Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/jehovah's witness
Jehovah's Witness[edit source]
Just want an opinion of how it is coming --5go 04:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
| Humour: | 5 | Well, not too many jokes per se in my opinion. More fact-twisting than humor. |
| Concept: | 8 | It's a major Christian denomination, we should have an article on it. |
| Prose and formatting: | 4 | Needs big work. "Dissender" is not a word, and you can choose either "intersting" or "intresting" and still be wrong. Grammar needs help too. |
| Images: | 4 | The images really don't have anything to do with the article. |
| Miscellaneous: | 5 | I'm sorry, but I really don't have too much enthusiasm for this article. |
| Final Score: | 26 | |
| Reviewer: | ----OEJ 20:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC) | |
Endnotes: The biggest problem I see with this article is lack of coherence. How can Hitler be said in one place to have tried to wipe out JWs, and in the image be said to be a future leader of JWs? Both the "History of Jehobar's Witlesses" and the "Presidents of Jehovah's Witnesses" sections have descriptions of church leaders; sometimes the facts in the different descriptions overlap and sometimes they don't. For instance, Rutherford is first described as starting Jehovah's Globetrotters, but the second description ignores that and concentrates on Bible rewrites.
The second biggest problem -- for me -- was how the concept was handled. Making up spurious facts can be part of parody, but for me there should be a sense of wittiness behind the fiction. Yes, if you say that Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Darth Vader, and George W. Bush are on the governing council of the church you make a point: the church is led by unpopular bad-guys (even though some of those listed are fictional and some are dead). But it's also very, very cliché: everybody thinks of Hitler when they think of evil.
The article can use work, in my opinion. Of course this is just the foul opinion of a foul, foul man, so take it as you wish. ----OEJ 20:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)