you're right! it's crap! wow!

/me goes and listens to Eclipse... why the hell not??

Holy crap! He lives!

he does no such thing.

Bump. These reviews haven't gotten any better...

Cleaned. In the future, include the username in the nuking proposal, you silly little bugger. Otherwise Uncle Nappy will have to make guesses, just like he did 5 minutes ago, and you know what? He ended up killing 9 reviews out of the 5 you linked. There will be lamenting is several homes tonight, and it's your fault...

Ritual Day - Sky Lake by loinclarm
http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=22076#8592

This one's just a little under-average. The writer doesn't really describe the music beyond "melodic black metal" and a little of the second paragraph.

Also, some facts are cited that aren't really necessary, including that a different version of one of the songs appeared on a compilation which you can order from the band.

I realize that this is the only review for that release, but I feel that this does not contribute any useful opinions about the album.

This Anthrax review by schwaba is pretty Engrish and looks like it was written in a foreign language and then processed with the google translator.

doomknocker's review for Behemoth's The Apostasy:

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.ph ... 3926#88090

Quite poorly written and there's over 20 reviews for that record already so this one is REALLY redundant.

I can't vouch for the last bit because before him I was the last one to write a review for that album, but yeah, it's quite poorly written: it's terrible reasoning for why he thinks the album is so bad. And it's obvious he thinks it's not actually too bad, but just gave it 30% to be spiteful.

This has got to be one of the earliest reviews I've seen floating around randomly, doesn't seem to have any sort of value? 4 sentences?

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=2125

!!!!

Removed.

It's nice to know that review quality has improved so greatly over the years.

Their going to be the shit that he expels? Well, he was an idiot so whatever.

Oh dear. I'll have to be more careful in the future, eh?

EDIT: Here's one. This album has 14 other reviews so this mediocre one by Tale_Of _The_Hellship can go.

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=50956

EDIT 2:another one by the same user:

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=7363#28286

EDIT 3: This one by Mourningrise

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=18194#28286

Good. Now if only some mod would see this one....

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=33223

Lord, I know this is the only review for this album, but due to the fact that it's for a shameless label cash grab "best of" compilation, I see no harm in it going away. I mean, seriously:



That choppy See Spot Run style of checklist redundancy pisses me off. I say this one gets axed.

hey, what's up with this Cloud0129 guy? Has he hacked the site?

yeah it's pretty fucking weird o.0


http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=137191#125020


127% haha

Indeed, I haven't seen that happen before. Taken care of.

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=12404

One paragraph less than 10 lines? Stating the genre of the release as a highly vague description isn't really descriptive of the sound in my book. Something "chaotic, raw and fast" doesn't necessarily "equates being totally awesome", he doesn't write a word as to why. The most descriptive thing in his review is a comparison to Hellhammer's sound. I may as well in a near future do a review for that release.

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=3726

MetalThunder review isn't really good either, some other may not be necessary but it's not a release as populated of reviews as say Altars of Madness.

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=2580

PowerMetalGuardian's. There isn't much besides that he says it sounds like Slayer. Surely not the only release to. "It is good to see that in these times, heavy metal can change and still remain heavy." Indeed as "there isn't a song on this album that doesn't have a heavy riff or fast solo" and "the fast paced double bass leaves you headbanging for hours." Did I just quoted half the review?

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=104336

Stating the obvious. The last sentence is the closest thing to a review.

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=223919#192637

I don't think that JusticeofSuffering's review is informative at all, at least if one isn't familiar with Amoral. Even so, he doesn't describe the music at all - it's just him ranting about how the vocal style changed and proclaiming the superiority of their earlier works, pretty much.

Have you heard Lich King? I think you might like them, a lot. Really pummeling thrash metal with humor rather similar to yours.

The glorious "Men Dancing" thread in The Tavern made me check out the OP's reviews and pretty much all of them suck. Some are still the only ones for the respective releases, so I'll leave those out.

Kyuss - Wretch

Musical description is there, but it's just one badly formatted paragraph and completely pales in comparison (as well as the two reviews that followed it) to zeingard's competent analysis.

Mötley Crüe - Theatre of Pain

Seriously, not putting a space between two sentences and after a comma should be reason enough to delete it.

Spiritual Beggars - On Fire

Aye, his review is in good company, but it's the only one with such outrageously bad formatting.

Witchery (Swe) - Symphony for the Devil

Well, if UltraBoris' piece of work reads like Friedrich Schiller by comparison, I don't really have to lose more words, I suppose.

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=69#114679
Die Blutgrafin; heroine des grauens...

Note: if you are not familiar with German, then let it be. Do not pretend to write in this language unless you have some basic knowledge in it. There are three errors in five words... gives me eye-cancer.

correct:
Die Blutgräfin; Heroine des Grauens...
(maybe the semicolon should be replaced by a colon. At least I would feel more comfortable with it.)
-----------------

The latest release by Gnaw Their Tongues has also a wrong translation:
Verbrennt und verflucht (burned and cursed in English)

This is more tricky. Verbrennt is an imperative (plural), but burned requires the past tense of the verb, so correct would it be Verbrannt.

Another example would be the Russian band Der Galgen; they have numerous errors in their German.

So, please do no write in German, unless you know what you are doing. Thank you.

This review has little to no musical description:

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.ph ... 213#188818

Accepted a month ago?

EVERY review here needs nuking.

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=5441

Before the release date?

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.ph ... 928#127659

Yeah, I had a review for this one ready to go as it's one of my 4 promos for this time around at the metal observer and I was waiting like a good boy until the 8th. I hope this gets corrected soon.

I left the marginally best one. The rest are being tormented in hell.

If it isn't a positive review I will lynch you.

Nah, but yeah, it is a kickass album. I'm waiting til I buy it. Same for the new Stratovarius.

It's a Power Metal album and it's not Power Symphony, of course it got a positive review.

I'm curious about the new Stratovarius as well, though given how much money I've already blown on new Cds, it may be a while before I get that one.


On Topic: The review below by gor absolutely sucks something awful. Way too short, no description other than that he thinks the songs are "good". It's 2004 vintage, and even though it's the only one on there, I think it has to go. I've got this single tucked away somewhere from back in the day and I'd be happy to review it at some point soon.

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=2546#327

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.ph ... 928#127659

Sorry for the double post, but this is the second time that a review for Slough Feg's latest album has been let in before the release date.

Can I petition against UltraBoris' review of Bark at the Moon?

http://www.metal-archives.com/review.php?id=844

It's the first one, and it is blantatly an anti-Ozzy album and how much Lee sucks. No mention at how much the bass plays a seminal part of the music or even a mention of drums. Says basically that Lee is a crazy guitarist and Ozzy can't sing worth shit.

Gives brief, one sentence mentions about some of the songs. Really, the rest of the reviews serve better than that.

I don't see anything really wrong with that review. He gives a legitimate reason for why it sucks - the guitar playing is too over-done and pointless. Yes, it is brief, but I don't think it's a bad review, and Boris' charismatic writing voice is very good.

Meh, all right whatever. If he's bashing over-done guitar playing, then he might as well hit every Ozzy album after Rhoads.

He basically does that on most of the post-Rhodes albums he reviewed. The Ultimate Sin actually doesn't have overdone guitars in the same way that Bark At The Moon and No Rest For The Wicked did.

Yeah, well, in all fairness, the album has been available for streaming on the label's website. So, while it isn't released in stores, people can listen to the WHOLE album on the website.

In this particular case, I don't think any of those reviews should have been deleted despite the album not being released. I talked to Nightgaunt about this already.

I see. I got an advanced promo of that album about 2 weeks ago and I've been waiting until now to put that review up and I was pretty sure it wasn't supposed to be put up until the official release date, with no exceptions. Maybe I missed something since I last read the changes made to the submission rules.

It's alright, you didn't do wrong. This was an unusual case.

http://www.metal-archives.com/release.php?id=21664

Shadow0fDeath's review doesn't explain the music at all and and is about three sentences long.