Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Worst Article Ever (Actual Review)

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archive

Guidelines

FAQ

Committee

RotM

Worst Article Ever

Ok, this wasnt reviewed good enough so please make this a better one. Also this has been on VFH and would have won but failed at the end. Also some things in here were not my work, like that naked fat dude or the waffles. Indepth please. Thanks! DirectorWILLYOU 333Talk IF YOU DARE 17:24, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Please delete this page and bad article have you beat I'm afraid. --EMC ^[TALK] 07:02 Jan 18 2010

Humour:	9	The n00b is captured well and doesn't become unfunny with repitition. I love the way you purposely stomp all over HTBFANJS. There are a couple of cliche`s that are missed, but that's OK, because you got all of the major ones well. There actually isn't much I can contribute, but I suggest making sure to follow How to be stupid and not just funny to a T, and reading HTBFANS to ignore it even more.
Concept:	7	With bad article out, it is a tiny bit unoriginal (Unless you wrote this before that existed) but it still manages to strike very good comedy. I suggest what I said above for expansion, if you didn't do that already.
Prose and formatting:	8	You take on the n00b making his first article style excellently, and obviously, any grammar mistakes there are forgiven. However, the fake pee review is supposed to be good grammar, yes? Well, there are some grammatical errors there. I could fix those myself, if you would like.
Images:	9	The images and the captions were hilarious, and the pure irreverance of them make it brilliant. The only reason they're not a 10 is because I have not pissed my pants yet. (Trust me, I will)
Miscellaneous:	8.3	The template sums up my feelings pretty well, I'd say.
Final Score:	41.3	Overall, really funny, which is certainly a great point. The images are funny and have really good captions. A couple grammar errors to iron out, and maybe beef it up a bit, but less is more.
Reviewer:	HELPME 07:55, January 18, 2010 (UTC)HELPME