This user is a student editor in College_of_DuPage/Research_as_Narrative_(Spring_2019) . |
What up bro? Sick user page!
Hello Hunter2714
Monarnuvs (
talk)
05:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Hunter2714, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi! I wanted to explain why I removed the reception section on the article for the Smiley Face Killers. The ultimate reason is that neither IMDb nor Amazon are considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia, particularly when it comes to audience reception. Most sites that allow users to submit their own reviews will not be considered reliable, as the nature of the sites means that anyone can add a review and as such potentially sway the ratings into one direction or another. The same principle applies to the audience reaction scores on Rotten Tomatoes. It's not impossible that people could make a concentrated effort to sway the reviews into one direction or another and there have been several visible campaigns to do just that. Even then, these campaigns would only be of note if the news covered them enough to establish how the campaign was notable. Here are some examples of this:
There is also history on Amazon of authors hiring people to write positive reviews and there are also authors who will do a "quid pro quo" by giving another author a positive review if they give a positive review in turn.
In any case, these ratings aren't seen as notable as far as Wikipedia go unless there's coverage about the ratings on sites like this, so the only ones that should be used are reviews in places like newspapers or sites like the AV Club, as well as scholarly and academic sources. There is some information about this here and at the WikiProject for film. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 15:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
This user is a student editor in College_of_DuPage/Research_as_Narrative_(Spring_2019) . |
What up bro? Sick user page!
Hello Hunter2714
Monarnuvs (
talk)
05:20, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Hunter2714, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 18:09, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi! I wanted to explain why I removed the reception section on the article for the Smiley Face Killers. The ultimate reason is that neither IMDb nor Amazon are considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia, particularly when it comes to audience reception. Most sites that allow users to submit their own reviews will not be considered reliable, as the nature of the sites means that anyone can add a review and as such potentially sway the ratings into one direction or another. The same principle applies to the audience reaction scores on Rotten Tomatoes. It's not impossible that people could make a concentrated effort to sway the reviews into one direction or another and there have been several visible campaigns to do just that. Even then, these campaigns would only be of note if the news covered them enough to establish how the campaign was notable. Here are some examples of this:
There is also history on Amazon of authors hiring people to write positive reviews and there are also authors who will do a "quid pro quo" by giving another author a positive review if they give a positive review in turn.
In any case, these ratings aren't seen as notable as far as Wikipedia go unless there's coverage about the ratings on sites like this, so the only ones that should be used are reviews in places like newspapers or sites like the AV Club, as well as scholarly and academic sources. There is some information about this here and at the WikiProject for film. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 15:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)