Revision as of 18:19, 27 September 2015 editSignedzzz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users20,559 edits →"Positive" Reception: r← Previous edit |
Revision as of 22:15, 27 September 2015 edit undoVaulter (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers20,662 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → |
Line 9: |
Line 9: |
|
::I'm not here for a conversation about what is or isn't an objective fact. Each of the quotes are a bit backhanded, in my opinion. So I'm leaving the neutrality tag until there's actual discussion about the content of the quotes, not impulsive "nope, you're wrong"s. (] (]) 17:03, 27 September 2015 (UTC)) |
|
::I'm not here for a conversation about what is or isn't an objective fact. Each of the quotes are a bit backhanded, in my opinion. So I'm leaving the neutrality tag until there's actual discussion about the content of the quotes, not impulsive "nope, you're wrong"s. (] (]) 17:03, 27 September 2015 (UTC)) |
|
:::There's nothing actionable in ], except, you could try adding another review. ] (]) 18:18, 27 September 2015 (UTC) |
|
:::There's nothing actionable in ], except, you could try adding another review. ] (]) 18:18, 27 September 2015 (UTC) |
|
|
::::He's saying it's an issue of ] to include only negative reviews when the show has received generally positive reviews, which I agree with. The section ought to be rewritten. ''']''' 22:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC) |
It reads contradictory to say that the show received positive reviews from critics, but then follow it (almost exclusively) with derisive quotes from critics. Any agreement to replace some of them with positive quotes to maintain Wiki neutrality? (Antinate (talk) 06:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC))