Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/1989
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
1989[edit]
My first completed piece of the timeline. True-to-life events and wikipedia style mocked and mimicked to a ten-thousandth of a degree.
TKFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK 
12:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
| Humour: | 9 | A great medley of plays on words and cultural mockery. Unfortunately, because of the format, most of the laughs are one-liners. I had some good laughs, but they were short. I enjoyed the One Nation Under Chocolate bit, but that's only because I get it (which I can't say will be the same for everybody). It did break up the flow of things rather nicely, as reading numbers and dashes in a giant list can get kind of irritating. It was also a good break in the humor where you could take something and run it a little bit longer than a few sentences. |
| Concept: | 6 | Let's face it: it's an article the needed to be made. How you went with it and applied your wit is worthy of praise, but the 80s, particularly the late 80s and the decade they spilled into were pretty much a joke already. Poking fun at it couldn't have been too difficult. |
| Prose and formatting: | 4.5 | Too many red links. The dashes are too tiny; try using bigger ones ( – or — ). I'm not too sure about what's going on with the inclusion of both the years and 80s templates. Both look just about the same, give or take a few years. Pick one or put them adjacent to one another. Give it a few more categories other than the ones that the templates mandate. Also spotted at least one misspelling. As a list, it's not bad. One thing you might want to note about lists is that they can sometimes be irritating to read as they strain the eyes. You could probably improve this by making the dates bold and maybe even making most of the text on the page a bit bigger. The latter probably wouldn't be necessary though, but it's up to you. |
| Images: | 7 | Funny and they "compliment the article very well" (as some would say). The first picture is excellent. The second picture annoys me because of the brightness. The third picture is only funny because of the caption, which isn't a bad thing, but it's also not a good thing. |
| Miscellaneous: | 8 | Semi-protection? |
| Final Score: | 34.5 | It's not feature-worthy, obviously. Most improvements can be made in the formatting because, quite frankly, it's not very pretty because of that. Red links are just fugly. |
| Reviewer: | --Hotadmin4u69 [TALK] 02:47, 30 July 2009 (UTC) | |