Quality of Park Reviews

JoeH wrote:

I no longer trust RVparkreviews due to their editing/censoring policies.

If you have actual evidence of RVParkReviews "editing/censoring" reviews other than to ask reviewers to tone down their rants and add other information about the park, I would be interested in seeing it.

In my experience the only people who get upset by our policies are those who can't understand why we won't publish their 500 word unedited diatribe about how badly they were treated at a particular park. Sending it back to them asking that they shorten the rant and, at the same time, provide some useful information about the park results in accusations of censorship.

In fact it's not censorship, it's what we call "maintaining a standard" for reviews. There are plenty of other review sites that don't do anything more than screen reviews for profanity; we try to do a bit more than that. We know many of our users appreciate it.

I've always used rvparkreviews.com and lately have also been using rvparky.com to compare reviews. I must say that we rarely have a problem finding a decent place because we're able to do our homework and read the reviews. I find them most helpful. As stated, filter out what's important to you, take an average, and try to identify a chronic whiner and complainer so they can be ignored.

I understand your dilemma. One thing you can do is check the dates of the reviews. Go with the latest dates if you can. Keep in mind that what happened that day does not mean it couldn't be different the next. Subtract what some say about the other campers. Noise, rudeness so on. Pay attention to condition's like ill repaired. Fire pit screens broken and such. Things that show signs of mismanagement and lazy workers. The best thing to do is call the park. Make a list of questions that are important to you. This may sound silly but ask if garbage bins are situated close to all sites. If you have to walk to the other side of the park to dump your garbage their not thinking about your comfort but your money. If they act bothered by your questions they defiantly are not interested in the comfort of their guests. I can go on but there it is. Happy camping!

GMandJM wrote:

There has been discussion that RVParkReviews has declined/rejected less-than-pleasant reviews, to the point where I no longer use or recommend that site. (Others will, of course, rush to their defense, for what that's worth.)

I prefer Trip Advisor for reviews and AllStays and RVParky when finding places to stay.

Recently Good Sam Club has started accepting RVer-written reviews, as well: RVerParkReviews.

I agree - I no longer trust RVparkreviews due to their editing/censoring policies. I rely on Tripadvisor the most. I also encourage folks to use tripadvisor to build up the volume of reviews

We find RV Parks Reviews much better than Trip Advisor. We also used the campsite photos a lot and found them very accurate.

For reviews we do as most folks do, strike the best reviews and the worst and go for the middle. We then eliminate things that don't pertain to us like free Wifi (we carry our own), pools (we don't use), etc. Everyone has different requirements.

docj wrote:

GMandJM wrote:


There has been discussion that RVParkReviews has declined/rejected less-than-pleasant reviews, to the point where I no longer use or recommend that site.

As an administrator of RVParkReviews I can personally attest to the fact that there are thousands of negative reviews posted on the site. It doesn't take more than a few minutes of searching the site to find scathing reviews of quite a few parks.

That being said, it is the policy of the RVPR that we will not post a review that is entirely a rant about a particular bad incident or occurrence. Reviewers are fully entitled to describe their bad experience and negative reactions in their reviews but the review must ALSO contain information useful to others even if they don't have the same bad experience.

For example, a common complaint at lots of parks is that someone's reservation is lost or the site type requested is not complied with. This is upsetting and definitely worth noting in one's review. But if the review contains nothing but a recounting of this experience then it is of no value to someone whose reservation works out OK. For that reason we ask reviewers to at least make some effort to provide additional information about the park.


We apologize if that simple request is too burdensome, but we believe it is important to provide our users with quality reviews. There are plenty of other sites that essentially post unedited reviews and anyone who finds RVPR's policies too difficult to comply with can always submit reviews to those.

Joel Weiss

Great to know, Joel. Thank you for your informational post here! I love RVreviews, BTW! I mainly use it to find RV Parks and compare prices in any locale. The positive or negative review gives me a heads-up on what I may expect too.

Thank you, AndyR's Rapid Response Team Member :B

GMandJM wrote:


There has been discussion that RVParkReviews has declined/rejected less-than-pleasant reviews, to the point where I no longer use or recommend that site.

As an administrator of RVParkReviews I can personally attest to the fact that there are thousands of negative reviews posted on the site. It doesn't take more than a few minutes of searching the site to find scathing reviews of quite a few parks.

That being said, it is the policy of the RVPR that we will not post a review that is entirely a rant about a particular bad incident or occurrence. Reviewers are fully entitled to describe their bad experience and negative reactions in their reviews but the review must ALSO contain information useful to others even if they don't have the same bad experience.

For example, a common complaint at lots of parks is that someone's reservation is lost or the site type requested is not complied with. This is upsetting and definitely worth noting in one's review. But if the review contains nothing but a recounting of this experience then it is of no value to someone whose reservation works out OK. For that reason we ask reviewers to at least make some effort to provide additional information about the park.


We apologize if that simple request is too burdensome, but we believe it is important to provide our users with quality reviews. There are plenty of other sites that essentially post unedited reviews and anyone who finds RVPR's policies too difficult to comply with can always submit reviews to those.

Joel Weiss

I ignore the star ratings and focus on the text of the reviews.

I look for the things important to ME -- not whether the reviewer liked those things.

For example, I don't care if there is a pool or good wifi or a spiffy new bathroom. And if there are a lot of long term people and the place is a bit run down I might feel right at home :). OTOH, if the staff are mean or cranky or impossible to reach, that I don't like.

I guess this sounds like I read reviews mostly for data, not so much for opinions. But I do find that reading multiple reviews from people who each see a place from a different perspective, does give me a pretty good overall sense of the vibe of a park, and that is important to me, too.

rr2254545 wrote:
Or after spending 42 years in the hotel business, I noticed time and again if a person found one thing wrong they went head hunting and soon everything was wrong

Personally I like the quality of reviews on Trip Advisor the best

X2. Trip Advisor is the best. We use both to get a good idea of what the truth is.