User talk:Knair1/Digital Content
Hello, this is my second article, which is probably only marginally less idiotic than the first. World domination to follow. Knair1 04:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Pee Review[edit source]
Digital Content[edit source]
Hello, this is my second article. The idea is to poke fun at the idea of "content" - a word which is tossed around frequently these days but seems to have no meaning whatsoever. To me, this seemed like an important point to make on uncyclopedia, whose tagline is, after all, "the content-free encyclopedia."
Knair1 05:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
| Humour: | 7.5 | It's OK, but not supper funny. I did like it generally, but it only gleamed a small half smile from my smileometer... I think you can expand the concept some more as discussed below. |
| Concept: | 8 | An original idea for an article, so you get a good score from me... I think there is room for (shall I say) more content?. Sorry about that... Hmm... Anyway... I would go back in history a bit more. What about the first written text (on the walls of caves). The invention of the quill pen? On to the printing press and typewriter... Then the radio, fax and television. Not sure that only the internet has content... :-).
I like the flow that you are showing as time goes on where it is apparent that the more content that is generated, the lower the quality generally is, and with a bit more get history to work through, you can expand this concept well. Start with the 'great' works such as important cave paintings, working through maybe when the bible got 'translated' (for whatever reason) into something different. (what happened to it's content due to that?). Then maybe work up to the more silly stuff later. |
| Prose and formatting: | 8 | Well written. I like your writing style. The text really looks like something which you would find in an actual encyclopaedic article, which is nice to see. I don't really like the lists in the "early days" section, but I do like the jokes involving 0 and 1. Maybe there is a better way to format this, or perhaps just thin it down a bit. In places the formatting looks just a bit jumbled, and perhaps if you add some extra sections you can sort this out. |
| Images: | 5.5 | Rather poor I thought. You need to work on the pictures.
The Internet-Based Content-Delivery is really small, and I can hardly see it. I'm not sure it adds much. Pornographers are prone to exaggeration. - That's really the best example you can get? How about a load of old ladies, with the text claiming they are "teenage school girls"? Unsafe rates of content delivery were prevalent. Is OK. Probably the best pic. Move over, Willy Um? Sorry you lost me... Basically, as I'm suggesting you go through history a bit more, including something about each of the new technologies I have suggested. I think if you do this, you can easily add pictures to those related sections, and possibly drop some of the pics which don't really help much. |
| Miscellaneous: | 7.4 | {{pee|7.5|8|8.5|5.5}} |
| Final Score: | 36.4 | I like the idea, and this has potential, but it's not the masterpiece it could be. I know the tittle is "Digital Content", but I think you should maybe expand into content generally (if you do, you might need to change the tittle, I'm not sure).
Use this as a vehicle to make fun of how the increased availability of content has reduced the quality, and I think you are onto a winner. It's not VFH material at the moment, but it has the potential (or content) to be so... Good luck! |
| Reviewer: | MrN  19:09, Feb 28
| |