Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Women Drivers
Women Drivers[edit source]
Though it's not exactly finished (it's too short), I'd like a quick review or two to point me in the right direction, gimme some ideas, and to see how good it is thus far.
- Sycamore is peeing on your article, for now enjoy Noel with this coupon.--Sycamore (Talk) 10:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
|
For a bumming session with Noel Fielding |
| Humour: | 5.5 | Alright, defiantly some funny moments throughout; I think the Barbara Stiesand and Feminism references could defiantly be expanded upon-A lot of the other stuff like the listly 'Classification" stuff adds little humour.
It’s not formatted all that well, the intro should not be divided, as well as there being too many sections essentially saying the same thing. Having said that repetition can be funny, it’s just that here I don't think that it's working all that well. The Misogynistic of the concept is not really all that filled out-I think were I to write his I would do more of a vintage 1930s style guide for "the Gent to deal with the Lady driver"; This would definatly make it funnier and add a to the fairly flat concept. |
| Concept: | 5 | although initially funny it just is a little bit o a dead end, ideally you should have your readers asking for more, which make the article funnier. For example in one of my articles Battleship Potemkin I put a lot in there for a such a short article-and people (I think) liked it a lot because there were so many avenues of interest. Here you’ve ultimately got only the one stereotypical joke-I think it could work with just a little bit added to the concept you're using within the piece. |
| Prose and formatting: | 5 | Alright only the one red link. There are a few lists which are generally discouraged (they are magnet for vandals/provide little humour). You have a great deal of quotes on the top-Not so cool and these ties in with the lists. I tend to advise using one, however many use two, however more than that is not really advised. I would keep the Tony Blair one and do away with the rest. The ==Intro== should be got rid of it’ll make it look tidier up the top of your article.
Other sections should mostly be merged or got rid of, tow 'Classification bits are unnecessary. Similarly a lot of the other parts could be better integrated with History, or a new "Overview" section. Use of broken one of sentences towards the end, again not really that great, and should be merged within the rest of the article |
| Images: | 8 | The first one is great, and very funny, second one is a bit dire, You can get another image made here: Uncyclopedia:RadicalX's Corner |
| Miscellaneous: | 6 | Its alright, Just a bit more work here and there- and tidying the whole thing up. Other than this I would get some more material to work within the article so it’s not just the one joke, you could also work to turning it on it' head making the guys look a bit dim |
| Final Score: | 29.5 | I hope this has helped, should there be anything else, jsut leave anote on my talk page;) |
| Reviewer: | --Sycamore (Talk) 12:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC) | |
Thanks for the review.