Talk:Judd, for the Defense: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 11:05, 23 November 2015

Television Start‑class Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Tvimage Template:Television needs episode list

Original Research

This article states: "Throughout the course of the two-year run of the show, there were never enough viewers to establish Foreman's claim [that the show appropriated his legal career for commercial purposes], although critics gave it positive reviews. Undoubtedly the skittishness of viewers was a result of the program's dealing with then-taboo (though contemporary) subjects such as homosexuality, blacklisting, and draft dodgers, with open-ended conclusions in many episodes." The first claim appears to be nonsense - what does the success of the show have to do with whether it "stole" details of a lawyer's career for commercial purpose? Be that as it may, both claims appear to be the author's opinion rather than based upon any sources - hence, would appear to violate Wiki policy against original research.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 {{tvimage}}
 {{Television needs episode list}}
+==Original Research==
+This article states: "Throughout the course of the two-year run of the show, there were never enough viewers to establish Foreman's claim [that the show appropriated his legal career for commercial purposes], although critics gave it positive reviews. Undoubtedly the skittishness of viewers was a result of the program's dealing with then-taboo (though contemporary) subjects such as homosexuality, blacklisting, and draft dodgers, with open-ended conclusions in many episodes." The first claim appears to be nonsense - what does the success of the show have to do with whether it "stole" details of a lawyer's career for commercial purpose? Be that as it may, both claims appear to be the author's opinion rather than based upon any sources - hence, would appear to violate Wiki policy against original research.