http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... /danmarder

has this been discussed yet? it's pure drivel. i can understand a positive review of an unpopular album coming off as a little defensive, but this? it's basically "the new ManOwaR album rulez and if u dont liek it thats cuz ur not metal enough!"

that, and he's wrong.

I'm not too sure this review deserves a place on the Archives.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/R ... ConorFynes

The only thing this guy seems to summarize is how bad the vocals are, and that's the lone point he argues for his entire review stating "crappy celine dion vocals" multiple times despite it being such a tiny review, it's a much deeper release than just the vocals and that's really the only dimension of the music he brings up. I've found a couple of his other reviews a bit iffy too.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/X ... hadowsfall

Should this review for Gris - Il Était une Forêt... still be here? I can see how it was accepted as is the first review giving the album less than a 90%, but another more in-depth review has been added since then that also gave it a less-than-stellar score. The review itself doesn't really discuss the music very much, besides lamenting over the lack of a keyboard.

Apart from his confusing score/content ratio, I would possibly accept it as a bare bones 3 pointer. Despite being short and missing the point (I've never listened to Gris, but it sounds like he expected something different and rated down based on that alone, which is stupid), the entirety of the review is spent talking about the music.

Fair enough, I just thought he spent more time talking about what he thought the album should've been instead of what the music actually consisted of. If it were to be a response to the other review's I guess it'd have served its purpose well, but as a stand-alone review, I still don't think it really contributes very much. All the same, I guess I can see how it'd just narrowly get in.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... _Blood_-_Môt_chûyên...chua_quên/349333/

I don't care if it's written by a mod, this review for a Satanic Warmaster split not publicly released is just fucking atrocious. I can say for certain this guy does not own a copy and is reviewing it off some rip a traitor mistakenly given a copy put up. This zero 0% review is short, far from the point and reads as very rushed. I don't think there is a single sentence spent critiquing the music, all he does is whine about the recording quality. The track from the split put on the WATWTCOTBWOAA compilation sounds nothing like what he describes and I wouldn't be surprised if he's never listened to a single track on the record. I am absolutely certain this review would not have been accepted if Zodijackyl wasn't a mod.

Zodijackyl isn't a mod.

He's not a site mod, he's an enforcer for the Musicians forums, this review was approved by another mod.

My bad.

^That review was approved by Nightgaunt, administrator and resident black metal expert.

Here's a super-sized batch of oven fodder, completely unrelated to the complaints about my review mentioned above.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... 306/Madman
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... ulless_Fox
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... iseryDeath NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... 1/megafury NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... 26/bry1188 NUKED

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/H ... 4470/Xeper
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/H ... /JakeDevil (only review for this album, but it's really bad) NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... Till_Death NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... 029/Shovel (the other review for this album isn't great, but this one's trash) NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... IUN69filth NUKED

Are you gettting Stockholm syndrome yet? Maybe Gothenburg syndrome...

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... ass_Casket NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... 05541/opes
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/L ... 468/AzzMan NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/L ... 034/AzzMan (Crappy diem?) NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/L ... InAFireBox (The other 17 are better) NUKED

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... peedemon86 NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... peedemon86 NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... oulSeekJay
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... 05/Alcohol
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/E ... earTheNome

That's it for metalcore for now, remember when Deicide weren't a laughingstock?

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... a_are_gods (Crappy diem?) NUKED
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... /head_flat
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... 5976/Snxke (did I mention that Deicide are blasphemous?)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... oomknocker (all context, no content)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... /halfassed (callouts of previous reviews seem to be discouraged, and this one is pretty crappy. 4/6 reviews for this album say almost nothing about the music.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... ibalCorpse (not too bare, but very poor/vague descriptions)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... /jciscrazy
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... brocashelm
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... Cup_Of_Tea
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... eMetalMike "In my opinion Deicide's production has gotten better over the years" (it's a compilation of their demos)NUKED

A few of the Deicide reviews are borderline-acceptable, but they also fail to offer anything beyond common knowledge of Deicide's blasphemy, speed, and vocals. There are plenty of quality reviews for most of their stuff, but there's a flood of low-quality old ones that say very little about the music.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... antasos666
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... 944/natrix
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... ckingLucas (Sorry diffle, this one's no good)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... eadMonkeyB
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... 4/Spectrum

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... TheCthulhu (This one and the next one aren't as bad as the others, but pretty poor.)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... emonomania
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... ses_Priced
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... rostbitten (It's like someone cut off an autothrall review before he started talking about the music)

I nuked all of these, they were all badly written. - Metantoine
Next up we have a batch of reviews from one user that just aren't up to the current standards of the site:
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 1013/MURAI
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 5564/MURAI
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... /224/MURAI
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/P ... 6041/MURAI
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... /727/MURAI
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... 2714/MURAI (bookended by talk about their previous band, little description of the music)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/E ... ng/5/MURAI (this one might be borderline acceptable, or I might be chin-deep in bad reviews. There are three quality reviews for this album so this one is expendable)


Four or five of the ten reviews for this album put you in a time machine back to 2003.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... 0247/Xeper
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... TheImpaler
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... 247/Opaque
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... iTiVePeTeR
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... dAdulation


Some crappy old track-by-track reviews that are short on content:
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... 065/aryias
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... /DemonEyes
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... 9/ihateyou "The Second Coming Of Metallica? Hell Yea! - 99%" (this one is particularly bad)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... peedemon86

This one is factually inaccurate, stating that the album used a drum machine. It's otherwise a borderline-acceptable review, but others say what it does better. Not sure if it's oven fodder.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... talThunder

Hummmmmmm, ok, I'll check that out little by little. I'll need a new axe after this though.

Edit: Gunther is also busy, I'll edit the post with his nukes too.

A long-handled axe so you can attack from a distance... like a halberd? Your halberd should go a long way sweeping through this pile!

This review is for a compilation, but it doesn't say a single thing about the music, it's mostly about track choice, and most of it simply stating the tracklist, not offering many thoughts on it.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/P ... 5/firebee1

Of course, there are more unapologetically bad reviews that don't need any commentary.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... ToSerenity
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 1541/Xeper
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... asinmaiden
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... ingOverdue
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... rcedSpirit

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... 308/Sinner
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/E ... lucent2you
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... lucent2you


A few old reviewers with consistently terrible output of stuff that other people covered better than them:

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... lfukinhead (he didn't even finish his track-by-track)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/I ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... lfukinhead

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... lfukinhead

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Z ... lfukinhead
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/F ... lfukinhead
(two of his reviews aren't quite nuke-worthy, one is the only description of a Pantera tape, the other is a minimal description of an Annihilator album)


http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall (this one is hilariously bad)

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... f_the_Fall (oh god the wall of text turns into track-by-track in the middle!)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... f_the_Fall

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall (so many typos!)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall (only one for this album, but it doesn't say much)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall (so many misspellings and errant capitalizations!)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall (fourth paragraph probably qualifies it on its own)

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... f_the_Fall (Nevermore's forth album!)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... f_the_Fall (this guy doesn't know what capital letters are for)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/J ... f_the_Fall

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... f_the_Fall
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... f_the_Fall

I didn't bother going through the rest of this guy's old reviews, but it's pretty safe to say that he did not have a solid grasp on writing in 2003. He wrote another review two days ago and it's much better, good to see that he has improved!

I need to preserve some of these quotes here:

"Although this is a hard to find album, you can find some tracks of these guys on Kazaa."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... f_the_Fall

"Although I was quite dissapointed with SYL's first offering titled "Heavy is a very Heavy Thing" , as it only contained 2 good songs. City has not one bad song, and I'm dead serious, this disc grabs your balls and never lets go."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... f_the_Fall

"How can I really give this genuine masterpeice any less than one hundred percent? This has everything any music lover would want to hear. Remember I exclude all rap/pop/punk and hip-hop due to none of those listed qualify to be music."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... f_the_Fall

"I'd rather not go into descripions about all the songs because I would be infront of my keyboard all day and I'm sure you all don't want a rant."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... f_the_Fall


http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 92/mike584
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 64/mike584
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 24/mike584
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 19/mike584
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... 12/mike584
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/J ... 22/mike584
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... 97/mike584


http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... overkill67
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... overkill67
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... overkill67
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/R ... overkill67
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/G ... overkill67
The rest of this guy's output from 2003 seems to be of similar quality.

Alright, that's enough for now.

Holy ... f***in .. that list is INTENSE. wow.

You're breaking my balls Zodi.

God, Zodi wants my death. This will take some time.

The vast majority of those are really bad. Some of them, like the Ebony Tears one, are serviceable as they're the only review for the album, but are a poor description of the music - I'm writing reviews of the Ebony Tears albums now, since they deserve a better description.

Okay, let's not get overzealous here. I haven't checked any yet but if I find even one that is just mediocre and not outright offensively wretched, I'm going to ignore the rest, blackball you, and maybe even mail you some anthrax.

Oh no, I heard listening to Stomp 442 can kill you! You don't want to kill me, do you?

When you dump sixtyish reviews on me (I can't be fucked to count for real, I'm bitter from a very shitty Bears loss right now), yes, death is a good option.

People, do not take inspiration from Zodi here. If you see things that need gone, by all means mention them. But if you drop a nuclear deuce like this I'm going to let them all sit out of fucking spite.

I was talking to Zodi and I agreed with this plan, I wasn't expecting this many reviews though Yeah, don't take Zodi as a role model, he was acting as my counselor or some sort...

All the reviews of Demon of the fall were deleted, except 1 or 2, I believe, his Morningrise review is alright, I edited some parts of it though.

Looks like you guys have some work to do . You guys might want to check this review, though. The guy only describes the vocals (and not even adequately ). I know that's the only review for the album, but I think it could really go.

Bad review and.......it's gone!

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... Placidity3

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... Placidity3

Bare description and quite a few misspellings. Also, "let the metal flow"; the hell did this come from?

Keep them coming, I won't comment for each post.

Here's a few more. Mostof them are so poorly written that they don't even need much of a comment.

This one either needs serious editing or removal.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... 093/Rhaven

Track-by-track with little music description.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... Brownstone

Another run-on track-by-track.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... rrenschiff

The formatting on this one is fucked up, but it's all track-by-track with minor digressions.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... Brownstone

Crappy TBT, PseudoGoatKill wrote a much better review that goes into detail on these descriptions.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... 3/Silmaril

I think this one predates the "Tell us about the music. Tell us about the music!" guideline.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... 2266/Ghost

Talks about what the music isn't, but the few details mentioned describe the music very poorly. Mentions some minor details, leaves out the main picture.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... lackEnergy

Very short on descriptions. The first two paragraphs manage to recount a personal experience and say everything is great, so there's only about five sentences of description.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... waytonever

The format of this one seems to pad very minimal descriptions with names and song titles. It barely explains the album.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... /prometeus

This one seems to use the wrong words to describe the music: "Alexi's amazingly brutal vocals" + "self-mutilation" + "standard drum machine rhythm" describing the homage to Carcass' Corporeal Jigsaw Quandary
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... 5/OSheaman

Glosses over main points for type-casting track-by-track. Uses lots of words to say very little.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... hadowsfall


http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... /Goatsbane

Yep, 2004 reviews.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... hadowsfall

How many times can you say "it's not Children of Bodom" in a dozen lines?
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... Till_Death

Finish? Technical?
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... /ThePharao

This one has a few sentences about the music, but just as many sentences reminding us that they aren ot Children of Bodom.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... on_Thunder

Track-by-track with little about the music.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... d/1957/Guy

More comparisons to Children of Bodom than other descriptions of the music
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... gingcorpse

Oh boy.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... 59/Chuckus

TBT that has a lot of little descriptions but nothing about the album as a whole, which I suppose is the problem with the format.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... InAFireBox

You could fit a more complete review in a tweet.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... ormcrusher

Once again, this one gets hung up on Children of Bodom, and it's very minimal.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... yPhalluses

Tell us about the music?
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... 92/Diamhea

It's heavier than Children of Bodom, the vocalist does a great job, oh fuck, not this again.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... hrashAD720

"My guess is they got sick of people comparing them to Children of Bodom. If this is the case, they succeeded because TBW doesn’t sound much like COB at all. Now that I got the bitter out of the way lets get to the sweet. This album must have been recorded and mastered by Jesus Christ himself because it sounds nothing short of miraculous."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... 26/aris801

So many adjectives, so little coherent meaning.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... nd_Vitriol

"It is soo evil sounding. When I listen to it I feel like brutally raping a priest then nailing him to an inverted cross. Oh geeeze. It’s got some serious bottom end to it. "
"He even designed his own guitar shaped like an Inverted cross. (If u haven’t seen a pic of it yet, check out Yavcon’s website. It looks awesome.)"
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... _MoRTiCiAN

"His inverted cross means nothing since he's probably not a satanist and it's fucking stupid anyway. The lyrics are just that- stupid. Everything revolves around the death of Christ, and destroying Christinaity, the same thing we hear every goddamn day. I gotta admit, they did give it a bit more flare here, though. Using more 'complex' words, so to speak, made it not the same "RORO SATAN" shit- an interesting twist that didn't quite save it anyway."
Full of typos too.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... 895/AzzMan

"When I listen to this CD I picture myself in a pimpin’ old skool pink Cadillac cruising down some desert highway at night, with a double bass in the back seat and a pair of bitchin’ dark sunglasses on, looking up at the starry night and thinking to myself. “Damn, I need one of those psychedelic blue drinks you always see in movies.” (You know the one that comes in a ridiculously large glass with a bunch of miniature umbrellas in it.) Listening to this reminds me of that Simpson’s episode when Homer eats the insanity peppers and is lost in the bizarre hallucinogenic desert."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... _MoRTiCiAN

This sounds like a review by Nathan Explosion of Dethklok. Brutal brutal brutal!
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... _MoRTiCiAN

"What makes this record so damn good is the sound."
Really? I thought it was the logo. This review is just bad.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... _MoRTiCiAN

Half of this short review is speculation about how the drums were recorded. What is this, ...And Justice For All?
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... arkandfoul

"One of my only problems with the album is the tendency to use some rather silly lyrics at times, but unlike most metal-people, I tend to believe that Benton really does hate this god-guy, making it acceptable."
Great quote, terrible review otherwise.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... Herbstleyd

Horribly formatted, with each sentence being a new line but no line breaks. Either a candidate for editing/formatting or deletion.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... Herbstleyd

This one is very minimal, but the writing is decent. It seems like it was cut off in the middle of the review.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... brocashelm

Terrible writing.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... hterofSoul

Nothing about the music.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... 6628/ozzeh

Aside from being short on description, this sentence is poorly phrased as it is describing the albums that came after this one.
"Gone are the superfluous elements which are contained in "Decristianize" & "Icons of Evil", replaced with a more streamlined, down-tuned fundamental death metal riffing sound-structure. "
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... 2409/ozzeh

No musical description other than the song lengths/structures.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... 16/Niflhel

Little musical description, and mostly in relation to the previous album.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... e_Terrible

Sorry to post so many at once, but I've been doing a lot of reading and these are all strong candidates for deletion.

Nothing about the music.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... teve112sms

Most of the review is explaining that he does not like the album, not why he doesn't like it.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... ySonicDiet

Very poorly written.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... /WIndrider

Poor grammar and doesn't get much beyond using genre labels to describe it.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... eofsilence

Sounds like typical black metal, just like Dissection? Minimal and misleadingly poor description of the music.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 7/ratsalad



I know it's the only review for this album, but it's terrible.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 6/ratsalad

I could've written better than this before hearing the album.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... 9/ratsalad

So it's death/thrash, and... nvm thats all.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 1807/cweed

Certainly a remnant of the past.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 1807/Snxke

This one spends more time talking about other bands and almost none describing the album being reviewed. It's also not post-black metal.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 877/Minion



This is either terrible or amazing, I'm not sure which.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 1/Erin_Fox

Low content track-by-track.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... /Pyosified

Rambling overview.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... 1261/cweed

Really bare.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... 4/multocco

There's probably an acceptable amount of musical description here, but it's stretched out with a lot of filler as track-by-track descriptions.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... 24/ict1523



Probably a bit too minimal.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... /The_Ghoul

A glance at this one should tell you enough.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... /Decarabia

I think this one is expendable too.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/O ... fth_Figure

I don't trust a one-inch review of Windir that mentions "breakdowns".
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... fth_Figure

Typical problems with a TBT.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... /Laraque27



Almost no musical description.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... errorsatan

A few more crappy old reviews.
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... s_the_kvlt
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... 2/Wikingus
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... darkFLAMES


And now, some choice quotes from terrible reviews!

"All too often, however, they merely make use of a gregorian chant style thing, which just sounds like bad keyboards. Hell, maybe it is."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 4/ratsalad

"Nieve and retarded was I."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... oodandIron

"So, let's play a little game again. Band comes from Sweden. Logo is hardly decipherable, even when you know what it means (even though it looks pretty cool). On the cover we see a Viking, his sword in the air and in the background dragonships. What does this tell us? So, all of you, who yell Viking Metal get a bonus-point.
THYRFING allegedly is a mythic sword and these young Swedish folks have fully taken on the Vikings in their lyrics. My way to this debut has been pretty weird. I had been talking to a label-boss, who would some time later completely vanish from everywhere (Invasion Records), and he mentioned THYRFING as interesting band before the line crashed and my phone fell into a day-long coma. Well, after many calls and shop-visits I finally held it in my hands..."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... g/1260/DcB

"Borknagar is not a band for people who are just looking for chaotic noise and pointless screaming (otherwise known as your average death metal or black metal or hardcore fan). It's not surprising that some headbashing, pit moshing kids would pick up a CD like this and complain about how much they hate progressive metal - a lot of these people are just plainly against the entire concept of progress... which is somewhat irrelevent, as Borknagar is viking/folk metal, not prog. If you are an intellectual connoisseur of fine metal, you should definitely like this CD. Listening through it is like roaming through the woods surrounding a medieval castle... if you are a fan of viking metal or folk metal, you know what I mean. The songs vary in key, tempo, and vocal style. Vortex is one of the best vocalists in the history of metal."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... 81/ZuSNick

"Some say this album is a classic, though I haven't heard of it for over a year of almost maniacal listening to black metal ... Melodic black metal is rather rare, and this album is the main and probably the best point of taht genre." (written in 2005)
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 1806/vorth

"An all out explosion of Black Metal so fierce and melodic, it would make any Cradle of Filth bandwagon jumper run home to his mommy crying. "
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... 6/ArtOfWar




This one deserves to have its full text preserved in all its terribility:

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... nstro_City

Well shit.

I find that he has a few other crappy "2004 reviews" too, very short and only arguing one point the entire review.

Watch your language, young man!

Also, some of these were rejected, some were fine, don't be too mean, Zodi, the Oven Fodder is for the crappiest ones.

Lol Meta, you've read my reviews. I most certainly do not watch my language.

Bahahahaha.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... 26371/Lane

I realize that when there's only one other review of an album the standards are a bit lower, but really, this is pretty awful. There's next to no actual musical description, the grammar is clunky and awkward, and the whole thing completely fails to impress on the listener what the author actually thinks of the album.

OK, I now have a much better idea of what and isn't oven fodder.

This certainly is:
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/P ... Hellegion'

This probably is:
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/V ... /Hellegion

This one contradicts itself, describing it as a mix of Emperor and Darkthrone, then not being a Darkthrone clone (it's pretty much a clone of 'A Blaze...')
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... /Hellegion

"This opus gives me an erection every time I listen to it."
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/K ... 2/Thorsson

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/B ... hrasher666

Only half of the first paragraph is describing the music.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... hrasher666
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... hrasher666

Only a couple of shreds of music talk.

Apparently not... Look, if there's a "probably" in there, don't post it here, ok? Most of those are mediocre, but not Oven Fodder worthy. Jesus, how many times do I have to say this...

I really don't mind people deleting old reviews when the standards for the Metal Archives were different in the pioneer era. It's absolutely okay to transform for example old reviews from 2004 or so to oven fodder. This is also okay for reviews that have important factual errors that have not been recognized before, whatever the reason might be.

But I think that the more recent reviews that were already judged by the moderators with new rules in mind should not be deleted anymore in general. I think there are way too many severe suppressions these days with people listing up hundreds of reviews that are judged as oven fodder. This feels a little bit like the McCarthyism of the Metal Archives or some sort of Great Purge. I mean it's okay to have standards but one should not reduce the Metal Archives to experienced writers only, native or nearly native (English) speakers or put it up to a too intellectual level. I'm universitarian, too, but we're talking about metal music that should be accessible for anyone.

It's not because somebody has some difficulties with English, a rather limited vocabulary or did a couple of mistakes, that his or her review must be deleted. These people might sill have something interesting to say and one should recognize the effort they put in their reviews for this site. I think this deletion mania should slow down a little bit. I'm not really concerned personally and don't have any quarrel but I think people start going a little bit too far on here.

By the way: if you delete a review, you should also send a short message to inform the person about it. It's the same thing as if you send a message telling somebody his or her review got accepted. Lately, I just wanted to check out my review for Edguy's "Age Of The Joker" and it had been deleted and I had never been informed about it. My review surely wasn't a masterpiece and it's okay for me to dump it but I would have liked to know about it to improve or to write a new one and I think many people think alike.

There is no Great Purge. Zodi simply caused a massive clusterfuck here because he posted dull, mediocre reviews instead of truly terrible pieces, which is what the Oven Fodder needs to feed. Also, the notion that this site is practicing "McCarthyism" as you put it, is a little much. Yes, there are standards, but they are not impossibly high. Hell, there are a number of reviews that pass through which are loaded with grammar/spelling errors, Engrish, or whatever you can think of. That's fine, nobody's perfect. The standards have increased, sure, but that's because the overall substance from the reviewers has as well; it's a positive correlation. Still, anyone with a keyboard can write a review. Metal Archives is not becoming an exclusive elite writers club; only a fool would think otherwise.

I think posting reviews in bulk as demonstrated above for deletion was a bad idea, but then adding in the question of acceptable/non-acceptable content made it even worse. kluseba, there is nothing to worry about, because the mods are in control and regular joes pretending to have a grasp on which reviews can stay and which can't are kidding themselves.

Yes, mods are truly infallible. That's why this thread exists. Because after their three-year apprenticeship and rigorous standardized testing, mods have the ability of perfect judgement. Anyone who does not realize this indisputable truth is truly kidding themselves.

-edit- Just to clarify, I'm not trying to be the new Lippyass and start a revolution, and I have a great deal of respect for the majority of the site staff, it's just that Gunther's statement was really, really pretentious...

Jesus Christ, I hope you're not accepting reviews loaded with grammar/spelling errors.

Haha No, I'm simply saying there are several reviews which have been accepted that have spelling/grammar errors. Perhaps I have should have worded that a bit lighter. My bad.




Well, that was certainly not my intention to call the mods infallible or appear pretentious. I took kluseba's post as concern for the reviews that were posted for deletion, and I was pointing out that, at the end of the day, reviews posted here aren't all going to be deleted unless they are, indeed, terrible reviews, and that the mods have the final say. There are errors that happen, of course, and no system is perfect.

But in retrospect I was in a terribly bad mood yesterday at the time of writing that post (bad excuse, I know) and that last sentence is a little much. Apologizes folks, did not mean to look so arrogant. I'll shut up now.