Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:Is a Flying Sperm Whale About to Crash into my House?

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Why?:Is a Flying Sperm Whale About to Crash into my House?

It's just a decent article now, I need a Review to help get it Featured.--Almost Sir Random Crap

Nobody offered to review yet.--Bad Shroom 20:40, September 1, 2009 (UTC)

I'll review. Nameable • mumble? 20:20, September 3, 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	4	OK, maybe this isn't my kind of humour. In fact, it definitely isn't my kind of humour. You used the word "buttsex" and "bat fuck insanity", which often would warn me that, but I know that this kind of humour would amuse lots of other people, so I won't mark you down too much for that. I'm just going to say that I think it's the easy way out. This could, as you have said, be a Featured article, it has a great title, but the content isn't there. I'll go through what I like and don't like quickly: Like: The introduction. It's pretty short, it sets the scene well to make you want to read more, and you haven't overused expletives. It's also quite funny. Don't change it. Not Keen: on the second section "Okay, how does this fucking thing even exist?". It is only a list, and not a particularly funny one, I'm afraid. What I would do, is remove the list entirely. You could either then rearrange it as paragraphs, but with more a narrative thread (ie. describe this whale to us before hypothesising as to why it is there). Or, alternatively, you could rename the section "Okay, a sperm whale with wings? That's new." I only suggest this because throughout the first half of the article, despite there was a picture, I never seemed to really get the fact that it had wings. I for some reason automatically assumed it was hurtling through the air because it had been thrown. That is probably just my fault however. Like: The next section. I like it more than the last anyway. It is still just two bullet points, and I always prefer paragraphs. The self reference to Uncyclopedia is probably not needed. I would replace it with something like "Most likely though, God was pissed because you killed your neighbours. We did warn you. In fact, I even remember telling you that He was watching. But, hey ho, you didn't listen and now God is so angry that he has decided to launch a flying sea creature at your house...£. Obviously, you don't have to use that one, but you could see what you like. Maybe have two very minor things, like dropping a Bible or working on the Sabbath, and then saying it was probably the triple mass murder that clinched it. Like: The next section. No, I really do this time. I won't suggest anything. Don't Particularly Like: The final section. The child porn joke is lame, I'm afraid. The T-Shirt joke is gold though. I'd just replace the child porn laptop with something dull, like, say, a normal laptop, and then just emphasise the T-Shirt joke instead. Leaving the wife to die was fairly funny, so that's alright, keep it in. I realise it probably seems like I have criticised all your writing, but, honestly, this could be pretty good. It's just not there yet.
Concept:	7	OK, so I gave you seven because I like the title and wish I had thought of it. I also think that you can get something pretty funny out of this, but not the way you are going. Remember it is a "Why?" article, so don't lose sight of that. That isn't to say you shouldn't weave a narrative through it, as you have done in the introduction and last section. You could of course comment on the fact that you find it bizarre that in their last few moments of life before the large nautical mammal impact they have logged on to Uncyclopedia to discover the root cause of their predicament, rather than, say, run for their lives, and then suggest that maybe they haven't got their priorities right. That would of course mean quite severely changing round your article.
Prose and formatting:	5	I would like to suggest you remove the word "buttsex". This is only my personal preference, but it makes it sound immature, in my opinion. Nothing that would cause me to vote against, but I think that if you can put it subtler than that, it could be funnier. There are few other words that maybe the same. Apart from that, which is something I can't really criticise you on as it's your style of writing, just proofread please. Capital letters, less lists, yadda yadda yadda....
Images:	6	The article is so short your two images are plenty. I also think it is a good idea to have aligned the last one in the centre. It's a shame it can't be a bit bigger. Finally, if you drop down your template a few lines, I think it might align properly right below the first image. It looks a little messy at the moment.
Miscellaneous:	6	It just seemed about the right score for this article. It's funny, but not funny enough.
Final Score:	28	To improve this article: Paragraph your lists. Perhaps remove the 4chan and the child porn reference, and replace them with something less tired, if you need anything at all. Possibly do some of the ideas I have suggested above. Keep working on it. Remember I'm only suggesting stuff, and you don't have to follow any of it if you don't think it'll work. Good luck!
Reviewer:	Nameable • mumble? 20:51, September 3, 2009 (UTC)