It's not my job to type this down for you. But here it goes: you wrote "Skin against skin/ covering bone of the body you’re in/ aggressively slim,”. If you had ears - or the lyrics booklet at hand - you'd hear and read that it's "Skin against skin, covering bone. The body you're in is aggressively slim".
This is just a minor complaint, the problem isn't with your score either, or the fact you dislike the album. Spin didn't like it much either, but was well reasoned with its critic and well, it's Spin. Your review clearly shows you haven't even listened to the record as a reviewer. At this point it isn't a big deal, but then you revelead you listened this from a leak, not only that, but less than 24 hours after the leaking of a bad quality rip, all this information taken from reading the message board of your review. Wikipedia is a place for professional reviews, not fan blogs of any kind. I've been reading your comments on the message board, you say you're not paid to write there and it's fine, but as passionate as you're for enjoying or not something, Wikipedia can't have the luxury of displaying your review just because "Sputnik reviews are accepted".
There's a line between writing a professional review and writing down what you did. The reason to Wikipedia have a place for reviews on music albums isn't to bump Sputnik's web traffic/street cred or give your ego a boost, it's here to give the Wikipedia users a fair idea of what the record by professional reviewers. Agreeing to give a link to your review here is the same as letting other poorly written - very positive or negative ones - accepted too. Sputnik has a good reputation, but isn't above the "can do no wrong" plateau in the review community, since it's a community based website written by unpaid music fans.
Positive or negative reviews aren't the point of the arguing. The point is if you're writing for a respected website, you can't just write whatever you want and call it a day. Sputnik reputation is based on how good the reviews usually are, being negative or positive views on the music albums you review. If your review is allowed just because it's published on Sputnik, what's next, there'll tumblr based websites have their say here too? KillYourStereo had an advance copy of this record more than one month ago, publishing a review 20 days ago. So who's the professional reviewer, you or the people from KillYourStereo?
I'll leave to the people of the Album Project to decide if your review makes the cut or not. It's nothing personal against you, it's just that reviews, positive or negative, must have a profissional quality to placed here, I'm not feeling that from yours, taking in consideration what's written on the review and on its the message board.
I know the only leak you could got one day before the release date. That's not even the main point. I'm not taking your review off. Altmusicreviews (talk) 21:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)