From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia.
[edit] From Pee Review AFTER the rewrite
| Humo(u)r:
| 8.5
| a solidly humorous article that provided a more than adequate amount of chuckles.
|
| Concept:
| 9.5
| great concept, despite similar articles (see mousetrap).
|
| Prose and Formatting:
| 7.5
| no big problems, just a few redlinks. looks a little squished in the middle, maybe the template on the right could be trimmed & un-wide-ed.
|
| Images:
| 10
| a proper amount of images that are well executed.
|
| Miscellaneous:
| 8
| excellent mix of encyclopedic tone with absurd facts.
|
| Final Score:
| 43.5
| a very nicely done rewrite. if you're merely looking for it to be a solid article, your work is done. if you're going to go the extra mile or you're looking for a VFH, a little length couldn't hurt. maybe a section on a famous mass-escape from a zoo, or fossil evidence of gigantic flying radioactive toasters, or something.
|
| Reviewer:
| --OfficerGerrycheeversKunTalk 23:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
|
| Humo(u)r:
| 8
| Pretty damn good, I chuckled, and even laughed in places.
|
| Concept:
| 9
| Like the concept, and well followed through.
|
| Prose and Formatting:
| 9
| Well written, easy to follow, formatting is good.
|
| Images:
| 10
| Really good images, well used. I like.
|
| Miscellaneous:
| 9
| A really good re-write.
|
| Final Score:
| 45
| As a re-write, superb. As an article, very good, if you ask me. I'm not always a great judge of what plays well on VFH, but it would get my vote.
|
| Reviewer:
| --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 12:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
|
