Talk:Ophelia (2018 film)

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

United States: Cinema

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Shakespeare Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scrutiny of critical reception section

The IP editor 2604:2000:1404:85D8:90FD:9248:68A6:2307 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) added no-name reviews to the "Critical reception" section in July 2019 as seen here. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:51, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the alleged manipulations were true I don't think it makes sense to entirely delete Rotten Tomatoes from the article.[1] It certainly does not make sense to talk at length about the alleged attempts to manipulate the Rotten Tomatoes score without mentioning the actual Rotten Tomatoes score, and number of reviews. The alleged manipulation may have briefly helped the film seem more positive, but I'm not convinced that it entirely invalidates the ~130 reviews listed at Rotten Tomatoes to give it a score of ~60%. -- 109.76.192.132 (talk) 02:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the minor critics and selecting some reviews from the more reputable top critics would be a welcome improvement in any case. -- 109.76.192.132 (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, putting just RT back in, with the critique being summarized, works for me. The number of reviews under RT is large enough over time that I accept that the score would not be too severely affected by the reported manipulation. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 13:52, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]