User:EMC/PLS/scoring

Best Article

These are my scores for the Best Article category in the 8nd edition of the Poo Lit Surprise. Entries are listed in the order that they were submitted, the scoring template is the same as the Pee Review, and the articles were judged and scored by their own merit rather than being compared to the other articles in the competition which I've determined to be moar fairest way of judgering. --EMC ^[TALK]

User:Guildensternenstein/MonsterQuest

Humour:	10	Brilliant. As a judge who does watch the History Channel on Sunday afternoons, I've seen MonsterQuest and spent many hours with friends ridiculing it. Thus, the work has struck me quite personally. This is a great work of satire. The inclusion of the Tunguska event and the continuous references to Ice Road Truckers (which sucks, in my opinion) are hilarious. The humor pretty much creates itself, as it usually does with anything that is already a joke but takes itself seriously.
Concept:	9	Actually it's what I would have expected. Rather than being encyclopedic, it's a recreation of the show itself. It's probably the most appropriate approach, and I'd love to see an audio version of this available sometime.
Prose and formatting:	6.5	Fairly good. I spotted a few spelling errors, and some confusing sentences that appeared as though they were written by a dirty foreigner. Otherwise, it flowed very smoothly. Because of the approach some of the formatting is rather gappy (too much white, and therefore too racist), and some of the sections could be expanded upon or merged with others in my opinion. If you decide to bring it to the mainspace make sure you categorize it and proofread it.
Images:	8	The images are well-selected and go with the article pretty well. I did notice the "History.com" bits under the History Channel logo; they make it pretty obvious as to where you got the images from which can be indicated in the file information. Those can easily be taken out though if you decide to move this to the mainspace after the competition. Though the images do not appear original, they're put to good use. They could have probably been sized differently so as to get rid of some of those large white spaces surrounding them and the quotes sections.
Miscellaneous:	10	I hope the History Channel reads this sometime.
Final Score:	43.5	This was well executed and hilarious. I laughed so hard at times that I nearly pissed myself. I can't say enough good things about it, so I'm going to take you down a peg and say that you're a filthy sodomite.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 01:03 Oct 19 2009

User:15Mickey20/Elizabeth I

Humour:	7	Subtle wit here and there with some solid punchlines. I much like the encyclopedic feel to it with this mask of tongue-in-cheek facts and the personal twist that doesn't diverge too much. The sexist theme is very well-played and funny. The unfortunate part is that at times it feels like a bit of a stretch, or somewhat forced.
Concept:	8	I give it a good mark here. While the personal POV throughout the article is not particularly original, I think the overall concept and content are.
Prose and formatting:	9	The prose and formatting are excellent, and the article had a pretty good flow as a result. The intro could be expanded and made more legitimate-looking, but it's far from ugly. I spotted no spelling errors.
Images:	8	A good amount of images with relevancy and great captions. On the downside, none appeared original or funny per se.
Miscellaneous:	10	I appreciate the fact that you took your time to learn much of the history of Elizabeth I so as to write of her on Uncyclopedia. Taking facts and making satire, in regards to history at least, is painstaking, noble, and well worth it.
Final Score:	42	None.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 00:49 Oct 20 2009

User:DrStrange/RedHerring

Humour:	8	The logical fallacies and abundance of red herrings in the article are cleverly inserted and funny. I particularly enjoyed the Ayn Rand bit and the section on modern politics. Overall, I found myself with light but numerous chuckles rather than actual laughs.
Concept:	9	The concept is original and unique. It nearly looks like a page that looks like the thing it's about, but stops short of it by being encyclopedic and biographical. I think the only limitation is that the concept is difficult to expand upon. See below.
Prose and formatting:	8	The prose and formatting are superb, but the article is rather short and looks incomplete. The footnotes are rather tiny and the introductory paragraph could definitely be longer. I spotted no spelling or grammar errors.
Images:	7	The images are relevant, and as are their captions. Unfortunatelym, they don't contribute much to the article and seem to be used mostly as fillers to make the article appear longer. And the picture of Redd Herring is just creepy, but in a good way.
Miscellaneous:	10	None.
Final Score:	42	As it is now, I probably wouldn't vote for this on the VFH unless it was made longer and had some solid punchlines.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 14:20 Oct 20 2009

User:Mhaille/The History of the Decline and Fall of Uncyclopedia

Humour:	10	Funny, but it's a Mhaille article so that's to be expected. I enjoyed the cultural reference to H.G. Wells and the beginning joke (this is obviously a parody of The History Of The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire by Edward Gibbons -- hence the "hysterical Gibbons" bit).
Concept:	7	Two words: self-referencing article. Uncyclopedia writing about Uncyclopedia was a hilarious joke at first when we were parodying Wikipedia's doing so and their own self-lauding, but now it's something irksome (admittedly, I am plenty guilty of writing such articles). Don't get me wrong: I like the concept. But the impression I get is that anyone could have come up with a similar concept.
Prose and formatting:	8	The prose and formatting seemed clean and sexy. I would've liked to see less things on the right side of the page; the images and the Wikipedia reference template looked stacked.
Images:	9	Per above. Also, you're a racist for using only black and white images, and it's startling how much the first picture of Caesar actually looks like Oscar Wilde. The captions are relevant and funny (I enjoyed the last one from Shakespeare, and the woman in the image above it is clearly Sannse).
Miscellaneous:	8	I liked that you know your Uncyclopedia drama enough to write about it. I do not like that you know your Uncyclopedia drama to write about it. Really, I think that's what this article really mocks.
Final Score:	42	I like it. I love it. I want some moar of it.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 14:37 Oct 20 2009

User:Matt lobster/The Pregnancy of Great Britain

Humour:	6	A few laughs. Nothing much to really hook me in and make me want to keep reading though. I found a lot of it drudgingly silly. In this case, I feel that the concept - which is somewhat funny in its own right - has been stretched too far. It's like a stew with too much broth, not enough enough meat and potatoes.
Concept:	7	The concept is...well it's confusing. Perhaps it's because I'm American and don't know anything about, or want to know anything about, Great Britain.
Prose and formatting:	4	Grammar mistakes, short sections, no links. It needs to be tidied up if it's to be moved to the mainspace.
Images:	9	The images and their captions are probably the best part. Well done on their inclusion and making them go with the rest of the article.
Miscellaneous:	10	The article doesn't really have a good flow to it. The grammar is mostly to blame for this I believe.
Final Score:	36	Incomplete and lacking somewhat in the lols.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 14:48 Oct 20 2009

User:Acrolo/Days Of Our Lives

Humour:	8	Coming soon.
Concept:	8	Coming soon.
Prose and formatting:	8	Coming soon.
Images:	8	Coming soon.
Miscellaneous:	7	Coming soon.
Final Score:	39	Coming soon.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 01:24 Oct 25 2009

User:PuppyOnTheRadio/Jesus Lites™

Humour:	7	Coming soon.
Concept:	6	Coming soon.
Prose and formatting:	9	Coming soon.
Images:	8	Coming soon.
Miscellaneous:	8	Coming soon.
Final Score:	38	Coming soon.
Reviewer:	--EMC [TALK] 01:26 Oct 25 2009