 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Reception section
editComparing the reception sections of the two rival versions of Sid95Q[1] and Ustadeditor2011[2] it seems to me that Sid95Q's version is better.
Sid95Q's reception section contains both critical response and accolades. These correspond to the reception and awards sections of Ustadeditor2011's version.
- The difference between Sid95Q's critical response and Ustadeditor2011's reception section is that Ustadeditor2011 deleted one of the reviews without explanation.
- Sid95Q's accolades section is a neat table with citations (making it verifiable), whereas Ustadeditor2011's awards section lacks citations and has a worse format.
Unless anyone can give sensible reasons for preferring Ustadeditor2011's critical response and accolades sections I will revert that part of the article to Sid95Q's version.-- Toddy1 (talk) 08:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Since nobody objected, I have done that.[3] -- Toddy1 (talk) 12:09, 20 August 2024 (UTC)