The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
okay, I while back I wrote a Magnolia review and was much annoyed to see that the koala had already posted one that seemed remarkably similar... On looking through this mysterious poster's reviews the range of language and variance in styles gave rise to a number of concerns. So I investigated....
Using the google search and picking out key phrases in each review I was able to source almost every review to a different film site, for anyone who was piiped to the FAD post here's a few examples:
Magnolia review:
http://www.gary.gray.clara.net/reviews/magnolia.htm
Romeo must die:
http://www.mightybeastman.homestead.com/files/RomeoMustDie.htm
Both of these reviews among others, Erin Brockivich, American Beauty and Three Kings, are written by a person named Joseph C Tucker, who happens to live in America, wonder why he's trying to win region 2 DVDs?
The Gladiator Review can be found at:
http://www.apnaguide.com/review/22719
This one is written by one Rahul, or loverboy4u as his user name appears to be.
Finally a third alias enters the fray, one Norman Chan, author of the Black and White review:
http://www.game-guru.net/reviews/blackandwhite/index.shtml
Maybe this is a mean, vindictive thing to do but plagiarism should not be tolerated. Some people have spent a long time writing intelligently, only to be deprived by someone else who copies the reviews of an exceptionally talented reveiwer who lives in America. This copying appears to be systematic and is entirely deplorable.
Atomic_Koala, if you live in America and do this for a bit of a laugh, or write at different sites under different aliases then hey, I'll buy you a DVD myself to make up. If you are someone who trawls the net looking for other people's reviews then never underestimate the power of the google search engine and try not to vary the language so much between the masterpiece of the Billy Elliot review and the slightly dodgy prose of the Gladiator review. Oh yeah, and never refer to your 'editor' telling you to finish a review... bit of a give away...
Using the google search and picking out key phrases in each review I was able to source almost every review to a different film site, for anyone who was piiped to the FAD post here's a few examples:
Magnolia review:
http://www.gary.gray.clara.net/reviews/magnolia.htm
Romeo must die:
http://www.mightybeastman.homestead.com/files/RomeoMustDie.htm
Both of these reviews among others, Erin Brockivich, American Beauty and Three Kings, are written by a person named Joseph C Tucker, who happens to live in America, wonder why he's trying to win region 2 DVDs?
The Gladiator Review can be found at:
http://www.apnaguide.com/review/22719
This one is written by one Rahul, or loverboy4u as his user name appears to be.
Finally a third alias enters the fray, one Norman Chan, author of the Black and White review:
http://www.game-guru.net/reviews/blackandwhite/index.shtml
Maybe this is a mean, vindictive thing to do but plagiarism should not be tolerated. Some people have spent a long time writing intelligently, only to be deprived by someone else who copies the reviews of an exceptionally talented reveiwer who lives in America. This copying appears to be systematic and is entirely deplorable.
Atomic_Koala, if you live in America and do this for a bit of a laugh, or write at different sites under different aliases then hey, I'll buy you a DVD myself to make up. If you are someone who trawls the net looking for other people's reviews then never underestimate the power of the google search engine and try not to vary the language so much between the masterpiece of the Billy Elliot review and the slightly dodgy prose of the Gladiator review. Oh yeah, and never refer to your 'editor' telling you to finish a review... bit of a give away...
Page:
Out of interest, how many people clicked this thread thinking it was "Atomic Kitten Exposed"?
Or is it just me?
Or is it just me?
Goatboy wrote:
> I'm with everyone else on this.
Reviews are a way of expressing your own
> voice. The chance to give your view on something, and that review should always
> be in your style of writing.
Be it jokey or serious, you can always tell when
> someone is not being "true" to themselves, because the reviews sound
> different to the usual talking style.
Check someone's stats here and go read
> their reviews, usually you'll find they all have a certain style.
It's when
> they suddenly become overly-wordy and stuffed with purple prose that warning
> bells go off.
I like reading other people's reviews, it gives me a peek into
> who they are and to plagiarise is wrong and insulting.
(go read my Jaws review
> for an example of how plagiarism should look)
Write your own stuff, otherwise
> you are the Hearsay of FOG
And WHO wants to be the Hearsay of this? What a shameful title!
> I'm with everyone else on this.
Reviews are a way of expressing your own
> voice. The chance to give your view on something, and that review should always
> be in your style of writing.
Be it jokey or serious, you can always tell when
> someone is not being "true" to themselves, because the reviews sound
> different to the usual talking style.
Check someone's stats here and go read
> their reviews, usually you'll find they all have a certain style.
It's when
> they suddenly become overly-wordy and stuffed with purple prose that warning
> bells go off.
I like reading other people's reviews, it gives me a peek into
> who they are and to plagiarise is wrong and insulting.
(go read my Jaws review
> for an example of how plagiarism should look)
Write your own stuff, otherwise
> you are the Hearsay of FOG
And WHO wants to be the Hearsay of this? What a shameful title!
LOL@JAWS REVIEW
I'm with everyone else on this.
Reviews are a way of expressing your own voice. The chance to give your view on something, and that review should always be in your style of writing.
Be it jokey or serious, you can always tell when someone is not being "true" to themselves, because the reviews sound different to the usual talking style.
Check someone's stats here and go read their reviews, usually you'll find they all have a certain style.
It's when they suddenly become overly-wordy and stuffed with purple prose that warning bells go off.
I like reading other people's reviews, it gives me a peek into who they are and to plagiarise is wrong and insulting.
(go read my Jaws review for an example of how plagiarism should look)
Write your own stuff, otherwise you are the Hearsay of FOG
Reviews are a way of expressing your own voice. The chance to give your view on something, and that review should always be in your style of writing.
Be it jokey or serious, you can always tell when someone is not being "true" to themselves, because the reviews sound different to the usual talking style.
Check someone's stats here and go read their reviews, usually you'll find they all have a certain style.
It's when they suddenly become overly-wordy and stuffed with purple prose that warning bells go off.
I like reading other people's reviews, it gives me a peek into who they are and to plagiarise is wrong and insulting.
(go read my Jaws review for an example of how plagiarism should look)
Write your own stuff, otherwise you are the Hearsay of FOG
Me thinks Atomic Koala has returned as the newbie Gabbo, tsk tsk. If it is him then he's a cheeky little git, he's trying to win the extra GAD competition in Prime.
If it's not him then I apologise but i'm preety sure it is.
If it's not him then I apologise but i'm preety sure it is.
it is bad when that stuff happens, I don't feel cheated because I don't feel any of my posts/topics/cheats/reviews are of the required calibre to win anything on this site because the standard is high. I myself didn't plan any of my measly 2 reviews which is obvious to anyone who may have read them but it it is slghtly annoying when someone has put in marginally less effort than someone like me and won prizes for it when there are pople who don't copy professionals work and try to pass it off as their own work.
I seem to have lost the point I was trying to make.
anyway it is bad for all those people who worked hard on their contributions thatfeel they were cheated out of a chance of winning gameaday.
In the words (or voice) of mister mackay
"cheatings bad mmmmkay"
I seem to have lost the point I was trying to make.
anyway it is bad for all those people who worked hard on their contributions thatfeel they were cheated out of a chance of winning gameaday.
In the words (or voice) of mister mackay
"cheatings bad mmmmkay"
Personally I agree with Kitty on this one; reviews take a great deal of time to write and research -though my research usually consists of watching the film again- a film review. Having said that many of the posts that win FAD are of an equal standard. If there's two prizes for GAD, and games are more expensive, it makes sense to have two FAD's as well...
On another note, mainly the watching out that you don't end up paraphrasing the sites from where you researched a review... My economics teacher is always saying that copying one person's homework is plagiarism, whereas copying segments of several people's homework is original research.. not that I copy homework or anything, I usually end up being copied, which is quite annoying.
On another note, mainly the watching out that you don't end up paraphrasing the sites from where you researched a review... My economics teacher is always saying that copying one person's homework is plagiarism, whereas copying segments of several people's homework is original research.. not that I copy homework or anything, I usually end up being copied, which is quite annoying.
Page: