So that all the StS reviews are uniform, there are certain elements each review must have. I also recommend viewing examples of already published reviews. This will serve as the official StS TV Reviews Style Guide, but since it is a wiki, feel free to make your own contributions and changes to it.
The synopsis is a one to two (and maybe three) sentence summary of the entire episode. Aim to be pithy and succint. Pickle's synopsis of I've Got You Under My Skin and Matthew's synopsis of Voices are good examples. The primary purpose of the synopsis is to spark a reader's memory who has already seen the episode before launching into an analysis of the episode.
The analysis is the heart of the review. Readers expect a thorough analysis, so it should be a minimum of three paragraphs, but we don't want to cause reader fatigue, so the loosely set maximum is eight paragraphs. The basic assumption is that the reader has already watched the episode, so don't bog down your review with needless summary but rather delve into an actual analysis of the episode.
Since the basic assumption is that the reader has already watched the episode and anyone choosing to read reviews before watching an episode should already be aware of the dangers, Matthew Miller chooses not to include spoiler warnings in his reviews, but, on the other hand, Pickle often includes spoiler warnings. If you include a spoiler warning, it will be formatted as a separate paragraph and in bold, but it does not count toward the paragraph count of the review. Yes, you still need at least three paragraphs plus a spoiler warning.
All reviews are somewhat subjective and naturally contain opinion (e.g. Matthew is evidently the only person in the world who hates The Wish), but StS TV Reviews are critical reviews rather than opinion reviews. Reviewers should be knowledgeable of common television conventions and story elements. Pickle refers to character development in Sense and Sensitivity and Matthew dissects plot structure in Voices, but discussion about the production staff (e.g. City Of and Lois & Clark Pilot), actors and actresses (e.g. Hero), and writers (e.g. Where the Wild Things Are) can also add flavor to your reviews.
Any review website can critically review television episodes, but StS also acknowledges that television series (whether intentional or not) have themes and messages that affect Christians. In our effort to encourage viewers to actively engage the mixed messages Hollywood is broadcasting, reviews should go beyond the plot and characters and analyze the themes of the episode and discussion on how they apply to a Christian. Since this is such a major part of the StS reviews, I will include several examples (please help by keeping this list up to date with the best examples):
The rating is a 0-10 score indicating the overall quality of the entire episode. The rating is probably the most subjective part of the entire review, so think of these as "guidelines" rather than rules. Whenever I begin reading reviews by a new writer, it takes time before I am familiar with their rating tendencies and can really get a feel for how I'm going to like something based on how high of a rating they gave it. Since StS has multiple writers, some guidelines are necessary so that the approach we all take to rating is similar enough that a reader knows what quality to expect merely by looking at the rating regardless of who wrote the review.
Most internet reviews are plagued with the tendency to rate too high. Rating too low really does not seem to be a problem except for seasoned professional reviewers who have literally seen thousands of horrible films. In order to avoid both tendencies as much as possible, begin each episode with a 5 assuming it will be just another average episode until you see something that convinces you otherwise. If you really like the characterization in the episode, that may bump it up to 6 for slightly above average. If you feel like the plot is unoriginal, that may bump it down to a 3 or 4 for below average. The ratings basically break down as:
You may want to either mentally or with pen and paper keep track of plus and minuses as the episode goes along adding/subtracting them to/from 5. I caution against using whatever number results from your tabulation as your final score. Consider the episode as a whole and make sure the rating adequately describes how you feel about the overall quality of the episode. In situations where it is especially unclear what the rating should be, look at the ratings for a few episodes before it. Was the episode better or worse than those episodes? Then rate the episode accordingly.
When rating an episode, compare it to other episodes of the same series but avoid comparing it to episodes of other series. This does not mean not comparing the episode to the conventions, forms, and archetypes of its genre. The exception is pilots. I usually go easy on pilots, since most pilots are bad or at least not near as good as the rest of the series. Rather than comparing a pilot to other episodes in the series, compare a pilot to other pilots.
Both 10 and 0 should be rare. Reserve a 10 for episodes approaching Citizen Kane perfection. An entire series should probably only receive a 10 once or twice if at all. Only use 0 when you can not find anything redeeming in the episode. 9 and 1 make similarly strong statements about the episode and should be used with caution.
With the admission that ratings are inevitably subjective, it goes without saying that they are not scientific. When I see websites doling out ratings like 7.43, I laugh. Really, what constitutes .43 of quality? For that reason, I usually stick with whole numbers. There will be situations, especially when you are comparing the episode with the ratings of other episodes in that series, that an x.5 best describes the quality of the episode. .1, .2, .3, etc., or going any finer than tenths such as .43 or .628 are just ridiculous. The only exception is the one-point distance between 9 and 10: If you're struggling with an episode that you think is better than 9 but not quite perfect, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, and 9.9 are fair game, but still avoid anything finer than tenths. If an episode is really 9.998, go ahead and give it a 10.
Include the rating along with a justification of the score you gave the episode in a full sentence in the last paragraph of the review. You may want to consult a thesaurus to find a variety of verbs you can use to introduce the rating and naturally work it into the review as Matthew did in this review: "Anne is a nice addition to the Buffy mythology, but as a standalone episode, it only garners 6 out of 10." Sometimes the more straight forward approach followed by a justification works best as Pickle did in Lonely Hearts: "I give the episode a 6 out of 10. It's not horrible but also not especially memorable." When published on StS, the rating will be bolded. In certain situations if the situation merits it, you can include the rating in a paragraph other than the last paragraph as Matthew did in the Lois & Clark Pilot since the last paragraph really refers to the series as a whole rather than the episode.
Objectionable content is a semi-optional element of the review. It immediately follows the analysis with its own heading but precedes spiritual content if present. It is "optional," because it won't be included in all reviews, but if the episode contains something that someone (even if you personally don't) may find objectionable, it should be included. It is your judgment call as to what may be objectionable. The objectionable content element is not for analysis of objectionable content (all analysis should be done in your analysis of the episode) or even a judgment on the watchability of the episode. Concisely state the objectionable content so that a reader can decide the watchability of the episode for himself. In some situations, for clarity, you may split the objectionable content into two or more paragraphs (e.g. Wild at Heart).
Again, mostly for uniformity of reviews, but also to maintain certain standards on StS, guidelines are necessary. These guidelines are fluid, and I encourage you to discuss them on the talk page and make changes to the below guidelines through the wiki.
Bad words, cuss words, curse words, dirty words, expletives, obscenities, profanities, swearing, vulgarities. Whatever you choose to call them and whether or not they offend you or not, since many Christians do find them offensive, if they're present in the episode, you need to mention it in objectionable content. For uniformity sake, use obscenity to describe "bad words" on StS reviews. Racist slurs and derogatory names should also be included in objectionable content. Examples: Somnambulist, Lois & Clark Pilot.
There is no need to count the obscenities as many review websites do--that's just a little too excessive. In most cases, simply indicating whether the episode does or does not contain foul language should inform a viewer enough to make the decision to watch the episode or not. Designations such as a** and b**ch are similarly cheesy and excessive. If you find it necessary to distinguish which words were used, use euphemisms such as "donkey" and "illegitimate child."
Objectionable content that should be indicated if present in episode: Sexually explicit dialogue (The Zeppo) or sexual innuendo (Neverending Battle). Sensual scenes (Bad Girls), sex including implied sex (The Harsh Light of Day), and nudity (Nikita).
Violence is offensive to some people. If the violence is particularly graphic or disturbing, it should be indicated. Example: Nikita, Friend.
Some people are offended by the portrayal of drinking (Lover's Walk), smoking (Beauty and the Beasts), and drug usage on television. If these are prevalent in the episode, they should be indicated. At your judgment call, other "bad habits" such as disrespectful attitudes and revenge (Neverending Battle) that would set bad examples for children watching may also be included.
Spiritual content is an optional element of the review. It immediately follows both the analysis and the objectionable content if present with its own heading. In some situations, for clarity, you may split the spiritual content into two or more paragraphs (e.g. Amends). It is difficult to define "spiritual content," and it will primarily be your judgment call as what if anything to discuss. Unlike objectionable content, some analysis will almost always be required to clarify the content discussed. Content discussed may include (but not limited to): occult practices and/or symbols (Goodbye Iowa), comparisons of religious concepts in episode to orthodox doctrine (Anne), depictions of "fictionalized" supernatural such as ghosts, and depictions of true life religious practices such as church and pastors/priests.