Are wild inaccuracies enough reason to delete a review or has this reviewer circumvented the rules by writing almost total nonsense?  In any case, it looks pretty bad on the site and will also confuse people.  The writer should start their own site for referential prog reviews rather than piggyback here

Triceratopsoil(Colin) + James Dean = Colin James

Colin James + Colin James = 0 (Time space continuum)

Wikipedia says:

I'm currently listening to Camel, so I wouldn't switch them off to listen to Colin James's samples

Geoffrey Howe was Chancellor of the Exchequer (and various other Govt posts) during the reign of Margret Thatcher, he was often a figure of ridicule on the satirical TV programme Spitting Image - the reviewer is punning with the names, hence Chrisp Squire, Ian Anderson and Steve Hackett.

That's mysterious effectively, There has been a Geoff in a Yes album, if the program reads a database Geoff may come from Drama.

However I'm joking at least as the reviewer, but the idea of a program writing reviews is intriguing

And Geoffery Howe?

 

I don't get that humour but I'm not British. I think that taking some random pieces of sentences from other reviews, reading the band lineup and the track titles from the album page could be enough to give the input to a program.

Of course a program wouldn't say "Ian" instead of "Jon", but may rename "Rick" into "Richard".

 

"The title track is very rocky and mellow (?) with some fine slide playing from Geoffrey Howe"

http://www.progarchives.com/album-reviews.asp?id=40650 

Not always and even when they are it's not always relevant. Imagine if Edgar Froese was gay (he may be or not, I surely don't care), how can this be reflected in Phaedra, Rubycon or Alpha Centauri? After your campaign against Gentle Giant I think you are having fun by provoking. It may be a funny joke but it has to be done with a bit of intelligence that I think you are not showing. 

...and today's nomination for most ignorant comment of the month is:

Originally posted by Tubes Artist's sexual preferences as any other personal thing are relevant all the time because that is a big component of anyone's personality and will be reflected in their music, of course. I'm pretty sure it was intended as joke, anyway, but either way, don't be hating on homophobes.

Nice to agree with Ivan for a change.

This is clearly an honest, well written opinion. Also, think about it. If you were reading reviews for this artist, you would see a range of opinions. Looking closely at Robert's tastes after exploring more closely, you would realise this was not his cup of tea. You would also find that others, who might like this type of music, gave it a good rating. You would, therefore, make an opinion on whether to buy based upon this.

Robert's review is a good and honest one. He does not like it. He thinks it is a "noise". Knowing his tastes as I do, and agreeing with them, I would not get this album. Others would disagree, and would buy based upon others opinion.

It is the way the site works, and, by and large, this part of it works well.

But hey...It's his honest opinion.

Robert and I have different musical tastes.but he's always honest, I remember when I rated HIS album lower than the resto of the Collaborators, he sent me a kind message saying he respected my opinion even if he didn't shared it.

If he says he doesn't like it, i believe he's giving his 100% honest opinion and he's entitled to it.

Iván

Their first album has 48 ratings for 4.52 average score, and the second mentioned here 12 ratings making 2.82, rounding up as three stars. Does this current state at ProgArchives after all worsen their situation in the world?

Very lovely people, though I did not personally dig their music very much. Made them some food at the club I helped to create when they visited Finland on their 2010 tour: www.progarchives.com/video.asp?id=3097

I'm not opposed to the current system.  I think it makes sense and works well overall. 

In this specific situation, the album's rating is significantly lower than if collab reviews were weighted the same as non-collab, and it's unlikely that the album will ever reach the point of "balancing out".  It's unfortunate, but not cause for any type of change based on that alone.  However, I don't feel that the review justifies its rating.

 

 

I don't see how being personally unused to a style of music's sound or aesthetic is enough to give it 1 star.  There is very little objective analysis in the review, and most of it is spent saying how he doesn't like the band's distorted sound.  For bands in the RIO/Avant-Garde category, surely a "distorted" or "weird" sound is not enough to give an album 1 star.  You can hate an album because of that, but you're not actually evaluating the music on the album if you only talk about how "noisy" it is.  From reading it, it seems as if his opion was made up during the first song.  

It's a shame because the band is virtually unknown, so their album rating is at 2.82 stars because of this one rating, while 75% of the ratings are for 4 or 5 stars.  

hmm, he's making quite an effort to explain his poor ratings, and there is plenty I agree with him on.  He does seem rather focused on bringing ratings down for overrated albums, but perhaps somebody should tell him they don't have much effect on overall ratings when they come from a non-collaborator or reviewer.  I still don't think it rises to the level where he should be banned.  I have read much worse, much less informative, reviews that we don't consider banning just because they happen to agree with fans of the group.

Review is for the wrong BBT album.

 

 Buffoon is my new fav word!!!!

 

Exactly HolyMoly maybe this new member was not aware of the site rules, as you agree it's a very articulate and well written informed review

I read it translated by either Bing, or Google Translate, and it did make perfect sense and was nearly free from the  idiosyncrasies, typical for online automated translations. 

 

Maybe cause the site rules are in English. Hmm....

I can understand Spanish, and thought it was a good review too.

 

It's Spanish  maybe the member doesn't know that all reviews should be submitted in English. It's a great and insightful review tho'

Spanish 

Sorry Dean, i just said that I respected his right to say whatever he wanted

My mistake - Mea Culpa

But at the end he cooled down on a second PM, and that's good

Hey, but he rubbed his review on my face and was really pissed because I gave one star to several albums

Sound advice!

We used to have a record shop called Sound  Advice....(that was when I did by "vinyl" or as we used to call them LPs)