I don't get what there is to like about this article. It is competently written (in the first half, at least; more on that later), but competent writing does not a good article make.
I would normally complain when the logs restate the description (which they do) and add nothing to further the article (which they do), but I really didn't see any story or progression here to begin with. There are so many different things that could've been added onto, but the article goes with nothing. Just to name a few:
- What if you leave the tree supervised all night, or store it in a way where it could not place the presents? There may not be a lot of opportunities to do experiments, but "Research" is in the name for a reason.
- What does the gun mean? Yes, this already is in the article, but as it stands it's just a random diversion.
- Amazing! Co. has just been given an anonymous, unregulated channel with which to deliver any object they want to a random child, and if the blame falls on anybody it will likely be the Authority. Damn. Arguably in the article already, but if that was the intention then it is not emphasized nearly enough.
- On the opposite end of that spectrum, and as stated by the above review, write about how the Authority gives 50 toys to charity every Christmas. (I will say, it's not every day that the ConProts have the most thought-provoking part of the article. Good on ya)
As for what I said about the writing getting weaker later on…
RPC-926 first came to the attention of the Authority after mall security guard Robert Conway of the Denver Pavilions mall reported on 12/22/2008 of multiple decorative Christmas trees restocking gifts below them without anyone having to place them, claiming it happened as if Santa himself placed them without him knowing.
One sentence, people. I'll admit that it's far from the worst writing I've seen, but it still grates on the reader after a while and could definitely use a revision.
I'm willing to accept an underwhelming object for the sake of a narrative, but I agree with JimmyBoyHaha's review here: if it's an underwhelming object with no narrative attached to it, maybe make it an LO. 2/5