THE Group for Authors! discussion

Authors have no ability to delete reviews. That can only be done by the user who wrote the review, or if that person's account is deleted, the associated review is also deleted.

Another scenario is that sock puppet accounts were being created to rate the book and GR detected the fake accounts and they were deleted - which then removes their reviews/ratings.

A.W. wrote: "Another scenario is that sock puppet accounts were being created to rate the book and GR detected the fake accounts and they were deleted - which then removes their reviews/ratings."

Yes, this must have been what happened.

Peter, if you scroll to the bottom of the book page, you will see a discussion with the title "Negative reviews are fake".

Starting next week, I hope to initiate a discussion on this group about reviews.
What makes a good review? For me, it's not how many stars the reviewer awarded.
As a rule, I don't GIVE sub-three star reviews except in unusual cases, where the author changed the name from a previously published edition and didn't indicate that. I know how much sweat and anxiety goes into publishing a book! I'll let someone else stick the knife in.
If I continued to read to the end, that book deserves at least a 3-star review. Those that don't deserve such, I abandon as soon as I lose interest. There are far too many books available now for me to waste my remaining time. As to 'abandoning a book', I view that as being equivalent to putting one back on the library shelf after examining it. Not really a question of 'good' or 'bad', just that it wasn't what I was looking for.
A good review is a fair review.
It might discuss grammar and spelling, for example; for a long time, that was an issue that troubled many independent authors/publishers. It seems to me that the issue is less common now, but if it's present to an objectionable degree, it should be mentioned.
A good review looks at character development. That one is pretty subjective. Was the character interesting? I rarely use this when reviewing, because if a character isn't someone I would be interested in, I move on to the next book.
A good review looks at the plot, and how it added to or subtracted from the story. Did sequences follow a logical progression and arrive at a reasonable conclusion to the book? This is particularly important when the book is a mystery. Were there subtle clues that the reader saw, but paid little attention to at the time? That's usually necessary; springing the solution on the reader at the last minute, with no pre-preparation, is reason enough not to buy a book by that author in future.
What are your thoughts on this issue?

Jack, it is better to start a new topic on this, as this thread discusses something else and also is linked to a specific book.

Jack wrote: "Starting next week, I hope to initiate a discussion on this group about reviews.What makes a good review?"

Yikes. I hope you will be donning flame proof undies while initiating a discussion about how readers should review. Reviews are reader opinions. Readers are under no obligation to review in a certain manner, heck they don't even have to finish a book if it doesn't appeal. A mere three words that say "I hated it" is just as valid a review as any other.

For whatever reason, the vast majority of avid readers choose to never post a rating or review on a literary website or periodical. Those that do are merely sharing their personal, and therefore, subjective opinion with fellow readers, not the author.

Authors would be better served to focus upon striving to continuously improve upon their technical writing and narration skills and self-marketing efforts rather than obsessing over ratings and reviews of their work.