Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/seductive space boob
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
seductive space boob[edit source]
116.118.16.181 09:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
| Humour: | 3 | It's not got a lot of funny bits in this one, I'm afraid. It reads like your prototypical "meme" article: Lots of mentions of popular culture people that no-one finds funny anymore. little text, lists, the obligatory Chuck Norris reference, and lots and lots of random stuff that has nothing to do with the article. The article needs a solid background, and it needs to focus on the actual subject a lot more, as right now it just describes anecdotal things that have only slightly to do with the subject. Two-or three line sections are almost never long enough to be funny, so these obviously need a load of expansion, or, failing that, merging so it at least looks neater. The "diary of the space boob" section could be good with some work, but right now it is just plain awful and I would seriously consider nuking it. You need to ix-nay the lists at the end too, or at least convert them to prose and paragraphs, so that they are more streamlined and funny. Oh, and one more thing: Censoring an entire section; it would be better to use {{c|[insert text here]}} and still actually write the section rather than just saying it's censored - it's an extra joke and it shows that you've worked hard on the article. |
| Concept: | 2 | This isn't a brilliant concept, I'm afraid. I feel that this really can't be taken much further than what it already has been, and this right now isn't a great-caliber article to begin with. It just opens itself up to innuendo and clciché, both of which you have succumbed to and both of which aren't funny. I just can't se this ever being good. |
| Prose and formatting: | 2 | See above, mainly. This influx of lists doesn't really set you on a good footing to begin with. The images seem to be in the exact right positions to cramp up the text and annoy it. There are several spelling mistakes that I could count, but not too many. The prose is really too short to be marked well on, and it is very intermittently written. |
| Images: | 4 | First off, there's too many of them for the amount of text there, so you need to either: 1° remove a couple (good) or 2° Add some more text (better). Secondly, these, while OK for this type of article, aren't really all that funny, due to their massive overuse. A couple of original images would go a long way here. If you have any ideas but lack execution, I recommend RadicalX's Corner. |
| Miscellaneous: | 2.8 | n/a |
| Final Score: | 13.8 | This isn't brilliant right now, and with a lot of work it could be a decent article, but I just don't think this concept goes far enough for anyone to make this into a great article. |
| Reviewer: | –—Hv (talk) 22/03 10:47 | |