49,076
edits
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
:There are enough sites where we, the fans, can toss our opinions on shows, et al, at each other. Please skip the critical reviews. I think you will be opening a swamp full of quick sand, even limiting it to 'official' reviews. [[User:Mgailp|MGailP]] 04:15, July 17, 2011 (UTC) | :There are enough sites where we, the fans, can toss our opinions on shows, et al, at each other. Please skip the critical reviews. I think you will be opening a swamp full of quick sand, even limiting it to 'official' reviews. [[User:Mgailp|MGailP]] 04:15, July 17, 2011 (UTC) | ||
: | : | ||
:I do reviews of Dr. Who on the IMDB and | :I do reviews of Dr. Who on the IMDB and get an extremely mixed reaction. Certainly, a lot of professional reviewers who tackle Dr. Who seem to miss the point. For the classic series they miss a lot and see the cheap production values. For the modern show they see the production values and the audience ratings which, while enjoyable ''are not the point of the show.'' People who come here are perfectly capable of making up their own minds as to what they like and dislike, even if they lack skills in composition. I think that, as we try to avoid citing something here as fact until it is nailed down flat, we should avoid posting opinions.[[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] 00:18, July 18, 2011 (UTC) | ||
==I'm on the fence== | ==I'm on the fence== | ||
Conditionally in favour if done ''right'' and ''well'', but too many personal points against to actually say "Yes we should". 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. I'd also qualify ranked episodes in magazine polls as non-reviews. [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] 15:17, July 15, 2011 (UTC) | Conditionally in favour if done ''right'' and ''well'', but too many personal points against to actually say "Yes we should". 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. I'd also qualify ranked episodes in magazine polls as non-reviews. [[User:Tybort|Tybort]] 15:17, July 15, 2011 (UTC) |
edits