to be honest, there isn't really a set format for your reviews; just a certain given set of content which i will list below. but over all, the structure, the design, the set-up of your review is all up to you. you are not required to limit yourself to only recent albums, you can review older work if you so choose.i will also include the tagging format below. required content for reviews:
► artist, label, album name, year, genre
► a review of any length - preferably 2-3 paragraphs, more if you so choose
► a rating system is preferred (5 stars, 10/10, whatever you want)
► recommendations of tracks and or similar artists (if you can think of some for the latter)
if you would like to use the format of
maylene's review (also used by
potthead), you can just right click + select all + copy/paste from the box below and edit it to be the information for your review/entry.
Band Name ALBUM TITLE http://i46.tinypic.com/2vrvr42.png">
http://i46.tinypic.com/2vrvr42.png">
http://i46.tinypic.com/2vrvr42.png">
http://i46.tinypic.com/2vrvr42.png">
http://i46.tinypic.com/2vrvr42.png" title="Use up to 5 hearts, put the rating details in this as the last heart">
Label: Name
Release: Month Year
Type: Full-Length, LP or EP
Genre: Self-Explanatory
Links: Official MySpace,
Wiki Start of review content, maybe the first paragraph or so. Your choice: goes here.
Continuance of review content. 2-3 more paragraphs or more, again your choice.
Recommended for fans of: Burton films, Danny Elfman, almost none of what Last.FM suggestsHover over last heart to view rating
tagging format:
(just copy/paste this into the tag bar with appropriate edits.)
artist/band: name, reviewer: name / username, genre: pick one most appropriate, label: name
don't worry if some of your tags don't show up, myself or one of the other maintainers will add whatever tags are missing. apparently moderators can't edit tags.