I think the best thing I've done lately is subscribe to the above.
Thinking about a sonnet a day is a much better study than reading the sonnets
hyper-sequentially in one sitting. And because I'm crazy, I think the sonnets
they started sending me, 117,118... have direct relevance to my life, especially
previous thought events. And I'm not saying that it's universal, I'm just announcing that receiving a sonnet a day from shakespeare is the best thing I've done. If only you could be in a 16th century village with a laptop, perhaps
under no one's knowledge, receiving sonnets a day as you sip a homemade brew in the morning and download beethoven? Alright, I forgot what I was trying to say.

I'm not sure how this relates to the reviewing process, unless you use the sonnets as a benchmark to measure other poetry against. But the range of poetry covers so much more than sonnets, that I'm not sure how useful that would be.

I do, however, read published fiction with a critical eye. When I come across a passage that doesn't hold my interest well, or is confusing, I think about how I would rewrite it if it were my own work.

Perhaps I can assure you? I think people on these forums whose focus is poetry want
to avoid writing doggerels. Shakespeare is barnone. When reviewing, I think a person
uses standards to measure the writing against. Merely reviewing poems on these forums creates no real ultima thule. Not that this is the Shakespearian competition, but i think any
aspiring poet on our forums would like to emulate a past great in his/her expression. I opine that no one here presents a durable standard. Reviewing is emphasized as most important here, before creating. Reviewing should have a standard. Many reviewers here
come from different backgrounds and levels of education, but all volunteer in the same spirit. Often, reviewers could improve their literary knowledge, thus allowing a more pertinent review. Because volunteers only have so much time, I suggested Shakespeare sonnet a day, to improve everyone. I don't even think you can recite the sonnets from memory. Sonnets would not be useful as a benchmark against the typical doggerels.
I hope you have found this retort pertinent and appreciate its attention to your previous reply.

Yes, what I was looking for was how the suggestion relates to the reviewing process. I certainly agree that Shakespeare was a master of words (duh!). However, his writing style is of course archaic. That makes it difficult to see where studying his works will improve either one's writing or reviewing skills, without some thoughts on where to focus.

As written, the post seemed more relevant to Book Reviews, or perhaps General Writing - although even there, the relevance was not made very clear.

Well, perhaps move this to more appropriate section, or delete it. My comments are sometimes more relevant for blogging. I'm not so archaic to these forums.