Review by Petshopgirls Reviews
This review came as a pleasant surprise, as I was expecting the reviewer to really dislike my site (can't remember why). My only complaint was the awkward formatting she used for the review.
SPLASH PAGE - N/A
No splash n/a
FIRST IMPRESSIONS - 10/10
Wow! I'm really liking the appearance of your site. The incorperation of a ladybug into your layout is unique, and it looks great. I've read some of your previous reviews and am wondering why there seems to be a "problem" of sorts with this ladybug - does it HAVE to be cute? I was unaware that cuteness seems to be a requirement with some people. As for loading time, no problems whatsoever.
LAYOUT - 20/20
You've got the look of professionalism down to a tee with this layout, and I'm in love with that ladybug! Right down to the glossy sheen on it's back, it looks great. Your version title of "Greening" is so suitable for your layout, and your choice of greens support this title nicely.
Actually I found the title rather stupid, but couldn't come up with anything more suitable.
The professional look continues with your navigation - content is set up in an organised, tabled format to the right hand side of the page.
With the exception of the calendar and review page, I'm using divs.
I'm a big fan of adding little summaries to content sections, and I suppose in your case it was more of a necessity due to your original naming of sections eg "Professional Slang", "Bribery", etc. In other words you could say you've catered for the needs of the ignorant with that, haha. I know you're probably wanting some criticism here, but in truth I can't spot any flaws with this layout at all. Sorry!
CONTENT - 19/20
Firstly, I'd like to mention something I don't usually touch on - blogs. You write in your blog; "I’m quite bothered to realize that this post is up because I’m really curious about a review and am afraid the reviewer might think I’ve abbadoned my site (I know: you’re terribly ashamed of ever having associated yourselves - or your browser - with me). ". I'm not sure if that was written in reference to my (then) pending review, but if it was, then don't worry about it, seriously! I'm not really a "nit-picky" reviewer, and apart from coding and spelling errors I don't comment or critisise how frequent/infrequent blogs are.
Yes I was refering to you. Still I didn't want you to think I had neglected my site. I just don't always list every update, and even if I do, I do it in the blog.
I was quite taken aback to learn you are from Romania - your English is impeccable. You're also fluent in several other languages, so you're obviously quite intelligent. For some reason I had just assumed you were yet another generic American webdesigner, so yeah I was a little surprised. I would never have guessed English wasn't your native tongue.
You have a nice array of photos, complete with the provision of a backgrounder as to the nature of the photo, and where it was taken, etc. Haha, I liked your definition of "busy" under "MSN ID >> Contact". If only more people understood the concept of the busy status...it's never worked with me so instead I have taken to hiding on offline mode. Even when I come online under the "Busy" status, I still get pestered. Your "Of Forgotten Blogs" section is very original, a unique concept that I've never come across before. Your opinions displayed were forthright, and sometimes even chuckle-inducing, such as "I'm sorry for all those cute little furry animals being killed just so we could eat that yummy steak, nevertheless that won't stop me from enjoying chicken meat every other day". Haha, I couldn't agree with you more!
Actually that sounds rather mean, but I just couldn't imagine writing scrolls upon scrolls of lines about how much I pity animals. As for the originality, kind of, I was somewhat inspired by Sway My Way.
Moving onto the "Bribery" section now. You have an entire page dedicated to explaining the nature of a WPR, also having noticed you've had your site reviewed by many others I'm guessing that you take being reviewed quite seriously.
It depends on the review, but generally speaking, yes.
However you decide to classify this review (I'm hoping I won't be considered a quote, "crappy reviewer"!), I'd like to point out a few things. I realise it is a reviewers job to offer tips for improving ones' site, as well as providing any negative criticism if needed - however, so far in this case I really can't think of anything negative to say about your site, nor can I see any room for improvement. I'm hoping you won't have a problem with my seemingly continual compliments and praises, but there's nothing negative for me to say here.
Technically speaking, a review is an opinion of the reviewer on a certain subject. Of course, ideally reviewers shouldn't give full marks, makes the reviewee conceited, but you don't HAVE to pepper the whole review with suggestions.
Onto "Professional Slang" now, where you've included a wealth of information regarding your site and your webdesigning roots. You've gone into depth in giving more information about your site in general - this is a good indication of how much you care about your site, and you seem to take it quite seriously to an extent. Your comebacks and the general nature of your responses to the previous reviews of your site was quite an entertaining read.
I had fun writing those 'come backs'. Basically they're just proof of my tendency to ramble on and on.
Regarding the apparent issue of "not enough visitor content" - remember, this is YOUR site, you call the shots, and you shouldnt have to feel the need to comply to the unspoken regulations a personal site seems to go by. What you choose to concentrate on content-wise is your business. Reviewers probably complained about the lack of visitor content because they couldn't think of anything else to bitch about.
True, but if I didn't care about others' opinions I wouldn't have published it, let alone submitted it to that many WPR sites.
In truth I'm starting to think I SHOULD be at least offering you some constructive criticism for fear of you deeming me as a "sugar coater", but I really can't think of anything.
Your "Previous Layouts" page was, for a few seconds, confusing, as the latest layouts started from the top, with the oldest layout at the bottom. No complaints though, I soon checked the dates and realised you'd started from the most recent at the top and worked your way down.
I didn't think of mentioning this, since 90% of the webmasters make use of this style of presentation.
SUMMARY
My overall opinion of your site is extremely high - yours is a site that is definitely worth visiting again and again, and I'm intending on doing just that.Your layout was thoroughly original and I've never seen anything similar. You've broken away from the dull trend of webmasters' producing generic, tabled layouts with the obligatory picture of a celebrity - a style in which I am becoming increasingly irritated by. Your layout was different, and a breath of fresh air for me. In addition, your content was much the same - original, appealing to a wide range of audiences, and could even be considered as a knowledge base. Your intelligence is apparent throughout your whole site, and I found your writing style to be mature, informative, with a flair of wit and sarcasm from time to time. You've gone that extra mile to ensure your site has its own style and the originality has been maintained throughout your entire site.Your site was truly a pleasure to review, and I look forward to returning to it. Congratulations for coming up with a top quality website!
