Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/blah

Main

Current

Reviewed

Archived

Guidelines

FAQ

Pee Week

Committee

RotM

blah

72.1.206.43 19:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Humour:	1	Hi! Welcome to Uncyclopedia. I suggest signing up as a registered user. There's a lot of extra privileges waiting for you like ... uhm ... OK, 'can't think of any. But I recommend it, anyways. For your first article on Pee Review, this seems very much like ... any other first article. It's not that funny. Except for the "Grammatical Usage" section - you get one point for that. But put some more into that section, get more fun into it. Go look in the weirdest places. That's where fun's hidin' most of the time!
Concept:	3	The idea for the article is alright and it might get somewhere in the end. Right now what doesn't work are the following parts (and whilst they "do not work", you should rewrite 'em completely): Intro, Possible reasons for original Blah!, The Mad Blah, Famous Blahers. You see, there's not much left. Work on it.
Prose and formatting:	2	Nice formatting, nothing special. Try using {{Q|-This code for Quote formatting!(See the "{{Q|" thing at the beginning?)-|-put author here-(Oscar Wilde?)|-put subject here!-}} like so. Go see the Special pages to learn about making good and entertaining articles and look up the code within Featured Articles - they got some nice lookin' stuff. Also see this!
Images:	0	I guess that article doesn't need any. But you could, however, insert at least one. Maybe somebody sprayed a "Blah" on some wall. I dunno, anythings possible with graffiti "art". Or come up with something yourself.
Miscellaneous:	1	avg'd scores. Blah, blah, blah.
Final Score:	7	Tis, me friend, is no good right now. You might have been drunk writing this. It's not smashing, nor do I get these funny spasms in my face (which I guess you would call the act of smiling). So, put your grammar section in brackets (because it's the only good thing about the article), wipe off EVERYTHING around it and start again! Then go pee it out of your system here and we'll see if it's getting somewhere.
Reviewer:	--BlackInkWriter 10:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)