|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
personal twitter
My personal Twitter.
If you would like to be hosted by Skyline Illusions, please continue here for more information.
Recommended that you upload to your own server.
Site and content are original property and created by the owner. All sources are cited and questions, comments, or problems are to be sent to the owner directly. To read the full diclaimer please continue here.
background information
site: Fashionista
owner: Ally
reviewed: October 20th, 2008screen shot
The repeating image background is very obvious and doesn't flow well. Why does the white thing in the graphic randomly cut off?
The site name has been written across the graphic in a good place, but in a very boring font.
Why does the white... things (whatever it may be) that's protruding upwards randomly cut itself off? It looks bad doing that. Actually, the white thing in general just looks bad.
I think the sidebar links would just look a little bit better if they didn't look like the links in the main div.
tutorials;
There are several tutorials that continue to split off into subpages. They seem easy to follow and range
from a variety of topics.
Onto the graphics section.
In the rules along the top of the page dont should be don't, she needs an apostrophe, don't is a conjunction.
There's not line break between number seven and number eight
affiliate images;
People can make their own and there is nothing special about these.
buttons;
On the page they're listed as buttons, but when you follow that link, on their own page they're called linkable buttons.
People can make their own, I'm really sick of seeing these. There's nothing special or cool about them.
colour paletts;
Paletts should be palettes, there's an e before the s.
They're just two colors. While these may be sort of nice (thuogh they should have more colors on them), they don't belong in graphics, they belong in resources.
Why are there only three per page? That's pointless.
emotions;
everyone else calls them emoticons. These are nice, but it's just the same set repeated over and over
in different colors.
fonts;
She didn't make these and she doesn't link to who actually did make them. It's stupid and annoying
when sites offer "fonts they like" but don't even bother to link visitors to the ACTUAL OWNERS.
Why, oh why, are these in the graphics section?
icons;
Not attractive at all. These have had absolutely no time spent on them or effort put into them.
PNGs;
Down =(
Take it off of the list then!
web icons;
Why aren't these with icons? Are the other icons not for the web? Oh, I see, these are little symbols
like a letter, a computer, cell phone, clock, aim logo. How cute. These are really nice! I wish
it wasn't the same set repeated over and over in different colors.
reviews;
I think Ally has decent knowledge to offer reviews, especially for CSS! I'm not too sure about graphics though.
On the rules page, in rule number six, your should be you're.
Noo! GRADING people is DEGRADING! You get graded on first impresion, design/coding, content, layouts, errors/concerns, and extras (bonus points.) Then she even has the audacity to give out those stupid graphics that are "1 out of 5 stars" and so on.
How rude!
Why is layouts a section? She never said you had to offer layouts if you wanted to be reviewed.
Here. I will treat her the way she treats reviewees. I won't write much about each section though, since you can read about each section all over this review.
First Impression: 5 points. I wasn't too impressed with the errors in the
graphic and the obvious repeating background.
Design/Coding: 2.5 points. She uses an external style sheet, so I can only giver her
partial credit.
Content: 10 points. Color palettes and fonts don't belong under graphics,
she didn't link to the font owners/creators, the avatars were not well made...
Layouts: 0 points. She doesn't have any!
Errors/concerns: 1 point. I already pointed out errors and her lack of
linking, her poorly made avatars, and her blatant graphic mistakes.
Extras: 0 points. Nothing is that great.
total score: 18.5 points.
Down where she gives you those stupid stars along the bottom, sites should be site's.
On her exit page only one site is listed for brushes. No original image site sare listed. She has seriously slacked on her credits.
Nix the font page! They're not hers and she hasn't even taken the time to link us to the actual owners.
More enthusiasm into the graphics!
Take PNGs off of the list until they're actually made...
Proof reading is so, so nice.
Her reviews are rude and degrading. She only scored an 18.5 using her own system.
This cbox is for visitors to comment about the sites that have been reviewed. It is not for visitors' complaints, defending of friends, telling me how to review sites, or for juding my site. If you want to do one of those listed above, feel free to e-mail me at skylineillusions@yahoo.com which is the site e-mail that I check frequently; I don't feel as if there is a need for any one to e-mail me over these reviews, though. I check this cbox about once every two weeks, usually only if one of my friends says "Go look at that cbox!"