User talk:Slakenger

Improperly sourced content

Please don't add improperly sourced content like this. One cherrypicked review does not mean that the entirety of critical response was bad, and I think most people would understand that. Any attempt to summarise an opinion must be directly attributed to a reliable source that says "critical reception was generally negative" or positive, or whatever. Understand? Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:42, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what was confusing about the above note, but you are not Rotten Tomatoes, thus, you are not a critical response aggregator. Picking 1, 2, 5 or 10 negative reviews and then summarising the entirety of critical response constitutes "synthesis". As noted above, any opinion, like the opinion that critical response was generally unfavourable, must be directly attributed to a source that describes the critical response as "generally unfavourable". I don't know a better way to say that, so here's an example: If I find 10 critics that say "I hate chocolate ice cream", that doesn't mean that most critics hate chocolate ice cream. To draw that conclusion, I would have to find a source that says "most ice cream critics dislike chocolate ice cream" at which point I could summarise, "critical response toward chocolate ice cream is mostly negative". Does that make sense? Please don't resubmit this content without finding that proper source. Note also MOS:FILM instructions about critical response. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:37, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]