Talk:Freeze Out (game show)

A fact from Freeze Out (game show) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 September 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Freeze Out and Rebound are both summer replacements for The Chase?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Freeze Out (game show).

Wikipedia

Television

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Critical reception section

To the person who reinstated the negative critisism:

Please read: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Criticism

Negative criticism is inappropriate and it does NOT generally appear in game show articles at all, as you claimed. I had checked a number of these before removing the section — even those game shows of recent times that received substantial criticism in the press do not have criticism/reception sections precisely because that goes against wikipedia policy. So please stop reinstating this.Scowie (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Scowie: A ping would have been nice.

You have misunderstood the policy you quote; having read it, my reading of it is that entirely negative reviewing content may be present so long as all major viewpoints are represented and that it is separated from the description - which it was. Although Wikipedia:Criticism#"Reception" type section suggests that Reception sections contain both positive and negative reviews, I can't find any positive reviews on a simple Google search for "freeze out" "mark durden-smith" - if you can find them, you are welcome to add them. Your argument that other game show articles don't have critical reception sections is invalid given WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (and the fact that having written most of the recent game show articles I am a bit more qualified to talk about them). In addition, WP:CRITICISM is overruled by WP:NPA, which in a nutshell says "Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides, fairly and without bias".

I voluntarily follow WP:1RR on all articles, so as a rule I don't revert reversions. I do, however, recommend you doing the right thing and reverting your reversion; if you think I'm deluded, feel free to ask at WP:AIV.--Laun chba ller 15:24, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, first, suggestions that someone revert a reversion are usually not helpful. Second, the suggestion that someone take a content dispute to WP:AIV is never helpful. If there is a content dispute, it wastes the time of the admins who have an important job to deal with real vandalism. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Launchballer: I would suggest that you are the one who is deliberately misreading WP:CRITICISM in order to justify giving this article a negative slant.

Here is a list of UK game shows that I have looked at, none of which have critical reception sections:

Tipping Point
1000 Heartbeats
Deal Or No Deal

(the above were also heavily criticised in the press when they first appeared)

The Chase
Pointless
Two Tribes
Eggheads

The WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS does not say that this argument is invalid.

Freeze Out is just the latest gameshow that everyone loves to hate when it first comes to our screens. You will never find positive and negative reviews in equal proportions as the haters always shout the loudest. I am just doing my bit to ensure this article, like all the other game show articles I have looked at, has a neutral point of view. So please don't revert.Scowie (talk) 19:09, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Has the criticism been been published in reliable sources? If so, I would suggest that it be mentioned, but only very briefly to avoid undue weight. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Reliable source" applies to information sources, not opinion pieces. There is no such thing as a reliable opinion. The question here is is the criticism notable? I would argue that it isn't seeing as gameshows generally attract plenty of press criticism when they initially come on air, even ones that go on to be very popular and run for many series. This criticism section offers no factual information, it just gives a negative slant to the article.Scowie (talk) 17:35, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have very little experience in having my edits questioned due to my preference for writing about little-known subjects. I've slashed it right down - I seem to have lost a reference in between writing the section and Scowie's removal as well as all the names for them - how's it looking now?--Laun chba ller 20:38, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[clarification needed]

MPJ-DK: It's my belief that words like "perfect" and "incredibly elaborate" indicate positivity.--Laun chba ller 22:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What? "Perfect lack of personality" is positive? Elaborate is neither positive or negative. So you are stating you took that part as positive reception? alrighty. MPJ -US 23:06, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, he's commending the relationship between the two characters ("the perfect companion").--Laun chba ller 23:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that is not how I read it. MPJ -US 00:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"A kick in the groin is the perfect companion to a punch in the nose", there is a positive sentence. MPJ -US 00:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]