Talk:The Rising of the Shield Hero

Anime and manga: Light novel C‑class Low‑importance

	Anime and manga portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics 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.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Light novel work group.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of The Rising of the Shield Hero was copied or moved into List of The Rising of the Shield Hero episodes with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Added CBR article to reception

I added a paragraph referencing a Comic Book Resources article to the reception section. I hope i did everything correctly. If i made amistake, plese let me know. 46.97.170.78 (talk) 09:59, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is quoting at length from a critic's review really appropriate for an encyclopedia? Wouldn't it be sufficient to include CBR in the first paragraph without extended quotations? i.e. "Several Anime News Network and Comic Book Resources reviewers..." and then provide the associated articles as links in the footnotes? It is one thing to quote the producer of the show, but reviews by critics are opinion. The edit itself even uses the word "speculates", as if to underline that the statements have no basis in fact. The award that the show won was given a single sentence, while there are three entire paragraphs about controversy, quoting two critics' opinions at length multiple times. For what it's worth, these opinions seem to be at odds with the reviews given by users on multiple different platforms for review (4.7/5 on Crunchyroll's site, 8.1/10 on IMDB, 8/10 on MyAnimeList). Yes, we can verify that the reviewers did in fact write those words, but does that make their statements in and of themselves verifiable facts regarding the show and the audience? 173.71.171.58 (talk) 19:17, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What individual viewers say about the show is irrelevant; what we care about is what established critics in reliable sources say about the series. If most critics in reliable sources gave it negative feedback, that is what the article should show. If you have a reliable anime-related or other website that praised it, you are more than welcome to add it. I noticed you just added an "Asian Movie Pulse" website, however this doesn't look like a reliable source. Link20XX (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]