based on it's current condition, but the concept score on it's potential.
Concept:	8	The narrative hits me as the stuff that make out as an UnBook, though I don't know if you care to gander in that particular direction. If you don't want to venture in the literary depths of the UnBookery, the article is very rough around edges in this current state when posed as a run-of-the-mill normal article. If the article is developed and engineered, I think it'd pull off. Perhaps in the vein of Modusoperandi's The defense rests, your honor, where a quote leads to an article. The execution is fuzzy, even in this pre-rendered state, it yearns to be criticised. There is a high amount of stuff you want to talk about, it seems, in this article. You may want to shear some off, however the suchlike device of showing how insane the person is, is an exceptional device, especially in a paranoid topic as this. I highly recommend it; but not so much is needed, before you simply lose the reader totally. I'd essentially suggest you continue the article. Not in the same artery, perhaps, but realign yourself, and your eyes, to follow the real deal that the future of the article can offer. It's a very good idea, but what needs to be done is the obvious; complete it, and the necessity; change lane.
Prose and formatting:	5	In this state, the organisation and stratagem of the text is rather messy and confusing to the eye. I struggled to keep up any interest in following the prose, particularly as the actual content seemed to drift off into a world of it's own. I even considered whether or not you even knew what you were writing about. That said, the narrative is very much alive, hence the UnBooks reference. Although there is quite an impressionable provision of prose within the text, although it is very messy and could do with some clipping. The profanity is a touch too common, fourteen instances of the word 'fuck' (although, one escaped the 'ing' suffix), and result is that the text feels like it's spluttering in the reader's face. Stress and anger can be easily identified, even without the callous use of bad language. Over-amplified, it can sound deeply unattractive to the reader. Speaking of which, red links burn holes into the eyes of the reader - eliminate them all, wherever they may be found. As for the strategy, I'm going to go on a limb here and use the same advice (not something I like to do) I gave in another review a while back: sentences are communal creatures, separate them from the pack and you can watch them slowly go mad. They belong to paragraphs, to be noticed and assimilated into the passage of the article. Although, as a device, it can work, but most of the time, prose can do with not looking so cold, bare and empty with all her texts lying about uselessly like litter. I will begin to sound like I'm nitpicking here, but I'm willing to point out anything. You may also want to look at the handling of special characters such as the full stop, illustration marks, et al. Using more than one is good for exaggerating or underlining the mood of the language that the author intends to give off to the reader, but then even that must be done well. Using a quote (and this is one of the best quotes I've ever had to quote ever) "He's Not Going To Anally Rape Me With His Clipboard, Is He?!?!", the reuse of of the illustration and question marks at the end are teetering on unprofessional (if I'm one to talk). In your shoes, or socks-and-sandals, I'd have been content with just "Is He!?". Note that the illustration mark goes first, as the question mark has the half loop symbol. The three dots ("..."') are often used to display a fade in the text to resemble tragedy or relief, however, when used between words like "And that was it...I'm free", a space is usually put after the dots, so it'd come out as: "And that was it... I'm free". Some clear up here and there, and the humour article will boast the prose of a god, befitting of it's true nature.
Images:	0	Well, duh. Anyway, the kind of images I'd suggest are ruthlessly simple - no photoshop hysterics required. Instead, I'd consider it preferable to concentrate imagery into captions. For example, you might show a picture of the policeman approaching the author in a car in the first section, a picture of a clipboard with the caption describing how the hell it'd fit inside of you, the last section could show a Greek philosopher and the caption running "He'd find this alphabet thing a walk in the park" or something completely abstract that underlines the mental capacity of the person supposedly writing the article, and so on. Caption work really, most articles on a phrase are hard to define with images, but are obviously still in want.
Miscellaneous:	4.5	Average'd.
Final Score:	23.5	On a scale of one to crap, I'd give this cream of the crap potential award. If you think this review negative, you're wrong. I fully condone the completion of this article, however hard it may be to staple down. So anyway, yes. This article carries a lot of promise, I'd say. You clearly have a picture in your mind, so why not get the tools out and put it down on paper? I hope this review is of any help. If not, I wish you good luck and there are other opinions available.
Reviewer:	--Nachlader 14:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)