User:EMC/PLS/Judge

Best Main Namespace Article

User:TheLedBalloon/The nonexistent page

Humour:	6	Wasn't all that funny. Pretty repetitive.
Concept:	10	Great concept, though the execution was lacking.
Prose and formatting:	8	Very good formatting for a page that doesn't exist.
Images:	10	The images are placed conveniently (don't clutter the text), and serve their satirical purpose.
Miscellaneous:	6	The sections are pretty short. The article isn't that long, and it's not categorized at all, though I wouldn't dock points off for the noncategorization because it's likely you didn't know it had to be categorized.
Final Score:	40	Above average, but still missing a bit of a flow. It just ends so abruptly. I sort of feel that the article follows just one joke, and plays it out as much as it possibly can.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 17:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Leatherboundbooks/Polo

Humour:	9	Very funny. Had me slobbering all over my keyboard.
Concept:	8	Of course, we all know polo is only played by rich white men. But other than that, it's very original and clever.
Prose and formatting:	5	The only real thing lacking is the formatting. I spotted one grammatical error, and the bullets are overwritten by the images.
Images:	7	A bit small, and seem to clutter the article just a wee bit. Other than that, not bad.
Miscellaneous:	9.4269	A very good flow. Has a beginning, middle, end, and encore. Oh no wait...
Final Score:	38.4269	I'm impressed. Except for a few things I'm picky about, it's very good.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 23:16, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Thekillerfroggy/How much can YOU take!!

Humour:	9	How would I define the humor employed in this article...hmm. Typical, maybe. Almost like how you'd expect an article about France to define France as a country of sissy girls or something, this is how you'd expect an article about an ad for a Japanese gameshow being syndicated to American television to be, and it's funny!
Concept:	8	Amusing concept.
Prose and formatting:	7	Okay, so I get the striking of the text towards the bottom. Sort of. It's just slightly irritating is all. A bit of it is tolerable, but that's just ridiculous. Also, it's uncategorized, but I'm not going to take off points for that, though it would've been a bonus had you done so.
Images:	7	Asians and a robot. They're not that funny, but they're there. Some pictures are better than no pictures.
Miscellaneous:	9	It has a pretty solid delivery and a decent flow to it.
Final Score:	40	Definitely above average. Lots of positive things about it, though a few minor things stop it from being perfect.
Reviewer:

Not reviewed yet!
Review now

User:Ikabu/Alien Invasion

Humour:	10	Hilariois, though it doesn't have the angle of a regular article. It certainly deviates from the norm. It almost seems like an UnScript. Anyways...
Concept:	8	Good concept. I like the Doctor Who reference.
Prose and formatting:	10	Not an error spotted. Just one red link, but who cares?
Images:	10	Funny and flawless.
Miscellaneous:	9.4269	Should be slapped with one of those "Overly British" templates.
Final Score:	47.4269	Very funny and clever.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 23:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

User:MaxMangel/Online Dating

Humour:	10	Very, very, very funny.
Concept:	7	Reminds me of this, but the work is entirely original even if the concept isn't (which I'm sure it is; just pointing out that there are similar works out there).
Prose and formatting:	6	Seems somewhat sloppy and quite listy.
Images:	6.5	There's a lot of them. They sort of go along with the list theme of the article, as they're all aligned to the right (which makes sense; otherwise they'd conflict with the vast number of bullets). They're pretty funny, but a few funny ones are better than too many funny ones.
Miscellaneous:	7	Pretty good flow despite the sloppy formatting.
Final Score:	36.5	The humor is there, but the formatting is a big factor.
Reviewer:

Not reviewed yet!
Review now

User:15Mickey20/Big Brother (UK television series)

Humour:	8	Funny, but it's very difficult to understand. See below.
Concept:	10	Great concept, though execution is another thing. See below.
Prose and formatting:	5	I understand the concept and everything, but the chatroom talk is very annoying and makes it difficult to read. I'm not saying get rid of it, I'm just saying it's a really big hyperbole. That's part of the humor, yes, but it's possible to cut out some of the excessive acronyms and typos while still retaining the exaggerated chatroom speak, just to make it a bit easier to read. There are also quite a few red links because of this.
Images:	10	Images are great. Nice alignment, funny, and uncluttering (if that's a word).
Miscellaneous:	7	Everything seems fine, though the flow is slightly disrupted by the formatting.
Final Score:	40	The overall chatroom theme of the article is the biggest error. It's a tricky trick to use. It has to be done just right.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 19:08, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Cs1987/Superannuation

Humour:	10	Holy crap, this is hilarious.
Concept:	10	A genius concept, proving what we've all suspected superannuation of really being: a conspiracy.
Prose and formatting:	10	Except for the uncategorization, which I'm not taking points off for, it's great. No red links. Woo!
Images:	10	Images are aligned perfectly and are of good sizes. You did a really good job of making a hybrid of the images themselves and the captions, and that TankChair looks awesome!
Miscellaneous:	10	A perfect flow.
Final Score:	50	A joy to read. Great job!
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 19:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Prettiestpretty/The Red Balloon

Humour:	8	Very funny in a random sort of way.
Concept:	8	I haven't seen the movie, but based on what I've read on the Wikipedia article, it seems like a fantastic parody.
Prose and formatting:	10	Nothing wrong here.
Images:	8.5	I noticed the red balloon is actually an enema bag. Very nice.
Miscellaneous:	8	A quote from Oscar Wilde, that's actually funny?! How dare you!
Final Score:	42.5	Despite having not seen the film, I can still tell this is a great parody.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 20:18, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Kingkitty/Pokemon Adventure

Humour:	8.5	Not bad. I wish I knew what the hell it was talking about sometimes.
Concept:	9	Eccentric, but good.
Prose and formatting:	5	What's with all the bolding? And there are no links!
Images:	7.8	Umm...yeah.
Miscellaneous:	9	I get it now. It's about a Pokemon adventure!
Final Score:	39.3	You've got one hell of a...thing...here. Look, I don't know what's up with this article. It's bold, it's talking about Pokemon and pie and...I mean, it's good, I just don't really understand it much. Maybe it requires a certain advanced level of knowledge or something.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 04:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Mordillo/Jewish Holidays

Humour:	10	Got the humor down pretty well. Hebrew is a funny language, and this is a funny article.
Concept:	9	Well it's an article about Jewish holidays. And it talks about Jewish holidays in a very enlightening and funny way, unlike that Bill Nye the Science Guy guy. He's neither. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT FISH HAVE GILLS, JACKASS.
Prose and formatting:	9.5	Not bad. A big gap between the title and opening text, and only one red link.
Images:	10	If I knew the Hebrew word for perfect, I would cleverly say that, but I don't, so I'll just say it in English. Perfect.
Miscellaneous:	10	Okay.
Final Score:	48.5	Very nice, Mr. Mordillo, very nice.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 04:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Bradaphraser/cyanide

Humour:	10	Too funny for words to express.
Concept:	10	Great angle on cyanide. The Nazi regime references are teh bomb, yo.
Prose and formatting:	10	Flawless.
Images:	10	Awesome.
Miscellaneous:	10	Bananas.
Final Score:	50	This article rocked my face off. The execution, the formatting, the images, the categorization, the humor, everything was perfect. I got a boner reading it.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 20:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Tomtyke/Shit Hits The Fan

Humour:	7.1408	It goes from a theatrical theme to a political theme, which is somewhat confusing. Despite this, it's quite funny.
Concept:	8	Good concept.
Prose and formatting:	9	Good formatting. No real errors here.
Images:	9	Your shit to fan ratio in the pictures is 2:1.
Miscellaneous:	9	Has a pretty good flow. It's uncategorized.
Final Score:	42.1408	So. About this. Yeah. It's good. Good? I meant great!
Reviewer:

Not reviewed yet!
Review now

User:Alksub/Citizen's Advertising Consortium

Humour:	9	The intelligence and wit behind the humor is incredible. Perhaps this was unintentional, but the Citizen's Advertising Consortium is, as stated, is to dumb-down and make advertisements more appealing to even the least intelligent consumers, while the article is clearly a well-written and deft piece of satire, using big words like "disattentive", "biochemistry", and "the", which is complete irony and completely hilarious if you ask me.
Concept:	10	Brilliant concept. Something I would've never thought of.
Prose and formatting:	9	Very good, but there could be more links.
Images:	8	Not bad. The Trump picture relies on the caption too much, but they're still both funny.
Miscellaneous:	9.666	An article of such brilliance may not be understood by all. Uncyclopedia's target audience is 4-11 year olds (not really). Though this really shouldn't matter, it's just something to take into consideration. All I'm saying is, don't expect everyone to understand what the word "lavelled" means. While words like that are fun to write, most people don't appreciate having to refer to a dictionary just to read an article. However, that's most people. I absolutely enjoyed the article. And who knows, maybe I'm wrong? Either way, I still say it's a fanstastic article.
Final Score:	45.666	Shit.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 17:56, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

User:The Number-One ALF Fan/Atomic Mass

Humour:	10	Article. Funny. Very.
Concept:	10	A brilliant concept! I wish I could explain why. Well, let's see. I could try. No wait nevermind. It just is.
Prose and formatting:	10	Perfect.
Images:	10	See above.
Miscellaneous:	10	The whole "science" and "Christian" theme is a hilarious oxymoron. It's like matter and antimatter. It's going to make Uncyclopedia explode!
Final Score:	50	Excellent. Superb. Fetus.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 04:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)