Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Wind generators
Wind generators[edit source]
Lantash (talk) 11:19, March 22, 2012 (UTC)
- Why not? Haven't done one in ages. Lets do this! ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!)
09:36, March 24, 2012 (UTC)
- Undone previous review due to lack of substance. Nominally Humane! 04:26 16 Apr
| Humour: | 8.5 | ;READ CONCEPT FIRST, THEN HUMOUR, AND THEN THE REST
I have very little more to add here. The humour is delivered in a brilliant "straight man" voice. I love that approach, but the template at the top slightly belies that as that has a more jocular feel. I'd be tempted to move that template to the base of the article. The joke within it will be maintained, but you don't show your hand too soon, and you don't start jocularly and then become straight. While I'd avoid being too jocular, you can afford a few throw away gags in here as well. A one liner in the right place will help keep a person looking for a Monty Pythonesque style of joke in place. Think of the way Colbert works - he is the ultimate straight man but doesn't shy away from the odd joke here and there. That would be the voice that I'd be aiming for. |
| Concept: | 8 | Hey. Frosty has taken a while to get to this - just a touch longer than the 24 hours - so I figured I'd grab it as I've kinda lived it since I first saw it.
The concept is brilliant - turning almost every "factual" thing about wind turbines on its head. And the execution is brilliant. As it stands at the moment it is probably a featurable article. The only reason why I haven't nominated this for feature so far is that while I this this is very good, there is probably a few tweaks here and there that could make it even better. One thing I did do while working on reviewing this article is begin to develop a bit of understanding of what wind turbines are and how they work. While I understood the basic concept, I have to admit that I had never really been that heavily into the details of it. One thing I did come across was the idea of using smaller turbines in remote third world areas where they didn't have mains power supply to charge mobile phone batteries (as they also don't have land line phones) or for other electrical purposes. While you have talked a little bit about being able to run one off a car battery, I wonder if the stupidity of the reverse of this concept could work here. For instance, it could be used to keep the air moving in these towns where there is a large animal population and excessive methane is produced. By using manually powered versions of these turbines they help to combat the increased heat in these areas as well as safely disburse the methane. These are powered using a number of gears and pulleys, so a turbine with the diameter of a full grown man could be powered by a child as young as 8 using a exercise bike type of arrangement. This also has the added benefit of keeping the children employed in a useful activity rather than sending them to useless education, and keeping them fit and active. The other thing is how the air flow cools down the earth. In a conventional evaporative cooling system the air is cooled by blowing it across a water bath and then into the household. The wind turbine works in a similar method where it blows the air in off the sea, where it is naturally cooked by the sea water, and then across the land. In order for this to be most effective there need to be wind turbines even across inland areas to ensure that a consistent airflow is experienced across the entire continent. I also had a look at a video of a gigantic wind turbine concept in the middle of the ocean. This was an animation of how the turbine worked, amongst other aspects. Using the same video but reversing the order of it you can show the power being supplied to the turbine running up to a motor and gearing system that then drive the propellor. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | I have no issues here. I think you used plant where it should be plants in one part, but otherwise spelling and grammar are fine.
At one place you use a <sub>2</sub> which does slightly break the line height. Try using the subscript UTF-8 character 2 (₂) instead. While what you've done is technically fine, the other is just a touch better, and with my browser it makes a much smaller impact. |
| Images: | 6.5 | Great images, and the captions work well within the context of the text itself. Something like this image would work well, as would one or two animations of a similar nature.
In short looking for something that looks more technical in the way that it works, and having that cartoonish like technical drawing feel to it. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8.5 | Featurable as it is. I'd love to see it as a top ten of the month candidate though. |
| Final Score: | 39.5 | |
| Reviewer: | Nominally Humane! 03:50 27 Apr | |
Some good ideas there of which I've incorporated most, although my CAD skills don't stretch to complete tech diagrams so a schematic is not really on the cards just now. (Though did think of having a nacelle containing a modified washing machine as the motive power)
Rearranged the sections into a more logical order, added a few more images plus another must-have on any green issue, a fake Al Gore quote. I could go on tweaking things but I reckon it's about time to VFH.
Thanks for review. Your time and effort is appreciated. --Lantash (talk) 20:12, May 30, 2012 (UTC)