| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Easy Livin 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
 Topic: Reviews
Posted: July 26 2005 at 15:10 |
The reviews guidelines have been updated. While they are essentially the same, please take the time to have a look at them and make sure you are familiar with them.
Please note in particular the section which asks that you write something which is likely to be of interest to those reading it. If you simply say, "this album is brilliant, you must buy it", or "the music on this album is rubbish", those reading will be none the wiser as to whether it is for them. Try to explain why you like or don’t like it, and to give an indication of the type of music, similar artists, etc.
Please also avoid raising matters in reviews which should be discussed in the forums. For example, if you wish to make a general point about the star rating system, that is a matter for the forum, not for a review. In the same way, if you disagree with the opinions of another reviewer, that is also a matter for the forum. It is generally best to avoid mentioning other reviews in your reviews altogether. If you have a complaint relating to another review, or a correction relating to either a review or the album information shown, advise the admin team using the "Prog archives" tab in the reviews section.
I am now monitoring all reviews to ensure they comply with the site’s guidelines. I have also embarked on a full review of all the reviews already posted on the site to ensure they too comply with the guidelines. Clearly this will take some time to complete!
The open nature of the site means that some inappropriate reviews will continue to appear in the latest reviews section, but rest assured they will be dealt with. Please however continue to report any reviews which do not comply with the guidelines, either through the "Prog archives" tab, or in the "Inappropriate reviews" thread.
Finally, I would emphasise that the quality of the reviews submitted to the site is extraordinarily high. The number of reviews which need attention is minimal when compared to the quantity of informed and intelligent submissions. We have a site here we can all be very proud of.
|
 |
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Online
Points: 21133
|
Posted: July 26 2005 at 15:28 |
Are there definite rules about what kind of HTML formatting can be used in reviews? I'm using the obvious <p> and also <br />, <b> and <i>, which I should replace by <em>, <strong> and <cite>.
|
|
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: July 26 2005 at 16:23 |
Well done, Easy, and all the best with the lengthy (but essential!) task you have so generously taken on.
You are a terrific asset to the Archives!
BTW: I think mentioning another's review (within your own review) in a positive way from time to time is fine, no? (As in "I agree with my esteemed collegue EasyLivin' that this is "an essential Dream Theater album," {as if! } and would just like to add that....")
Sincerely,
Peter
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: July 26 2005 at 17:00 |
 MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Are there definite rules about what kind of HTML formatting can be used in reviews? I'm using the obvious <p> and also <br />, <b> and <i>, which I should replace by <em>, <strong> and <cite>.
|
Too technical for me Mike, that's one for Max!
Many thanks for the thumbs up Peter. I agree entirely about the complementing or supporting of other reviews. As you imply, it's all about showing respect really.
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: July 27 2005 at 05:00 |
And the odd piece of comedy?
Seriously:
We have to be consisitent,I've posted one that was removed and then I slipped it back in.It is a review of the album,but contains some obvious fallacies.However,these fallacies are ironic references to events surrounding the making of the album,as I remember them.
So,Easy,it's your call.
BTW,whilst I would like it to remain,I will abide by your decision as should everybody.
|
|
James Lee
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 05 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3525
|
Posted: July 27 2005 at 09:23 |
how about: "The music is well-done, I just don't find myself caring about it one way or the other."
I hope that's acceptible, because I've used similar statements several times. 
|
|
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: July 27 2005 at 15:31 |
Tony,
Thanks for the comments, all comments, suggestions, etc. gratefully received!
I've certainly no wish to be a killjoy, one of the strengths of this site is the fact that people can express themselves in virtually any way they wish.
I'm not aware of the specific review you mention, but as a general observation, a review containing erroneous or misleading information is a different matter to one containing what can clearly be seen to be irony. The old adage, "it ain't what you say, it's how you say it" comes to mind. Relevant humour has a legitimate place in reviews, and I certainly have no intention of attempting to stifle it. As long as a review contains information about the album concerned, and does not breach the guidelines in terms of civility etc., then it will be just fine.
Each case has to be judged on it's merits, but I will try to be as consistent as I possibly can. Deletion of reviews is very much a last resort, it won't be done just because someone's English is a bit poor for example.
One final point. The Collaborators, (which of course includes prog reviewers), have been identified by the site owners as being particularly valued contributors to the site. I would not therefore expect to touch a collaborator's review unless it was a clear abuse of the site. (Unless of course it's James pathetically non-committal review above! ). If I feel there are weaknesses in a collaborator's review, I will PM them saying what I think needs done to the review, and inviting them to modify it (something other reviewers cannot do).
If I feel a collaborator is consistently out of order, and disregarding my comments to them, I'll let M@X and Rony know. Knowing our collaborators though, this is as unlikely as a Pink Floyd reunion (oops, well you know what I mean!).
By the way, I'm half way through the "A's" already!
As I say, all input, suggestions etc., gratefully received.
|
|
Fitzcarraldo
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 30 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1835
|
Posted: July 28 2005 at 19:35 |
Easy Livin wrote: "I have also embarked on a full review of all the reviews already posted on the site to ensure they too comply with the guidelines. Clearly this will take some time to complete!"
Bravo, Easy! An essential -- and onerous -- task. Actually, in my opinion all new reviews should be vetted soon after being submitted.
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: July 29 2005 at 14:38 |
Fitzcarraldo wrote:
Bravo, Easy! An essential -- and onerous -- task. Actually, in my opinion all new reviews should be vetted soon after being submitted.
|
Thnaks Fitz! The new review vetting is also being done.
|
|
Joren
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 07 2004
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 6667
|
Posted: July 30 2005 at 18:03 |
Great to hear this Easy Livin!
Is it possible to report certain reviews (by collaborators or by others) to you? Or are you simply too busy? (if so, I understand).
Keep up the good work! 
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: July 31 2005 at 11:02 |
Joren,
No problem with reporting to me, just send a PM (discretion assured!). Forgive me if I don't acknowledge your PMs, take it as read I've put them on the deal with list and will get round to them OK.
Cheers.
|
|
Joren
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 07 2004
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 6667
|
Posted: July 31 2005 at 14:04 |
Ok, I'll send you a PM right away!
|
|
Easy Livin
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15585
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 15:50 |
|
A couple more thoughts for you in respect of reviews. |
|
|
|
Spelling - Please run a spell check over your reviews before submitting them.
It is so much easier to read something if you are not distracted by glaring spelling errors.
(I'm not talking about the minor US/UK differences such as honor and honour here).
Two suggested methods are to either compose the review in a word processing package,
spell check it and paste it into the submit review page (ctrl+v), or install the Google toolbar,
which contains a spell checker. |
|
Fact checking - Please try to ensure that you validate any factual statements you make in
reviews. For example, if you say in your review "This was the band's third album", check
that it was. If you are stating something you believe to be the case, add a qualification.
For example, if you believe an album was made to fulfil a contractual obligation, but you
are not entirely sure, say something like "I believe the album was made to fulfil a
contractual obligation". It is all to easy to unwittingly distort the truth. |
|
One other point I would make is that there is sometimes a tendency to write reviews for
the front page. What I mean here is that the reviewer is thinking about the latest reviews
section on the home page. Comments such as "I am glad this band has just been
added to the archives" may make sense now (even if they should not be made in a
review!), but will not make so much sense in a year's time. Hopefully, your reviews
will be read for many years to come, and will contribute towards the documenting of
the history of prog, the "Archives" indeed! Please try to write so that the reviews will
make just as much sense 10 years after you wrote them. |
Thanks
Edited by Easy Livin
|
|
Cygnus X-2
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 24 2004
Location: Bucketheadland
Status: Offline
Points: 21342
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 21:48 |
How 'bout what Peter suggested, "Good, if you like it"? Is that an acceptable review?
|
|
|
|
tuxon
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 21 2004
Location: plugged-in
Status: Offline
Points: 5502
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 22:48 |
quote Sinus X-2
How 'bout what Peter suggested, "Good, if you like it"? Is that an acceptable review?
__________ ___
Well it would be good review if you like those kinds of reviews
|
|
I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
|
|
Cygnus X-2
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 24 2004
Location: Bucketheadland
Status: Offline
Points: 21342
|
Posted: August 01 2005 at 23:02 |
Tuxon:
Do I cause your allergies to flare?
And I was kidding about that... of course that is an unacceptable review. I prefer the meatier reviews (but there are quite a few short gems out there).
|
|
|
|
Seyo
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: May 08 2004
Location: Bosnia
Status: Offline
Points: 1320
|
Posted: October 15 2005 at 19:59 |
Good work Easy
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Reviews
