Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/Will Smith

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archived

Guidelines

FAQ

Pee Week

Committee

RotM

Will Smith

Unwehr Rewrite (the original page was shit). Hopefully this is an improvement. Review away. —Unführer Guildy Ritter von Guildensternenstein 21:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Humour:	6	While the style of your article is fine, and your jokes are perfectly acceptable I would suggest that more is better here. As I read your article it felt like I was moving between jokes all the time, the best articles do not have all these breaks and seem consistent throughout. It is especially vital for you considering the encyclopedic perspective you have decided to use for your article, as it is all to easy to forget the jokes when you are focusing on style. You have some good jokes and they are very well executed, thus my disappointment when there were not more of them. I would also suggest that if you do not wish to change that then you vary the jokes you use, while I found the jokes amusing, I would urge you to use a variety jokes, as it seemed you relied very much on variations of a couple of jokes, if people do not find one of these amusing it could mean an end to their enjoyment of the article, variety would circumvent this problem.
Concept:	8	Nothing much wrong here, I can't fault your tone at all and the subtlety that you use in your jokes compliments said tone perfectly. Just a little bit of reworking needed on those. I would recommend, if you are using the encyclopedic perspective that you have a look at the wikipedia article on Will Smith and consider adding some sections based on that as I think the article could be a fair bit longer than it is now; just a suggestion rather than a criticism. I don't see anything else in serious need of changing here.
Prose and formatting:	9	Mark me down as impressed, try as I might I could not find a single error in your spelling and grammar.... and then I spotted a tense confusion and felt like the world was working properly again. But seriously now your prose are absolutely fine and don't really require any more action. The sections are intelligently formatted and the pictures are superbly used, and compliment all the text very well. One suggestion: consider using one of the boxes that wikipedia use to give a persons vital statistics.
Images:	9	Your images are fine, and they break up the text nicely and make the article much easier to read by breaking up the text nicely.
Miscellaneous:	8	My overall grade of the article
Final Score:	40	A pretty good article, my main criticism being that there wasn't more of it. Just examine a couple of points again and make the jokes more consistent throughout to prevent boredom setting into the mind of the average uncyclopedian as they read. Otherwise nicely done. Good luck with any edits you do.
Reviewer:	--ChiefjusticeDS 15:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)