Reviews reporting thread

ExittheLemming wrote: tamijo wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=36504 New Mars volta - allready got 3 ratings - would think if someone had a legit copy, they would write a review The band's official website states the official release date as 27/3/12 (and even the pre-order package is not available as either a CD or digital download until this date - I think if you pre-order you can download one track 'The Malkin Jewel' immediately.) So unless people get a copy from a legit source beforehand (promo?) and state in their review its source - we're just gonna have to delete the reviews.

Edited by VanVanVan - March 04 2012 at 20:24

You ninja'd me. Well done sir. 

Can it be the same reviewer writing on two different sites? On the second link there is no signature on that review.

Hi Guys,

Triceratopsoil wrote: alinux wrote: Hi Guys, Can someone gently solve this problem? http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=649648 Can someone communicate to mohamed to write his own review and do not copy/paste from other review sites ? Or simply an admin just remove the review.  Thank you in advance! ;) First of all, can you say with certainty that he's not the same guy?  secondly, try posting in the "report reviews" thread

His Alcest review first appeared in Central Michican Life attributed to Ryan Fitzmaurice. Mohamed is posting from Paris, France. Case closed.

Well, there we indeed do go. Or more accurate, there they went.

Edited by Dean - March 07 2012 at 17:42

You're most welcome.

alinux wrote: Dear People, First of all sorry me for my horrible English... Hope that it's a right place for this kind of message. yesterday appeared this review for Profiuson: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=649902 In my humble opinion this kind of review only damages young bands like Profusion... I know that someone may don't like the album... but can justify - WHY? This review dosen't explain anything, just telling that Eclectic prog is a wrong classification ... (Yes but it's not a bands fault, someone on ProgArchives decided that). It's talking about bad production...   without thinking that it's not a SONY or EMI production... everythings comes out from band's pockets..is't an poor auto-producion, and it's the maximum that with 4000-5000€ a band can reach. No words about music, about pieces, about artwork... It's even non-conforming to the general Reviews Guidelines, statement (5). I'm really upset... Thank you for attention...and I'm sorry for disturbing.

Sorry Vladimer, I don't see that it does not conform to our guidelines - he is not saying that Eclectic Prog is a wrong classification, he saying you don't sound like the "greats" of Eclectic Prog - and that's not against any rules or guidelines. He's not talking about bad production either, but even if he was, that would not be wrong either. You got a low-rated review, that's life.

Edited by Dean - March 08 2012 at 07:22

alinux wrote: I'm so sorry that Profusion doesn't sound  like VDGG or King Crimson :) Hehehe... Anyway thank you! Maybe you're intrested to do a review ? Or maybe you can point me someone who could be intrested? Unfortunately our promo CDs are terminated :( But I can provide high definition audio files, with bio and photos. Shortly - a PRESS digital PROMO. Let me know ;) Hope that "bad" reviewer bought the album at least ;) Prog on people!

Thank you all! ;)