Forum:Reception section conception

Forums - Reception section conception

This page is waiting to be archived by an administrator. Please do not edit the contents of this page. While browsing Wikipedia, I've noticed that forms of media, particularly films, often have a section for "reception" by critics, experts, and/or audiences. I think that something like this would be a good addition to articles, particularly for sets. Of course it should probably be standardized in a way with a list of approved websites or reviewers so we can avoid the section being used as a billboard for "check out my new site bro" or "Help me buy even more stuff than you could ever imagine by watching my video review! I'll cry if you don't!" Anyway, if we are going to mention any reviewers by name, I'd prefer that they be gold star reviewers at Brickset or graduates from Eurobricks' Reviewer Academy. If you have any other ideas in regards to those or know of similar recognitions, let me know. Also, maybe putting something similar to Template:Images at the bottom of the section that says "Brickipedia has two reviews for set 12345 XXXXX here" would be a good way to incorporate the reviews namespace with the articles. So, basically the section would be something like "This set currently has a 3.8/5 star rating at Brickset.com. It has been criticized for not resembling any particular scene from the movie it is based on, but its play features have been cited as creative by most reviewers. Eurobricks Review Academy Instructor 'User' notes that despite being made up of rectangles, the final model resembles a double helix." Obviously it involves picking and choosing to create a general idea (and superficial stuff should be omitted :P) which might not be something we would want to go for, but I think that something like this would be a neat feature for us to incorporate, and I know we are looking to incorporate new stuff now.... Berrybrick (talk) 21:23, 18 March 2014 (UTC) I'd support, so long as it's only a requirement for new C2 or C1 articles. Having to add this to all of the current pages would be a pain. BrickfilmNut (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC) I wouldn't even suggest that. But I'd make it more of a "going forward" sort of thing. Even adding it to all current C2/C1/FA articles would be a pain. Berrybrick (talk) 21:41, 18 March 2014 (UTC) We should certainly have a section for this, however it does need to have everything in it cited since I don't want a bunch of random kids' opinions being put in our articles. --ToaMeiko (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC) Definitely. I forgot to mention that. Berrybrick (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC) I'd be ok with it, as like Meiko said, everything was sourced, and only certain reputable sites and reviewers were used as Berrybrick said. (and since virtually nothing is sourced around here as it is, I guess I have my doubts). (shop.lego.com star rating should probably be used alongside the Brickset one) NovaHawk 22:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC) The star ratings seem like they'd be hard to keep up to date though. I think we should only include reviews from critics from notable sources, not a user-generated star rating system that's subject to change. --ToaMeiko (talk) 22:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC) Sounds good. I don't think the star rating should be used, though. -LFY1547 00:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)