Quality Rating Guidelines

These are the quality ratings guidelines I've thought of so far.
I may edit this post to contain suggestions made in the comments.

Moderators don't have to strictly follow these rules, and may award different brownie points for each quality (good or bad) than these guidelines suggest. Even so, it would still be a good idea for reviewers to look to these rules for guidance.

Feel free to make comments suggesting possible guidelines, but please follow the format shown below.

--------------------
ON A SCALE OF ONE TO TEN
--------------------

+1: Minimum length

Anyone that writes a review which is longer than a few sentences should receive a brownie point just for that. It's nearly impossible to write a quality review that doesn't fulfill this requirement.

+1: Impressive length

OK, so you wrote a review that's longer than a few sentences. Doesn't mean it's a quality review. This brownie point is awarded for sticking it out and writing a review which dwarfs the worthless drivel churned out by the uncaring or biased reviewers which are present all over.

+1: No apparent bias

It's difficult to hide bias in a review, at least with inexperienced reviewers. Beginning reviewers will try and make up for their lack of experience by writing with a degree of misapplied intensity. Intensity is always welcome, but misplacing it can cause a larger number of users to call the reviewer out for fanboyism and increase the chances of the review being bombed semi-legitimately. We know that everyone has bias to some degree towards the game they're reviewing, but don't give the worst of the internet more ammunition.

-1: Use of bad filler

Anyone, regardless of intention or skill, has used filler in their reviews. Filler is unnecessary content that is either repetitive, pointless, or irrelevant to the average reader. There are some good varieties of filler. Clarifying a point which in your opinion needs to be clarified doesn't necessarily constitute as filler. (Although, really, if you're having to resort to use of filler you should probably rewrite that section so that it clarifies the point better.) If there are issues with the game that aren't a variety typically seen in a game review, but in your opinion need to be addressed, then that doesn't necessarily count as filler either.

+1: Uses relevant visual aids

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. That doesn't mean you should flood a review with images. It's fine to include images in your review, just make sure they're relevant to what you're talking about.

-1: Doesn't link to image sources or hotlinks images

If you don't acquire an image through fair use, you need to link to its source. Fair use in this case includes but is not limited to images you personally own, and unwatermarked box art and screenshots. If there is a watermark or a copyright line in the image, you need to link to where you got the image. "Hotlinking" is where you don't host the image on your own space (imageshack, photobucket, etc.). Do not hotlink images. Hotlinking an image may result in lowering your Integrity rating. If you must include an image that is hosted elsewhere, download it and host it on your own space and link to the original source of the image in your review. There are several ways to link to an image source. One is to put a link around the image itself. However, it's better if you either include the link in the image's caption or include the link in a reference at the end of the review.

-1: Doesn't link to referenced text/verbal sources

If you refer to or quote something someone else said, you need to reference the source. For online resources, simply link to the page. If it's in print-only (such as a magazine) or is otherwise not publicly-available, link to the homepage of that publication.

-1: Doesn't sound confident with their own opinion

It's tough to publish your opinion for the rest of the world to see. However, if you don't sound confident in what you're writing, readers of your review won't trust your opinion.

+1: Uses acceptable spelling and grammar

Firefox has a built-in spellchecker. Use it. Don't use Firefox? Paste the review in something with a built-in spellchecker. You don't have to have perfect spelling and grammar, just make sure you put an effort in.

-1: Uses incorrect BBCode syntax

Reviewer Planet uses its own unique form of BBCode. This allows us to do things with text formatting that traditional BBCode can't. The syntax for some tags may work a little differently than what you use elsewhere. If your published review has publicly-visible errors in the BBCode, it will reflect badly on you. Preview and proofread your review before publishing it.

-1: Uses BBCode that messes with the page layout

Reviewer Planet's unique form of BBCode has the potential to be used improperly. When this happens, the page layout may be distorted or otherwise look differently than the rest of the site. This can happen even if there are not any BBCode syntax errors. Do NOT write BBCode that messes with the page layout. Publishing a review that messes with the page layout may result in lowering your Integrity rating.