This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media franchises, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to media franchises 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.Media franchisesWikipedia:WikiProject Media franchisesTemplate:WikiProject Media franchisesmedia franchise articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, TriipleThreat. We seem to be having a disagreement over how to word the critical reception for the franchise in the opening paragraphs. You say that using the average results are fine. I, however, think it's better to adress which specific films have received a positive reception and which didn't. It's almost universally agreed that the sequels are not as the good as the first. If it just says the franchise as a whole has received mixed reviews, it's not specific enough. One film received good reviews, while two films received bad reviews. It sounds clearer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.245.66 (talk) 20:11, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
The reception of each film is covered in the article body, the WP:LEAD is just to summarize the article's content. As the article is about franchise just the franchise's reception as a whole is needed there. Also there are WP:PEACOCK problems with your wording.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 20:28, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply