Review: Vanesa @ Chosen Destinies
back to Completed Reviews
Site Name: Chosen Destinies
Owner: Vanesa
Reviewed by: Georgina
Reviewed on: 31st July 2009
Site Name
It’s not a bad name; it’s easy to remember.
Coding and Validation
Your HTML is valid. Great job.
Your CSS is valid.
Looking through your coding I don’t see any problems; your coding is excellent and flawless.
Browser Compatibility & Usability
According to Browsershots.org your site looks the same in most browsers.
The navigation is very nice and unique, but you’re using images. Specifying alt (as well as the title you already have) will make sure alternative text shows up, should the viewer be unable to see images.
The text appears fuzzy on my screen. I’ve looked at it in multiple browsers but it still has a slightly fuzzy quality. I also think the text should be a bit bigger. Because of the relatively large scale of the layout, slightly larger text would complement it.
Layout
It’s very unique and colourful. I have seen quite a few of your past layouts, and this one is just as colourful and extremely creative.
The header image is a little too big for my liking. A bit more overlapping of the image elements – the website name and the paint palette – would fit with the footer a bit more and reduce the size of the image a bit.
Content
On the page about your counter, Nostaligia and Nostaliga should be Nostalgia.
About
I’m not a fan of the dynamic sidebar but it’s good that you have included the links at the top of the page as well, without making things look cluttered.
Under the paragraph “Accessibility”, you have written C-D with a dash instead.
On the credits page, Juliebeans should be Julibeans. Since you have the sub navigation at the top of the About page in a line, I think it would be a good idea if you put it on every page in this section.
On the commenting page, you have written [I] and [I] and [Q] and [Q] – you have forgotten the slash.
name calling should be name-calling.
You’ve written C-D on the history page as well; I’m not sure if you prefer it without the dash or with the dash because you’ve written it both ways.
The sitemap is a nice addition.
Writings
I didn’t realise the Computer/Internet-Related Articles was a link. I’m not sure if other people would get confused.
On the Computer/Internet-Related Articles page, furthur should be further.
The CSS codes article is very basic; but still a good reference point.
The introduction to HTML is a 404. However, “HTML Help” (the title) leads to that page.
On part two, Locater should be Locator. Take note that people can use a left handed mouse, so “Right click” would be “Left click” for them.
w/ should be with.
On part three, the paragraphs are incorrect. You don’t end the paragraph with </p>.
On the article “Addicted”:
gotta should be got to
turn of should be turn off
websites.Whatever should be websites. Whatever
everyday should be every day
neopets should be Neopets
reccomended should be recommended.
Also, instead of writing <–Not too much, write it in brackets.
On the browser article:
google should be Google
IE users has should be IE users have
interagtion should be interaction
Name:Opera should be Name: Opera
interagted search should be integrated search
ect should be etc
urls should be URLs
acount should be account
mesenger acount should be messenger account.
On the Cookie Grabbers article:
them.They should be them. They.
On the email service article:
top three email service should be top three email services
calender should be calendar
alot should be a lot.
You might like to update the Image Hosts article with a screenshot of TinyPic.
reccomend should be recommend
Reccomended should be Recommended.
On the internet/computer tools article:
you lists should be you list
ect should be etc
a image should be an image
Kdding should be Kidding
engine:Google should be engine: Google
computer.It should be computer. It
On the online safety article:
Or ive should be Or give
you gave should be you give.
On the Spring Cleaning a PC article:
got through should be go through
yet! only should be yet! Only.
On the Getting More Traffic article:
goals is should be goals are
blog everyday should be every day.
The layout tips page doesn’t have a sidebar; you might want to fix that.
On the originality guide:
Originality big thing should be Originality is a big thing
sucess should be success
in it’s name should be in its name.
On the PHP includes article, Server Slide should be Server Side.
On the bandwidth article, you.If should be you. If.
On the website tips article, contents of your website is should be contents of your website are.
On the graphics page, crt should be Ctrl.
The page with your poem “Random Mike” also doesn’t have a sidebar; you might want to fix that as well.
Extras
The adoptables are cute and well made.
The backgrounds are nice. Some of them are brightly coloured and I don’t really like them, but they’re simple and are mostly of high quality.
Blank buttons are rather boring but these are nice.
The colour schemes are set out very nicely and you have chosen a nice range of shades.
The Neopets avatars aren’t very interesting; extra effects and some text would look better.
The blogs aren’t of great quality and look quite messy.
The scribbles look great; the colours are nice. Nothing much to complain about here.
On the obsessions (stuff) page, Stationary should be Stationery.
On the random writings page I can see target=”_blank”>Bagua – I’m sure you need to fix up the coding there.
Random
The content in this section is repeated in the “Extras”.
About Me
On this page non-existant should be non-existent
Originality & Creativity
Very original and creative. You have original articles and graphics and a very creative layout.
Some of the graphics were generic, like the Neopets graphics, but were otherwise well done.
Organisation & Errors
Well organised; no problems here. There were just a few careless mistakes in the articles and writings.
There were a couple of page errors that I pointed out.
Overall Comment
You’ve got an amazing website, Vanesa. It’s clean, neat and full of interesting and helpful articles. I didn’t spot many flaws, but there were quite a few mistakes.
The text appears a bit fuzzy, as I mentioned. It may just be my computer though.
Keep up the awesome work.
Vanesa
Thanks for this review! It was worth the wait. ^^
The Random section is supposed to take you to a random section, but that’s confusing and it’s going to take some extra work to change it to something else. Oh well.
The Layout Tips article and the Random Mike Poem don’t have sidebars because I didn’t include the footer correctly. :S
Again, thank you, and I’m off to fix those errors!
[Reply]