Reviews reporting thread

Logan wrote: ^ Neither Keishiro nor I are on the site every day, but we do respond to PMs as soon as we can usually. I deleted that Riverside review as well as five rating for it. I copied the review and will PM it to the reviewer while mentioning why I deleted it, and explain some other things. if it was a legitimate review of a promo copy, that should be stated and explained that it was with permission. Sometimes such reviews are off leaked demos, unfinal takes, and not full copies too.

^ why not just make it a blanket policy to ban reviews before an official release? This is a database not a promo magazine.

Yeesh!

This review rolled across my Facebook feed.

projeKct wrote: ^ I don't want to be mean and/or stupid, but what's wrong with this review?

To me that black midi Cavalcade review appears permissible.

I'll never take a review seriously that doesn't actually mention a song title, or anything about the music at hand. It reads as somebody who listened to it once, and then does the absolute bare minimum with surface level comparrisons (eg. King Crimson, Mars Volta) most likely to just influence the rating since reviews carry 10x of the weight that a simple rating would, I feel like the main criticism being that it's "overhyped" in the review feeds into that. Kinda agree that it is really doing the bare minimum and I think the rule of thumb should be that if a review in question could clearly be written by somebody who's never heard the album before, it probably should be axed.

lazland wrote: projeKct wrote: ^ I don't want to be mean and/or stupid, but what's wrong with this review? Nothing, he just doesn’t rate it very highly.

^ Depends--  true for the Album page, but not for the Artist page which lists newest reviews first.  Plus there are some key early reviews by founders, SCs, etc

lazland wrote: Logan wrote: To me that black midi Cavalcade review appears permissible. It is indeed, but I have said before that whilst the review might well fall within acceptable boundaries set by the site rules, it is not a review which is going to add to PA’s reputation in the music world. Indeed, I would venture that it will decrease it ever so slightly further. I know none of you will take a blind bit of notice of this, but I will say it anyway. I feel it is time for a major overhaul of the way the reviews are done on PA, and that should include an end to the “Wild West” of anybody and everybody being able to publish reviews. There must be some form of quality control in that only trusted reviewers are able to publish without moderation and everybody else undergoes some form of probation where their work is moderated before publication and then allowed to become trusted.

On your first point, that's exactly the problem I had with it. Sure, it accomplishes the bare minimum of album description, but I know way more now about the author's hate of The Mars Volta than anything relevant about the album. As you say, this is not a value added review and certainly should not be on the front page or the site's Facebook page to showcase what is offered by the site.

To your second point, I agree, but I am also aware of the added volunteer work that would require and probably a software overhaul that I really don't see happening.

siLLy puPPy wrote: All you have to do is scroll down to the bottom to get the latest review on any album. Easy enough me thinks :)

True enough, but the site defaults back and new users will always see the newest first. And of course, you only get one first impression.

Edited by Tapfret - December 30 2022 at 14:08

Edited by Atavachron - December 30 2022 at 17:13