I will probably regret this post. But I don't really understand the controversy.
Yes we are on Disc Golf COURSE Review. However! We all know this site also has other DG-related features - including disc shops, profile pages, and most significantly this forum.
I don't mind practice baskets being listed on this site *and categorized separately as practice areas*, which they already are.
I agree with what I think the OP may be getting at...I don't know that standalone practice areas need reviews. It seems to me that a description on the course info page and a couple of photos might be enough. On the other hand, if practice area reviews are allowed as they currently are, that doesn't bother me either. Just like a course review, I would read a practice area review and look at the rating, but mainly look at the description in the review to make a determination on whether to go play. And sure if there are courses with practice areas on site nearby, I'm probably picking that 10 times out of 10.
If I played a practice area and bothered to review it, personally I would review it in the context of it being a practice area and not a course. Of course a practice area is a terrible "course". Everyone agrees on that, I think? But there are still a couple things to like or dislike about it, in my view. Is the basket(s) in good shape? Is it on a hillside? Is the entire circle 1 and circle 2 clear, as the review in question answers? Are there trees or obstacles in the practice area? I personally like it when there are trees in a practice area, which I have seen a couple times at courses (Flip City comes to mind). It gives me an opportunity to practice putting around them like I will have to on a good course.