Uncyclopedia:Pee Review/UnNews:Obama swats a fly, causing the death of future maggot

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


edit UnNews:Obama swats a fly, causing the death of future maggot

If you piss on my article please aim properly.. kkthx!

Sir ACROLO KUNFPWAOTMFA •(SPAM) 08:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Concept, which must be
the basis of your article
if I'm using this template:
8 The concept for this article isn't bad, but it isn't great either. The key point I generally look for here is originality, and the concept here is fairly predictable. However, that hardly matters, this being an UnNews and all, so I've only docked points because there are still fully original concepts in the UnNews archives that this doesn't match up to.
Humor, without a second u,
because I'm American:
6 Most of the humor here is fairly predictable. The only really unexpected part was the connection to decomposition, and this was dragged on long enough to lose its novelty. One thing that could help is to use stronger language. For instance, the line "...promptly squashing the fly..." doesn't give much of an impression of outrage. Given that this article is supposed to be particularly outraged, you can use much stronger language, like "brutaly murdering" or "slaughtering", to get your point across. In this kind of article, overstatement is almost always better than understatement.
Your spelling and grammar,
which probably sucks:
6 Although your spelling and punctuation are generally great, the grammar in the article is pretty bad. One point that particularly stood out was that almost every one of your sentences was a run-on. The first five paragraphs alone are each single sentences, and the sixth paragraph almost ends up the same way. The sentences need to be far more short and succinct, especially because news articles are known for having short, almost fragmented sentences.
Images, or lack of: 7 The image here isn't bad, but it's certainly... odd. Especially because the hand belongs to a white guy. The article could certainly stand to have one more image, but the short length means that one image is fine.
Miscellaneous, not averaged,
despite what some would
have you believe:
8 Scorefix, explanation below.
Final Score, totaled, as most
would have you believe:
35 The article really isn't bad, and it's certainly repairable, but a lot more work needs to go into it before it can be considered for feature. My Misc. score is boosted to reflect this, and I hope you manage to make this into a feature.
Me: Sig_pic.PNG Unsolicited conversation Extravagant beauty PEEING 16:49, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools