This article was nominated for deletion on 7 June 2024. The result of the discussion was merge. |
This page was proposed for deletion by BrigadierG ( talk · contribs) on 26 April 2024. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I changed this article a bit, editing the parts about Demona's return to the castle, her deal with Macbeth as the deal with Puck.
I changed her to fictional magic users instead as she practiced sorcery and was not generally called a witch. RafikiSykes ( talk) 23:25, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Re this edit: Yes, we typically include a reception section. However, citing individual critics is frowned upon as it invites two huge problems.
First is cherry picking (whether intentional or not). By selecting individual reviews it is easy to purposefully (or accidentally) slant the article. This is familiar to anyone who has ever seen a movie poster or DVD cover: The movie was "Breathtaking! Amazing!" short for "Breathtaking in its stupidity, its amazing that anyone thought this was a good idea".
Second, as was likely the case with the Nostalgia Critic here, is promotion of the source. The Nostalgia Critic's reviews regularly pop up in movie articles with remarkably similar wording from random IPs, always with several links to our articles on the show, the reviewer, etc.
Our intent in a reception section is to provide an overview of general opinions about the subject. This is typically accomplished in one of two ways: review aggregation sites (rottentomatoes.com, metacritic, etc.) or articles that mention critical reception (while generally not being reviews themselves) "Critics found..." and such. - SummerPhD ( talk) 18:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Demona. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 20:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 7 June 2024. The result of the discussion was merge. |
This page was proposed for deletion by BrigadierG ( talk · contribs) on 26 April 2024. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I changed this article a bit, editing the parts about Demona's return to the castle, her deal with Macbeth as the deal with Puck.
I changed her to fictional magic users instead as she practiced sorcery and was not generally called a witch. RafikiSykes ( talk) 23:25, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Re this edit: Yes, we typically include a reception section. However, citing individual critics is frowned upon as it invites two huge problems.
First is cherry picking (whether intentional or not). By selecting individual reviews it is easy to purposefully (or accidentally) slant the article. This is familiar to anyone who has ever seen a movie poster or DVD cover: The movie was "Breathtaking! Amazing!" short for "Breathtaking in its stupidity, its amazing that anyone thought this was a good idea".
Second, as was likely the case with the Nostalgia Critic here, is promotion of the source. The Nostalgia Critic's reviews regularly pop up in movie articles with remarkably similar wording from random IPs, always with several links to our articles on the show, the reviewer, etc.
Our intent in a reception section is to provide an overview of general opinions about the subject. This is typically accomplished in one of two ways: review aggregation sites (rottentomatoes.com, metacritic, etc.) or articles that mention critical reception (while generally not being reviews themselves) "Critics found..." and such. - SummerPhD ( talk) 18:29, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Demona. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 20:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)