Someperson39 12:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Yeah, I'm here. Expect a review within 24 hours of the time on this comment. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/User:Someperson39/UnBooks:Conservapedia for Dummies
|
| rdfs:comment
| - Someperson39 12:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Yeah, I'm here. Expect a review within 24 hours of the time on this comment. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| Mcomment
| - My overall grade of the article.
|
| Pcomment
| - Your prose need some more work. The spelling is generally OK, but your grammar is in need of some attention. More than anything you need to get the perspectives right, if you read back, just in the first few lines you will notice some confusion in this regard. Also you should make sure you paragraph, it makes even small blocks of text far easier on the eye and much less daunting to read. You should try to proofread your work as thoroughly as possible, if that doesn't appeal to you or you feel it would still be substandard if you did then feel free to enlist the help of a member of UN:PS by placing this template on the page: .
Your article also has a couple of unnecessary red links. I see what the red links were intended to do but you should remove them or link to an available article if you can. You also need more images for the article, one is not enough for an article this size. Your current image is a bit small, could you make it a bit bigger?
|
| Icomment
| - OK, I touched on this above, you need to put a couple more images in here to make sure that the text is broken up and so people can look at the pretty pictures if the text doesn't grab them. The image you have right now is alright and it has a good caption. When selecting others you should be creative, or you could leave a request for Sonje who is usually happy to make images for people, especially if they don't feel confident doing it. If Sonje proves unwilling, as I suspect she sometimes does, then you can simply choose some appropriate images from Google or have a look around Uncyclopedia for some already created images
|
| Pscore
| |
| Ccomment
| - Alright, your concept is reasonable and baiting super-conservatives is a common thing to do. What really needs looking at, however, is your tone, you vary between first and third person throughout the article, ideally you should only use one. Saying "First, we are going to work on O'Reilly Point of View. Ooops I forgot..." is unprofessional and breaks tone. The tone that would be most appropriate for the article depends on which category you ultimately decide to place this in. UnBooks demands a consistent tone that for this type of article is encyclopedic; if you read a real "For dummies" book you will notice that the author rarely refers to themself as I, instead they stick to referring to the reader and giving information in an accessible form.
If you decided to use How To then your tone would have to be very different. Take a look at this featured instructional How To and you will get a sense of the correct tone for a How To. How To's should also imply that the reader is an idiot throughout without actually saying so, you draw some very close parallel's with this already, so it would definitely be worth some consideration.
|
| Cscore
| |
| Mscore
| |
| Hcomment
| - OK, I think you have a article that definitely has the potential to be very solid, but it needs some more work before it reaches that point. Your humour is good in some places, but lets you down in others. First of all you should try to be a bit more coherent. You make reasonable jokes and, sometimes, these jokes all crash into one another or there are too many of them in one place, this means that a reader either doesn't get them or gets fed up of them. If you take a look at some of the best Uncyclopedia has to offer then you will notice that the authors do not pile jokes into a single paragraph, but instead allow their instructions or speech to provide the humour. What you should try to do to in order to fix this is to go through some of the longer and more cluttered sections and remove all but the very best jokes, be harsh with your writing and make some hard cuts to the article. Another point would be: consider taking this out of UnBooks and changing it to How To: Use Conservapedia for dummies. I feel that the How To category's humour would lend itself to your article far more readily than that of UnBooks . You should also take a quick glance at HTBFANJS and make sure all your jokes conform, there were a couple towards the end of the article that I felt less comfortable with.
I like the parody of Uncyclopedia's HTBFANJS, and this more than anything leads me to say that you could have a superb article here. You just need to do a bit more work on it as it is currently being let down by some minor errors.
|
| Iscore
| |
| Hscore
| |
| Fcomment
| - Your article has definite potential and could become very good with a little more work. Always try to get an opinion on your humour from a neutral source before you put an article up for review again. My advice can be found above, read it carefully if you think what I said is valid. If you need any help with anything, or any questions about my review then feel free to leave me a message just here and I will be more than willing to assist. Good luck making further contributions.
|
| dbkwik:uncyclopedi...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| Signature
| |
| abstract
| - Someperson39 12:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Yeah, I'm here. Expect a review within 24 hours of the time on this comment. --ChiefjusticeDS 21:50, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)