Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Why?:You Will Never Have a Chance in Hell With Her (Second Review)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Why?:You Will Never Have a Chance in Hell With Her

While it did not win VFH, it had a few good votes. In-depth please.---   TALK What's it like to be a heretic? 15:46, October 15, 2011 (UTC)

I sort of indicated I'd do this before, so I may as well do it nowish since it's still here. That way I'll be able to move on to smaller and pinker things. But when I say 'nowish', I don't mean right away. I mean... later. This evening. Tomorrow. Something like that. If I still haven't finished by the next day, though, please come smack me in case something came up and I forgot. 1234 ~ 17:15, 7 November 2011

Humour:	5	What you have here is overall a decent article, the very model of a Why?, addressing the question lovelily, but I think it has one main flaw, and this was just what I said before but didn't want to actually review it for pretty much the same reason - there's too much of it. It just doesn't do that much for the amount of it that's there. Part of it is just that you make a good point, and then you... keep going anyway, losing the punchline in the stuff after, or trying to extend it into more punchline, which just doesn't work so well. In the first paragraph you have a line that works fairly well (I know . . . cemetery together), but compare this with the second paragraph - it's not just a line, but the entire paragraph. You only need to point out once that the thing needs to sit down and listen, and likewise you do not need an entire list of I'm not saying this tos to make the point that the thing is less than perfect; we get the idea with the first couple, and you have the entire rest of the article to go into more detail, which you do, often more than sufficiently in much the same vein. It also doesn't help that a lot of the sections are inherently redundant - you say the point in the section header, and then you basically just repeat that point in the section, saying it a few different ways. Take for instance the You're not the only man in the world one - this certainly bears explanation, but the first paragraph is mostly just restating that in three different ways -look at the line You are nothing special to her, just another man in the crowd. That typically means that you may be different from all the other guys, but in her eyes you're just a same old regular boy. Each sentence is the same thing. Try to avoid that unless you're intentionally trying to use it to make a joke, in which case you would only want to do it one or two times or the effect would be lost in the mass of it like it is here, as a result of which it all starts to seem to drag, at least that was my impression. Get to the explanation and elaboration more quickly and it should seem less draggy. Sometimes, however, setting up the section headers like this, the issue isn't even that it drags as a result, but that the headers are the punchlines of the sections themselves. When this happens, they're really not punchlines anymore, since we already see them coming, you know? And at that point the section itself is pretty pointless as well, since, again, you already made the joke in the header. What more is there to say? (Actually, you see this sort of thing a lot in UnNews, too - folks make the entirety of a joke in the title, and then it doesn't go anywhere after that.) This is especially true with the She wants diamonds but all you have is a nice marble that you found in your grandmother's drawer one - if you lead up to the marble without giving it away at the start, it could make for a much more effective joke. That list of responses is another thing in particular - you've probably given the speel about lists plenty of times yourself so I suspect I don't need to do that, but in this case, I don't think a list, however short or fleshed-out or whatever you could potentially make it, is the best way about it. You could probably milk a specific hypothetical situation based on one of those for a lot more comedic value than the entirety of the lot could ever have. Describe one, don't list all. Overall, though, I think the best thing you could do for it all would just be to try to cut down on the less important stuff. Anything that's not a joke in of itself, or helping make a point that's key to a joke, and definitely anything that's just restating something you already said, get rid of it. Once it makes a joke, stop with the line of thought and go onto the next thing, don't go into a pile of other permutations.
Concept:	7	Okay, I'll be honest and say I'm really not even the slightest bit familiar with what the other folks were referring to in regards to this being an old idea. The presentation makes it seem kind of old in that it's repetitive, but I'm quite clueless and thus it seems new... to me. That said, I have nothing helpful to add in regards to that, so I'm not sure why I brought it up. The idea of the thing, and the approach of the fellow counselling his friend is a decent one, however, and is definitely workable. Seems to me to be the delivery that brings it down, not the (un)originality or whatnot. It's all unoriginal after awhile anyway. At least emo girls are still cute even after all that...
Prose and formatting:	6	This needs another proofreading. Grammar issues, spelling things, typos... it's a relatively simple thing to address, however, and overall the format and such is decent. And that drummer at the bottom hangs off the end a bit. Might want to move her up or something. Maybe add a See Also section to balance her out.
Images:	7	Most of the images are pretty good. Not sure how the narrator got his hands on the first one, though, considering... it's obviously a professional shot (even if it's not a very good one). but then again, maybe rich people do that kind of thing? I mean, if they'll bathe in fish, who knows what all else they might do. Suicide one has more repetitiveness in the caption. You just said that, no need to say it again. That that was what it meant was the joke, and if we need it explained, chances are we won't be that amused anyway. The over 9000 gif just doesn't fit with the rest of them, and that meme (that is a meme, right? You kids and all these newfangled terms, so hard to keep them all straight) has been done so many times it's kind of ugh at this point.
Miscellaneous:	6	I am so tired...
Final Score:	31	I seem to have mostly centred on complaining about things that bothered me. This is because I'm self-centred and hope that this way maybe you'll be more likely to fix them some, or something. That said, I do believe it would help the article to do so, and while I brought up what I considered the weak points, this thing is not without good. A pile of people would not have voted to feature it otherwise. And that last review would not have been that lovely shade of green otherwise. Just try to maintain whatever it was they were voting for (most of the ideas, probably. Has good ideas) and maybe this will help with some of the presentation. Good luck, or something. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go pass out.
Reviewer:	1234 ~ 05:24, 9 November 2011

5	Humour The implementation, how funny the article comes out...
	What you have here is overall a decent article, the very model of a Why?, addressing the question lovelily, but I think it has one main flaw, and this was just what I said before but didn't want to actually review it for pretty much the same reason - there's too much of it. It just doesn't do that much for the amount of it that's there. Part of it is just that you make a good point, and then you... keep going anyway, losing the punchline in the stuff after, or trying to extend it into more punchline, which just doesn't work so well. In the first paragraph you have a line that works fairly well (I know . . . cemetery together), but compare this with the second paragraph - it's not just a line, but the entire paragraph. You only need to point out once that the thing needs to sit down and listen, and likewise you do not need an entire list of I'm not saying this tos to make the point that the thing is less than perfect; we get the idea with the first couple, and you have the entire rest of the article to go into more detail, which you do, often more than sufficiently in much the same vein. It also doesn't help that a lot of the sections are inherently redundant - you say the point in the section header, and then you basically just repeat that point in the section, saying it a few different ways. Take for instance the You're not the only man in the world one - this certainly bears explanation, but the first paragraph is mostly just restating that in three different ways -look at the line You are nothing special to her, just another man in the crowd. That typically means that you may be different from all the other guys, but in her eyes you're just a same old regular boy. Each sentence is the same thing. Try to avoid that unless you're intentionally trying to use it to make a joke, in which case you would only want to do it one or two times or the effect would be lost in the mass of it like it is here, as a result of which it all starts to seem to drag, at least that was my impression. Get to the explanation and elaboration more quickly and it should seem less draggy. Sometimes, however, setting up the section headers like this, the issue isn't even that it drags as a result, but that the headers are the punchlines of the sections themselves. When this happens, they're really not punchlines anymore, since we already see them coming, you know? And at that point the section itself is pretty pointless as well, since, again, you already made the joke in the header. What more is there to say? (Actually, you see this sort of thing a lot in UnNews, too - folks make the entirety of a joke in the title, and then it doesn't go anywhere after that.) This is especially true with the She wants diamonds but all you have is a nice marble that you found in your grandmother's drawer one - if you lead up to the marble without giving it away at the start, it could make for a much more effective joke. That list of responses is another thing in particular - you've probably given the speel about lists plenty of times yourself so I suspect I don't need to do that, but in this case, I don't think a list, however short or fleshed-out or whatever you could potentially make it, is the best way about it. You could probably milk a specific hypothetical situation based on one of those for a lot more comedic value than the entirety of the lot could ever have. Describe one, don't list all. Overall, though, I think the best thing you could do for it all would just be to try to cut down on the less important stuff. Anything that's not a joke in of itself, or helping make a point that's key to a joke, and definitely anything that's just restating something you already said, get rid of it. Once it makes a joke, stop with the line of thought and go onto the next thing, don't go into a pile of other permutations.
7	Concept The idea, the angle, the grand funny of the article...
	Okay, I'll be honest and say I'm really not even the slightest bit familiar with what the other folks were referring to in regards to this being an old idea. The presentation makes it seem kind of old in that it's repetitive, but I'm quite clueless and thus it seems new... to me. That said, I have nothing helpful to add in regards to that, so I'm not sure why I brought it up. The idea of the thing, and the approach of the fellow counselling his friend is a decent one, however, and is definitely workable. Seems to me to be the delivery that brings it down, not the (un)originality or whatnot. It's all unoriginal after awhile anyway. At least emo girls are still cute even after all that...
6	Prose and formatting Appearance, flow, overall presentation...
	This needs another proofreading. Grammar issues, spelling things, typos... it's a relatively simple thing to address, however, and overall the format and such is decent. And that drummer at the bottom hangs off the end a bit. Might want to move her up or something. Maybe add a See Also section to balance her out.
7	Images The graphics themselves, as well as their humour and relevance...
	Most of the images are pretty good. Not sure how the narrator got his hands on the first one, though, considering... it's obviously a professional shot (even if it's not a very good one). but then again, maybe rich people do that kind of thing? I mean, if they'll bathe in fish, who knows what all else they might do. Suicide one has more repetitiveness in the caption. You just said that, no need to say it again. That that was what it meant was the joke, and if we need it explained, chances are we won't be that amused anyway. The over 9000 gif just doesn't fit with the rest of them, and that meme (that is a meme, right? You kids and all these newfangled terms, so hard to keep them all straight) has been done so many times it's kind of ugh at this point.
6	Miscellaneous Anything else... or not...
	I am so tired...
31	Final score 1234 ~ 05:24, 9 November 2011
	I seem to have mostly centred on complaining about things that bothered me. This is because I'm self-centred and hope that this way maybe you'll be more likely to fix them some, or something. That said, I do believe it would help the article to do so, and while I brought up what I considered the weak points, this thing is not without good. A pile of people would not have voted to feature it otherwise. And that last review would not have been that lovely shade of green otherwise. Just try to maintain whatever it was they were voting for (most of the ideas, probably. Has good ideas) and maybe this will help with some of the presentation. Good luck, or something. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go pass out.