--Black flamingo11 13:23, September 4, 2009 (UTC) I'm here now. --ChiefjusticeDS 16:57, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/The Girl Next Door
|
| rdfs:comment
| - --Black flamingo11 13:23, September 4, 2009 (UTC) I'm here now. --ChiefjusticeDS 16:57, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| Mcomment
| - My overall grade of the article.
|
| Pcomment
| - Your prose are pretty good, as is your spelling and grammar. You just need to proofread carefully and be certain you don't get lazy with it if you decide to make changes. You should proofread any new editions to the article very carefully, this should help to weed out any difficulties with things like sentence structure, syntax and typos. Otherwise there is nothing to worry about on the grammar front and I commend you for having done a good job of it. My main problem comes with the lists. Lists are very difficult to make amusing, especially when they are the entire second half of your article. I think that while there is some amusing material in the lists, it would be better presented in the form of prose. The lists also contain a couple of points that I would recommend removing or working at while consulting HTBFANJS. It would be infinitely better if you scrapped one of the lists and turned the section into prose on something else, or the same topic. It is completely up to you. As far as your image formatting goes my advice would be to space them out a bit, as the three in the middle feel as though they are all crowding around a single part of the text.
|
| Icomment
| - Your images are pretty good, with the exception of the final one. I would encourage you to work with the images you have, not just on the formatting but also on the captioning, as I feel there is an awful lot of unexploited humour in a couple of them. If I were you I would reconsider the final image, it looks untidy and makes the second half of the article feel scruffy. But I leave this up to your discretion.
|
| Pscore
| |
| Ccomment
| - Your concept is absolutely fine, but the part you need to work on is your tone. While your writing is solid throughout and certainly nothing to be ashamed of, you need to work on your tone. Are you writing in a similar style to Wikipedia, or are you using an informal style where you frequently address the reader? This is very noticeable in your article, for me at least, because you open with the encyclopaedic style brilliantly. However, as the article goes on, you start switching between tones, one moment you are being detached and formal and the next you offer opinions and speak informally. Try to decide on one tone, as the switches break the flow of your article. Otherwise you do reasonably well here.
|
| Cscore
| |
| Mscore
| |
| Hcomment
| - Your humour has a reasonable idea behind it but, is marred by flawed execution and inconsistent delivery. My first point is to do with the inconsistency of the information that supports the jokes. After reading your article, I still had no idea what or who you wanted me to think the girl next door was as you give conflicting statements and views in the article. Nothing undermines humour than reader confusion, so the first thing you should do is decide what you want the article to tell the reader. Once you have decided on a direction for your article you can start tailoring the humour so that it all fits. An example of the inconsistency that is the problem is where you say "There is yet another sect who insist that she is simply a different person depending on where you live, this group are believed to be regular contributors to Wikipedia and thus have not realised that the meaning of life is to be as funny as possible at all times." This put down of Wikipedia just seems confusing when you seem to state that they are, in fact, correct later on: "Due to the subjective nature of reality, the girl next door is different to everyone". This is confusing as there is very little point in making a joke out of the Wikipedian point of view, if you then say it is correct. The other big problem with your humour is that while the jokes are often perfectly valid they seem to be out of context, while this is partly because of your tone, some seem to just be uncomfortable jerks away from the subtlety of some of the other humour. For example, you suddenly dash away from being subtle with jokes like: "She can often be seen performing such innocent tasks as trying on clothes, stretching as part of her morning exercises, eating bananas, sausages and other phallic foodstuffs" to jokes like: "These are knitted for her by her mother, who is probably the mute wife of a Rabbi". Notice the massive difference in the style of the jokes, try to get rid of this as far as you can. Choose one style and work on replicating that.
|
| Iscore
| |
| Hscore
| |
| Fcomment
| - Overall I feel that both you, as a writer and this article have a huge amount of unexplored potential. You simply need to continue to work with the article. Don't be afraid of cutting bits out and rewriting them. If you want a better work atmosphere shove this template: onto the page. I think that with a bit more attention from you that you could be onto something special here. Try not to be discouraged by the negative points of my review, I want to help you make this better so I am pointing out the best way for you to do so. Feel free to contact me on my talk page if you have any questions, comments, or suggestions. Good luck making any changes.
|
| dbkwik:uncyclopedi...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| Signature
| |
| abstract
| - --Black flamingo11 13:23, September 4, 2009 (UTC) I'm here now. --ChiefjusticeDS 16:57, September 18, 2009 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)