Topic on Talk:Qualitipedia

There's no point of this continuing going forward. --DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Overturned. In spite of a somewhat inflammatory title this is not a bad topic nor should it be approached with the sensitivity that's been given to it. He very well should get on our case if our content is crappy. Reviews change over time, and so the basic status of articles on wikis could very well become obsolete and that needs to be recognized and reviewed. Regarding sources, that is why using *multiple* of them, ideally based on longer term data is best. Any form of criticism is welcomed but then we close this when we don't feel like addressing it anymore? That's silly. Please allow it to run its course. --Raidarr (talk) 09:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Again, this is old, so you might as well resolve it. FatBurn0000 (sandbox | CentralAuth) 02:53, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

I think handful of articles on Qualitipedia are misleading, I prefer Wikipedia and the CLG Wiki.

I don't get why you're getting on our case about the articles we make and moderate. Some legit criticism would be absolutely invaluable (helping us tone down the misleading information by entirely mitigrating the likeliness of false information).

elaboration on your concerns i.e. examples would be more appreciated.

The Awful Movoes Wiki includes the last three Star Wars Skywalker Saga movies which are box office hits, The AMW's perspective on the last three movies are full of right-wing talking points and unnecessary negative mockery of The Walt Disney Company, Lucasfilm, Kathy Kennedy, J.J. Abrams and Rian Johnson.

There's no legitimate proof of right-winged bullshit being in there as you claim.

maybe he refers here https://awfulmovies.miraheze.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_The_Rise_of_Skywalker to the racial stereotypes thingy (inside point 11) and point 21 saying it panders to LGBT

Yep, I was referring to the Awful Movies Wiki article about Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.

I'll be off to bed shortly, but I think it's time I close this topic.

wait what why, i was literally just starting to adress his actual question aaaaa

I don't see how it panders to LGBT.

panders or not is not what i was going for. instead, i was trying to see if he was refering to both of these points.

All nine Star Wars Skywalker Saga movies are box office hits.

Box office hit does not necessarily mean they were recieved well in critique, which is a significant part of what the wikis are after. But I agree that the pages should be reviewed, especially as iirc TFA was generally received well and TLJ was more controversial but needs to be assessed for how it is placed and written. TROS, however, I find it difficult to see moving. Either way it may be more warranted to create a page discussing the controversy rather than breaking down the movies individually if they do not fit.

@MJ2003 Now now, I've heard WAY too many people complaining about our articles, and suffice it to say, it went nowhere. Also, why even bother going to the wikis if you don't like them? Why not just entirely focus on the CLG wiki, rather than try to moan and groan about them being on the wiki(s)?

o you answered while i was writing :p

IMO his inquiry is valid, if someone has a question like this and have already (somewhat) elaborated, then "go away" isn't the attitude to have, especially without adressing anything the person is saying. we should be tolerant on these inquiries, aren't y'all being accused of "not accepting criticism" in the rants anyway?

@Yonydesk While I understand he has a valid concern, but I doubted his statement to ever be true. Suffice it to say, he replied below understanding what I wrote. Also, regarding that last bit, that's what a lot of users said about us in the past. ThePackagedReviewer's rant was more about criticism, and wouldn't tolerate anyone harassing Miraheze users.

maybe he understood what you meant but it does kinda deviates from what the original topic's question was, and what i tried to make him elaborate with my first reply

@DarkMatterMan4500 That's a fair point.

what point though :thonk:

He's referring to my point above about him focusing on other wikis. And I believe you didn't read the message above saying that any form of criticism is absolutely welcomed.

> my thonk message: 9 minutes ago

> that other message: 7 minutes ago

can't read things from the future

but yeah fair, i was more worried that he'd take it the wrong way but he didn't, that's good (and lucky maybe)

"Why even bother going to these wikis if you don't like them?"
That's a ridiculous thing to say IMO. When someone criticises these wikis, we shouldn't say something like "If you don't like it, leave" because that will just make more users dislike these wikis, and it if anything proves that we can't take criticism (as Yonydesk mentioned).

Yeah, but I'm talking about those who just chooses to shit on us and harass us. If it was for criticism, then that's a different story.

@DarkMatterMan4500 Tone it down, please.

???

@MJ2003 Actually, you might find that I am indeed in charge, as I was promoted as the leader, as Masson Thief wanted me to take his place, and ever since Raidarr's arrival, I've improved my administration.

Um, yeah he is. He's the main leader.

Also, DarkMatterMan4500 and Raidarr are also bureaucrats of Qualitipedia.

Correct, I am. But same thing with @Blazikeye535.

god i had to skim over that wall of text of articles to get your point

and i don't get it, like i'm not the biggest star wars fan but generally speaking, box office hits can still have a bad reception. people buying it =/= people liking it. couldn't find anything about the right-wing points and unnecessary mockery in the pages though.

I have to explain a little more on the last three movies, those movies have mixed receptions according to websites like Rotten Tomatoes.

To be fair, Rotten Tomatoes isn't exactly as reliable as what other people say they are. Half of the time, people would take advantage of the rating, and rig them, so it would look legitimate.

Personally, I don't think we should avoid partially relying on Rotten Tomatoes just because they can be rigged. In situations where they are rigged, then there can be a reception.

In either case this is why multiple sources and proper research should be strongly encouraged. No one source can nor should be doing all the work.

...like Rotten Tomatoes for example.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/about

in theory, any rating website can be rigged, even the so-called most trustful ones. that's why a more proper and bullet-proof method of researching reception (like fatburn's RfC which iirc involved an oscillating, game/movie/show-dependant selection on public, critics, etc) would make good for the reception wikis. but i digress.

now to adress the general question: @MJ2003 it's natural that you're gonna find youself disagreeing with some pointers of the wikis. after all, everyone has its own opinions, even the reception wikis. they don't necessarily reflect your own opinions, and we're perfectly fine with that and respect your opinions. while we make articles based on general reception, we don't mind if you have a different opinion on some piece of media that you i.e. find on a wiki you disagree with. don't hesitate to contribute with your own beliefs though! as long as they're not disruptive, you may freely edit articles to add, remove or tweak pointers and info with a good justification, or open a thread in the article's talk page if you want to do a more formal discussion on that.

Precisely.

Alright @Raidarr I'll let this stay up.

The 2016 reboot of Ghostbusters flopped because of the film's budget and the film's mixed to negative reception.

Also, season 8 from SpongeBob SquarePants did get extremely negative reception.