The intent behind an article should be to put forth a citable, neutral point of view, which this does not do: Please cite the following, and remove the opinion statement. "sporting a lush plotline that easily separates them from other RPGs". Please consider a re-write, improving the tone of the Reception section, with an eye towards the following opinionated and unsourced statements: Not a terrible article, but as others have noted, the Reception section does not fit well with either the article or the nature of Wikipedia. Aenimiac 21:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC) Reception Section: Tone/NPOV Phrases such as "a ton of awards" and saying that fans of Oblivion will "probably love" the game don't really belong in an encyclopaedia, something which is supposed to do away with opinion and convey knowledge in a clear and very definite way. As it is though, without a specific set of reasons, having a section removed because it "irks" you seems to be a trivial reason at best.Ĭoming from the same angle as the original poster, in that I have no real knowledge of the game, I assume that the complaints centre around the use of non-encyclopaedic language in the 'Reception' section. If you could be more specific about the "use of language" being "totally wrong" perhaps we could understand just what it is about this section that "irks" you. It's intended as a stub (as is the entire Gothic 3 wiki) for reception and reviews of the game when it is released.
The Reception section was included based on the fact that one already existed for Gothic 2. I don't really have enough interest nor knowledge of the game to justify me doing the work itself, but the entire section just really irks me. I vote the 'Reaction' section is either totally re-written or removed completely the use of language seems totally wrong for an informational article.
0 kommentar(er)
