How to rate an Iron Maiden album?

Raff wrote: MartyMcFly89 wrote: Thank you for your opinions. I felt that giving Abbey Road 5 stars is needed, but backed by these arguments, I feel more confident. Yes, it's easier to be confident with more skilled people saying similar things, than have pedantic opinion "this is prog site and non-prog should be rated lover". People who have that opinion are fanatics, nothing more. I review for another prog site (Progressor), and often visits other prog sites, which are ALL more inclusive and open than this one. Many of the albums I have reviewed (and sometimes rated quite highly) would not be able to set foot here, or would be confined to Prog-Related.  Obviously, the Talebans among us have always ignored me every time I have stated this simple fact. but this does not change things. No other prog site practices anything close to a policy of rating anything 'non-prog' lower than the 'real' prog stuff. Something of the sort would be slightly deranged, not to mention ridiculous.

When I started reviewing, I had in my mind one single thing, to which I focused and which helped me to register and wrote these hundred of words on my 1st one. I knew that Dark Side of the Moon is five star album.

But soon I realized that things are not so easy. First I started to lower my enthusiasm and edit previous ratings. Degrade them if I felt it that way, after ecstasy fell down. And I have to say that DSotM was my oldest album. Then I learned to appreciate every single genre. Yes, this took a while, some I already knew and welcomed, with some I had few struggles, but now I can say that I'm more or less fair with them. My biggest failure is still probably death metal, but things are getting better.

But proto-prog, that's easy, they're mostly Deep Purple, The Beatles and The Who. But Prog-related is far bigger group. Metallica, Iron Maiden and Asia, these appears in my mind. I don't know Iron Maiden much, but know that they're amongst better metal of these times. Same as with early Metallica. Yes, both aren't prog, but they're not trying to be. Not in normal, conventional way of this world, as we understand normal jazz/symphonic prog. But way how they do it is a good one. And it would be unfair to rate them as prog. Thanks that I'm not doing this. Mostly. Everyone does mistakes and I'm trying to avoid them. 

It's hard to be fair and I know that I have to rate fairly, not rate by "prog" pattern every time. 

EDIT: And I'm aware and I admit that I rated few Asia albums lower, also because of reason that they're not prog. But one of the reasons was fact that they're boring, playing same music all over. With same pattern, same style, no innovations, no variations. Almost no. 

And of course, prog related is also Queen & Led Zeppelin.