Forum:Story pages should have reception sections: Difference between revisions
m (moved Forum:Reception to Forum:Story pages should have reception sections: changing title so that when it goes to archive, people will immediately know what thread is about) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
:'''''"Ever wanted to see how much Daleks in Manhattan sucked, now you can with TARDIS reception sections!"''''' | :'''''"Ever wanted to see how much Daleks in Manhattan sucked, now you can with TARDIS reception sections!"''''' | ||
Seeing as we don't really have many behind the scenes sections, I would like to propose that we introduce sections for critical reception onto episode pages. Obviously, they would have to be rigorously sourced and [[tardis:Manual of Style#Sources|couldn't make use of personal blogs]]. The sources would have to be reputable ones, such as newspaper reviews. Wikipedia do a similar thing with films; [[wikipedia:The King's Speech#Critical response|here's an example]]. So what do you think?--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 15:01, July 15, 2011 (UTC) | Seeing as we don't really have many behind the scenes sections, I would like to propose that we introduce sections for critical reception onto episode pages. Obviously, they would have to be rigorously sourced and [[tardis:Manual of Style#Sources|couldn't make use of personal blogs]]. The sources would have to be reputable ones, such as newspaper reviews. Wikipedia do a similar thing with films; [[wikipedia:The King's Speech#Critical response|here's an example]]. So what do you think?--{{User:Skittles the hog/sig}} 15:01, July 15, 2011 (UTC) | ||
I'm incredibly wary, if not outright opposed. I don't really see reviews as "behind the scenes" sections. Not to mention someone will invariably use forum posts or blogs or "some circles of fans" even ''with'' all the rigourous sourcing. Even though I agree I need to be more critical about the faults of the Whoniverse's writing, I'd still rather make my own conclusions on episodes rather than listen to either the fans or critics. And I really hate the idea of "proving" something sucking or ruling based on consensus of what others think. Awards and AI figures I think are enough. [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] 15:17, July 15, 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:17, 15 July 2011
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
- "Ever wanted to see how much Daleks in Manhattan sucked, now you can with TARDIS reception sections!"
Seeing as we don't really have many behind the scenes sections, I would like to propose that we introduce sections for critical reception onto episode pages. Obviously, they would have to be rigorously sourced and couldn't make use of personal blogs. The sources would have to be reputable ones, such as newspaper reviews. Wikipedia do a similar thing with films; here's an example. So what do you think?--Skittles the hog - talk 15:01, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
I'm incredibly wary, if not outright opposed. I don't really see reviews as "behind the scenes" sections. Not to mention someone will invariably use forum posts or blogs or "some circles of fans" even with all the rigourous sourcing. Even though I agree I need to be more critical about the faults of the Whoniverse's writing, I'd still rather make my own conclusions on episodes rather than listen to either the fans or critics. And I really hate the idea of "proving" something sucking or ruling based on consensus of what others think. Awards and AI figures I think are enough. Tybort 15:17, July 15, 2011 (UTC)
