back to Completed Reviews

Site Name: Skylish
Owner: Catherine
Reviewed by: Georgina
Reviewed on: 20th August 2009

Site Name

It’s a lovely name and it’s easy to remember.

On a more personal note before I continue, I have heard such great comments about your website even though I have never had a proper look through, so I’m already guessing this is going to be a good review.

Coding and Validation

Your coding has 8 errors.

You’re forgetting to close a few divs. Also, instead of using tables for parts of your layout, use divs

Your CSS is valid. There are just a few warnings and errors mostly from the Lightbox Javascript.

Overall your coding is neat and I can’t spot any huge errors.

Browser Compatibility & Usability

Your site looks the same in most browsers, and it is navigable and functions in Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox and Safari.

I can view and navigate your website in Opera, but I’m unable to see the entire sidebar. I can’t actually pick out what the problem is – could just be my settings, or perhaps some elements of code.

The amount of images used on the layout aren’t a very good idea, especially when you are relying on many of them for navigation. The main downside is the loading of the images when the mouse is hovered over certain parts of the layout, which can be rather slow when on a slow connection. This is because the image isn’t loaded with the webpage but only on command when the mouse is hovered over certain parts.

Additionally, if images were turned off or not able to be viewed on your website, the visitor would have a bit of a hard time trying to get around – until they discover “site map”, which is a good addition, actually.

The navigation is actually pretty hard to spot when it’s at the side of the page. I think it could fit somewhere in your sidebar section on the left of the layout, rather than going down the page. It bugs me that the navigation doesn’t quite show the exact name of the sections, but all in all it’s a creative way to put it together. Personally it reminds me of the days when I used to follow a little theme and name my sections accordingly. I simply recommend making it stand out a bit more (with slightly bigger and bolder text) or placing it horizontally somehow.

The text size is fine and everything’s pretty easy to read.

I actually find the favicon distracting because it is animated… as cute as it is.

I looked at your site through this web page analyzer; I thought my computer was just slow but a few of the scripts and images are affecting the loading time a bit.

Layout

The layout catches my eye because it looks well designed, creative, and the colours are nice on the eyes. One thing I’d like to mention first is the width of the layout, which is rather wide. Keep in mind that people still use rather small screen resolutions and have these small resolutions on mobile devices, so often a narrower layout is preferable.

I really like the theme you have going on here; a magazine themed layout. What also catches my eyes is the CSS, and how you have introduced subtle elements of yellow and green, of less important parts, without distracting too much from the blue and white that makes up most of the layout. This also “fills up” the mass amount of white there is, reducing the “blinding impact” that would normally occur from too much white.

There’s actually nothing much to critique on this layout. The colours are great and everything is well put together. It looks great, and even though it has a relatively simple structure, it’s very unique with elements such as the navigation and background that make it stand out as something amazing.

Content

About Me

“Cheese” need not be capitalised.

Personally I’m not a fan of the subnavigation and the “dynamic” sidebar. At least yours is pretty obvious and stands out.

The favourites under “Random Facts” would look a bit neater in a list, but that’s your choice. It would look a bit more even because of the facts at the bottom being in a neat list.

Domain

This would be better named as “website” since not everyone is familiar with the term “domain”.
Under the affiliate application, to some level should be at some level or to some extent.

On the advertising page Furthur should be Further.

On the FAQ page, alot of applies should be a lot of applications.

On the site history page, as “Sweets” I came should be as “Sweets”, I came.

On the past layouts page:
more idea’s should be more ideas
complicated, just should be complicated; just
and go a lot should be and got a lot.

Visitor/Resources

Obviously I’ll be looking at downloads first.

I didn’t download all the brushes but they’re very nice and of good quality. You have them as an imagepack, and I think to save all the hassle of downloading a zip file and extracting the contents, you could link simply to the image. It might also be a good idea to have these in .abr format, if possible. (I use Photoshop and I actually don’t know how to create a brush out of an image, as simple as it may be – and some people are also lazy.)

The premade layouts look great and very unique. The second one reminds me of a previous layout of yours too. I think it’s quite considerate that you have included the size of the download.

I’m not such a huge fan of icon texture packages – as you probably already realised, I am quite a lazy person and opening my downloads folder and unzipping is something I don’t like doing – I like seeing everything there on the page. I’m sure other people would also feel the same.

On the scripts page, you have written Cher’s link as http:/randomiss-designs.com with only one slash so the link isn’t working.

These scripts and textures are lovely. The previews and examples are very nice as well. I don’t use scripts but they’re very nice.

The smilies are very cute; nothing much to say.

The textures look alright. They’re not the best and some of them are a little bit fuzzy.

I don’t see many web icons; yours are very unique and quite adorable!

Onto graphics. The backgrounds are impressive. The colours are not blinding or dull, and they’re in a nice range of colours too. They all tile well too.

Bullets – very cute.

The button templates are so much better than others that I have seen, even though they aren’t too useful because people make their own most of the time.

The icons are so simple but beautiful. I am amazed by the worded ones. I don’t really like the animated ones, but anything that moves can be a bit distracting.

The pixel signs are very nice but I don’t like the fact that some of them are animated.

The scribbles are nice.
want, a should be want; a.

The stock images aren’t really that good. The images are rather blurry and hazy. They look like nice pictures but the quality isn’t good.

I would hate to burst your bubble but on the wallpapers, Just Loose Control should be Just Lose Control. You’ve written 204 by 147 pixels, when the image is actually 936 by 682 pixels.

On the giving credit article:
alot should be a lot
a long should be along.

On the layout tips article:
idea’s should be ideas (and numerous other instances on this page)
accross should be across
then look should be then you look
atleast should be at least
proccess should be process.

On the pet peeves article, accross should be across. I must say that I agree with you on all your pet peeves, especially the font downloads one, which people are still doing.

On the site tips page:
accross should be across
see’s should be sees
everyweek should be every week
in, often should be in; often
someones should be someone’s.

On the celebrity images article:
reccomend should be recommend
afterall should be after all.
I commend you for writing this article from your point of view. I wrote a similar article and I was quite stubborn and forceful in it; I copped a lot of crap for that.

On the gaining confidence article:
beggining should be beginning
those group should be that group
notiation should be notion (I believe)
Dad’s and Mum’s should be Dads and Mums
sombody should be somebody
confidence?… should be confidence…?.

I didn’t really read through your English works or stories; I don’t want to be too critical or review them in such a way. On the stories divided into pages, the “go to page 2″ and links at the bottom of the page are quite large.

I found all your articles interesting to read. It’s always nice to read web-related and non-web related tips and articles from different points of view; yours was no exception.

Tutorials

Though I have heard so many good words about your tutorials I have never looked at them for myself. After looking through your layout tutorials I am amazed that you have shared some of your designs and how you go about making them. All your tutorials are easy to follow and the screenshots show most of the steps.

I giggled at the nodding smiley at the conclusion of your animated smiley tutorial.

On the image to brushes tutorial, explanitory should be explanatory.

On the rainbow tutorial, your done should be you’re done.

I don’t really like the effect of the vector tutorial; the vector looks quite patchy and not as good as other vectors I have seen.

The second vector tutorial is okay but the edges look a bit choppy.

The third vector tutorial is better; it does look slightly patchy and edgy but is the best overall.

The tutorials are all great. Though I wouldn’t really refer to them all myself, they’re well set out and are explained well; I know they have helped many people.

Originality & Creativity

You’ve got a lot of very creative and unique ideas for layouts and graphics. Though you have a lot of common content, it’s all defined by your personal style. I think your layout tutorials are very unique and you also have a few signature bits and pieces, such as the web icons and your style of smilies.

Organisation & Errors

I’m personally not used to your type of navigation but everything was extremely organised.

I spotted some mistakes in grammar and spelling. These can be easily fixed; I know it can be some hassle going through a spellchecker – but I didn’t mind going through and finding those mistakes.

Overall Comment

You’ve got a lovely site, Catherine. You had a layout that was impressive, and going through your content, I really enjoyed reviewing your website.

You have such a unique and creative flair, and your content is both useful and mostly high quality. You also have some articles, which is good variety, along with your written works.

I don’t see much you can improve on your website; it’s wonderful. I only had a few issues with browser compatibility – that was it. Keep up the great work.

Rating

(out of 5)