See this thread from a subforum in which only Snow White has the right to reply to posts:
(Although the Organ Grinder has given the monkeys the power to hide "reviews" that do not abide by the guidelines of the site, he has neglected to let us reply to those who report them. Probably an oversight.)

For future reference/discussion, this is the text of the submission by Ethelred, referred to by the OP, and which I am now going to hide:

"Ethelred The Unsteady left this review about Hoxton Pony
Following the release of the "Paradise Papers" on offshore tax avoidance, the Guardian writes of one "James Mellon and his London bar". It says:

"The arch-Brexiteer and Isle of Man tax exile is a proprietor of a cocktail bar in one of London’s hippest neighbourhoods – the Hoxton Pony in Shoreditch.

In 2007, he teamed up with his longstanding business partner, the Canadian billionaire Stephen Dattels, to become a co-partner in the venture.

Rather than invest directly in a British business, Mellon created a layered structure. The bar was run by a UK-registered company, Calabrese House Ltd, which was entirely owned by an Isle of Man company, Calabrese Holdings Ltd, which had four equal shareholders.

Mellon and Dattels provided the funds, investing £500,000 each. They each held 25% via the Isle of Man. And it was the Manx vehicle that would pay out any dividends. If the bar was ever sold at a profit by its Manx parent, there would be no corporation tax to pay – because the Isle of Man does not tax company profits.

The leaked files show Appleby suggesting various ways this structure could help minimise tax. Mellon’s representative said the recommendations had not been acted on. The financier told the Guardian the bar had never made a profit, and that “the Calabrese investment has not been a good one”.

There are no tax advantages to holding the business outside the UK, according to Denham Eke, managing director of Mellon’s Isle of Man based Burnbrae Group. He added: “The reason we used an Isle of Man holding company is that we operate from the Isle of Man. It is our domicile and it is where we have our accounting and support infrastructure.”

Gerardo Calabrese, who runs the bar and holds a quarter share, said the dual Manx and UK structure was for convenience, for “minimising any cost duplication”, and had nothing to do with avoiding tax. Dattels did not respond to an emailed request for comment..."

So there you go, boys and girls.

No, I know this isn't a regular review, but neither are the ones which just say "Wasn't open when I called" etc., but which remain. Some people also might like to know something about the ownership and management of a place, before deciding to give it their custom.

On 13th November 2017 - no rating submitted
[User has posted 114 recommendations about 112 pubs]"

If Ethelred is reading this, he should note that reviews that state simply "wasn't open when I called" are also likely to be hidden if that's really all they say. If they say "wasn't open when I called although their website says it should have been", this is information that might well be useful to potential users of the pub.

"As is the information in my review", no doubt Mr Unsteady would reply. OK, but it would be better supplied by a link to the original article from which he obtained the information, either in the body of the review thus: "Information about the ownership structure of this bar was included in the Paradise Papers. Those interested can find it at page reference here" or simply by adding the link to the page (in the appropriate box). It will then be up to one of the Seven Dwarfs to either approve it or refer it to His Majesty for a decision. Personally, I would approve it as I don't see that it's any different to adding a link to the heritage pubs website, for example; it's information not polemic. Other dwarfs might think differently. Either of the above courses of action would be better than writing the "review" which has now been hidden.

I welcome comments on this subject, as some might feel I am being too high handed.