Difference between revisions of "Deadly Six"
From Sonic Retro
(Created page with "==Reception section in the intro paragraph== I legitimately don't get why this is here, it doesn't cite any sources on the arguments and genuinely comes off just like someone'...") |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
As I mentioned in an edit, Big and Elise (two of the most notoriously disliked characters in the series in the past) do not have sections like these are all, nor do any other characters who faced a lot of fan criticism in the past (Chip, Silver, Infinite, etc.). I'd also argue the sections for Chris and Cosmo are not warranted in their current state, either, as again, there are zero sources or anything to back this up and the wiki is asserting subjective claims from the nebulous source of "fan opinions" without citing anything. Not really an encyclopedic thing to do. [[User:BubbleRevolution|BubbleRevolution]] ([[User talk:BubbleRevolution|talk]]) 22:40, 19 December 2022 (EST) | As I mentioned in an edit, Big and Elise (two of the most notoriously disliked characters in the series in the past) do not have sections like these are all, nor do any other characters who faced a lot of fan criticism in the past (Chip, Silver, Infinite, etc.). I'd also argue the sections for Chris and Cosmo are not warranted in their current state, either, as again, there are zero sources or anything to back this up and the wiki is asserting subjective claims from the nebulous source of "fan opinions" without citing anything. Not really an encyclopedic thing to do. [[User:BubbleRevolution|BubbleRevolution]] ([[User talk:BubbleRevolution|talk]]) 22:40, 19 December 2022 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :It's a [[wikipedia:Template:By whom|by whom]] moment | ||
| + | :The lines should be referenced. If a reference can't be found, the lines should go. It's not an "unencyclopedic rant" - critical reception is notable, but it's a fair challenge to make. | ||
| + | :As to what that source looks like - you'd probably have to trawl through (p)reviews, and I suspect you're more likely to find indifference (though if you count the Sonic Retro forums as a measurement of opinion...) | ||
| + | :One vague plan I had for [[sega:Category:Reception|Reception]] page on Sega Retro was to have some prose to go alongside the raw statistics. e.g. "many reviewers thought the graphics sucked[1][2][3][4] but the music was widely prasied[5][6][7][8]". The reason that hasn't happened... is because it's a big job and my priorities lay elsewhere | ||
| + | |||
| + | :The wiki shouldn't itself be subjective, but it can document subjective opinions... if that makes sense. -[[User:Black Squirrel|Black Squirrel]] ([[User talk:Black Squirrel|talk]]) 08:45, 20 December 2022 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 09:45, 20 December 2022
Reception section in the intro paragraph
I legitimately don't get why this is here, it doesn't cite any sources on the arguments and genuinely comes off just like someone's personal rant rather than an actual informative section. If there was a reception section citing opinions from reviewers of the game or something, fine, but as it is it comes off as someone trying to speak authoritatively on "fan opinions" without any real sourcing to back it up and comes off completely subjectively.
As I mentioned in an edit, Big and Elise (two of the most notoriously disliked characters in the series in the past) do not have sections like these are all, nor do any other characters who faced a lot of fan criticism in the past (Chip, Silver, Infinite, etc.). I'd also argue the sections for Chris and Cosmo are not warranted in their current state, either, as again, there are zero sources or anything to back this up and the wiki is asserting subjective claims from the nebulous source of "fan opinions" without citing anything. Not really an encyclopedic thing to do. BubbleRevolution (talk) 22:40, 19 December 2022 (EST)
- It's a by whom moment
- The lines should be referenced. If a reference can't be found, the lines should go. It's not an "unencyclopedic rant" - critical reception is notable, but it's a fair challenge to make.
- As to what that source looks like - you'd probably have to trawl through (p)reviews, and I suspect you're more likely to find indifference (though if you count the Sonic Retro forums as a measurement of opinion...)
- One vague plan I had for Reception page on Sega Retro was to have some prose to go alongside the raw statistics. e.g. "many reviewers thought the graphics sucked[1][2][3][4] but the music was widely prasied[5][6][7][8]". The reason that hasn't happened... is because it's a big job and my priorities lay elsewhere
- The wiki shouldn't itself be subjective, but it can document subjective opinions... if that makes sense. -Black Squirrel (talk) 08:45, 20 December 2022 (EST)