Can I add the comment section on TLJ?
User talk:Masson Thief
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Uhm. Let's try. But they will be removed if flame wars will happen there.
And the good news is, Since you gave me a content moderator, I can delete any comments if drama happen.
Let's be Careful in this comment.
Exactly. I will add comments now, and then go away for the night. I will see the results tomorrow.
Allright, comments are working. Goodnight.
Goodnight, Twilight Sparkle is putting you in bed.
Is my TLJ sandbox ready?
A few months ago I've told you that I was working on my own sandbox for Star Wars: The Last Jedi and asked you about your thoughts on said sandbox, and that you mentioned you will be reviewing it when you're not busy. I've worked extremely hard on the sandbox, adding in pointers consisting of poor writing, atrocious characterization, inconsistencies, plot holes, pointless moments, scenes copied from other films, and other movie-making problems.
And now, I feel that my proposed page for The Last Jedi might be ready, especially with The Rise of Skywalker coming up in more than a week as of writing this. I have one question to ask you: do you think that the sandbox is ready to be turned into a full page on the Awful Movies Wiki? ',:)
There's still a lot of it that feels like attempts to pad out the list of negatives for the sake of padding it, some pointers still read like opinions.
And regardless it was still agreed to not make a page on either wiki.
"There's still a lot of it that feels like attempts to pad out the list of negatives for the sake of padding it, some pointers still read like opinions."
Okay, okay... *deletes some Main Pointers™ while changing two of the other ones into Side Pointers™*
DELETED COMMENT (my comment was having a "timeout", so I tried to post it again repeatedly)
There have been several times where I see users go out of their way to try to make an article's number of pointers bigger, but bigger isn't always better, more often than not they end up putting nitpicks, opinions, repeat the same point with slightly different wording, and smaller things that aren't that relevant or important for the sake of making that number larger and it just makes the page worse.
That pretty much describes Evil Tim's sandbox page in a nutshell (plus beating around the bush with some pointers).
Add the mocking tone and repeated name calling.
With some “gems”:
- “and so after wasting time on a moronic little "comedy" skit during which the Star Destroyers don't shoot the man who just destroyed Starkiller Base, ace pilot Poe Dameron and his toy robot BB-8 take out the surface cannons on the Dreadnought”
- ”Then the credits roll and you wonder if you can get your money back.”
- “Rian Johnson forgetting most of the enemy force actually exists is going to be a recurring theme, by the way.”
- “Biggestest Star Destroyer Evar™“ (my personal favorite)
- On the TFA side: “The movie fuelled questioning as to whether J J Abrams knows any way of raising the stakes in a sci-fi movie short of blowing up one or more planets.”
Tim’s sandboxes are like treasure chests, except that instead of treasure there’s failed attempts at comedy mocking.
But isn't "fuelled" a real word? I wonder why Evil Tim wrote "sic" after it.
I put that there because I assumed it was a typo.
Ah. Maybe it is not a very used word, it looks like a pretty refined term, it is the first time I heard of it.
There’s only one “l” in the word usually.
About that, I am noticing the comedy mocking is pretty much limited to the plot section, the rest of the page only had a few.
Anyway, let us not waste time making fun of an already mocking piece of text. I was actually going to ask you if you could write a plot section for the page, it doesn't have to be extremely long and mentioning every event of the movie.
"I was actually going to ask you if you could write a plot section for the page, it doesn't have to be extremely long and mentioning every event of the movie."
Already taken care of.
Where is it?
Right, it's in the sandbox.I wonder why I didn't think of it.
It should not be mocked but it is a good example (if a bit extreme) of why users getting opinionated when writing articles is a bad practice that results in poor quality articles.
Not a very good example, he also wrote that some elements from the movie are excellent and top-notch. Not exactly the behaviour of a hater, there is worst stuff you can find on the internet. Also, the plot is the part of the page which suffers the most from the comedy tone, the rest is sort of allright but still redundant in some parts, with some nitpicks and mocking.
The positives in that page weren't nearly as much as the negatives, which were stretched out as much as possible to make the list longer and several of them weren't exactly written in a civil manner either which is my main point, and that's not even the mocking points.
What I am trying to say is that the presence of positives written right makes the page not a complete hater rant. And about the positives, my current version of the page has ten of them, including Porgs.
"repeat the same point with slightly different wording"
It's one of the main reasons why I put some of the main pointers as side pointers. For example, I've put in the pointer of "pointless lines that tell us how we should react etc." under the Canto Bight one. Speaking of pointless moments, I've just made a main pointer talking about pointless moments, listing Canto Bight and said lines of dialogue.
That was Sausage Party, TyrantRex. For TLJ and TFA I said we were going to respect the deal we had with Evil Tim. but now I doubt he will ever come back so I decided. Both movies will be as average movies here because non toxic SW estimators too regard them as weak installements of the franchise. It doesn't convince me to forbid something because a very toxic portion of the fanbase hates it, nor is the average viewer liking it a good reason to prevent the pages from being on this wiki since lore and characterizations are important in movie series and the average viewer isn't able to complain about them due to not knowing much about them.
I must also point out how previous attempts at having these movies on the sister wiki resulted in very weak pages. Both sandboxes have potential in a decent amount of pointers and I am confident we will be able to make a good TLJ article here.
Trevor, who likes TLJ, helped with the sandbox in the recent months and that's another reason why we can have the movie here. Plus, I am dying to polish pages again after several weeks of semi-activity.
Also, Lego Star Wars: The Force Awakens was also well receieved by the gamers, and the fans.
Well, that is an another thing despite being based on the movie. That can go to Awesome Games Wiki if that's what you are asking. It wouldn't be the first time a LEGO video game is more entertaining than the movie it is based on. I heard at least one person claiming Lego Pirates of the Carribean made some boring scenes from the movies more entertaining and I am sure someone would say the same about The Lost World and Jurassic Park III.
In either case the sandbox still needs more cleanup so it doesn't come off as a fan rant. I'm not convinced at all that 28 whole pointers would be something a regular non diehard Star Wars fan would put.
"I'm not convinced at all that 28 whole pointers would be something a regular non diehard Star Wars fan would put."
To me a bunch of pointers on those pages could be merged or made into sub-pointers, as they're either not that much of an issue or a part of a bigger problem.
They also need to be condensed so they don't end up being large paragraphs.
I am confident I can make the article work from an understandable point of view.
I won't edit the sandbox though. I will work on it off-line first in a text file and then it will be uploaded here. Not sure if I will protect it as soon as uploaded, though. Maybe I will.
So, you're saying pages in general here should be short?
Pages just have to avoid containing walls of text while not being undetailed at the same time. It is pretty hard to manage to do such a thing, harder than most people realize.
But at the same time they need to be civil and not sound like an opinionated rant, something that many users tend to do, not just when they put obnoxious bold red capital letters, but also in the way they word their pointers. Users going out of their way to make pages longer because they dislike the movie/game/show in question is also a bad practice
I'm really sorry to tell you but......even though The Force Awakens, (I'm not saying about the fans) Is actually liked by a lot of people, While it was not hated by the audiences, It had a 6.8/10 user score rating, It was still favorable reviews from the audiences, and by the time it was released, on Rotten Tomatoes, It had a 86% rating on Audience score, But sure, Despite the flaws, Back on FANDOM, The Force Awakens was on Greatest Movies Wiki back on FANDOM before the SJW happened on our wikis and closed down back in 2018, I've saw it. I'm not going to lie.
But sure, Despite the flaws, A lot of audeinces including Me, I had enjoyed TFA, But not TLJ. I'm pretty concerned in this wiki right now.
Oh dear dear... I'm really nervous-worried right now. :(
And you mean, "But now I doubt that if he will ever come back"?
I found TLJ meh at best.
He probably means Evil Tim will not come back to these wikias.
Right. At this point he won't return.
Actually, I checked his FANDOM activity out of curiousity and noticed he had breaks from wikis which were even several years long, so who knows, it is still possible he will come back to our wikis.
Just because something has been recieved well, doesn't mean that it's actually good. Examples of bad movies with good critic ratings include Leaving Neverland and The Last Jedi. Same with LCW, though he has a good reputation, he's actually a bad character.
The more you think about something (e.g. a movie, character, song, etc.), you'll see how good/bad it actually is.
I was talking about the audiences, not the critics.
That's what I meant to say.
Um, even though it had a 6.8/10 score, the thing is, it’s gotten more negative reception in recent years after TLJ.
But that's pretty old news man.
I get that you like it (and trust me, so do I), but the thing is, it’s a minority.
What is sure about these two movies is that they are very divisive amongst viewers, and that's what the average category is for. Unnamedgoon also agreed in adding them while he was an admin here, too.
@Masson Thief When do you expect the page to be ready to be posted onto this wiki?
I already re-elaborated a half of the page yesterday, I still have to review and edit the rest. Overall the page is pretty bulky but I don't feel like removing a lot of pointers since I am afraid we could dismiss criticism.
About the die-hard fan pointers which have been discussed, I condensed them, removed redundant parts or created sub-pointers. Someone could argue that only a die-hard Star Wars fan could list errors in the ships or space physics and while that could be true, I think it wouldn't be right to ignore this criticism only because the average viewer probably doesn't care about them.
Not only we can't be sure of it, but I believe that since Star Wars is also sci fi, the technology and physics must always be credible, I am pretty sure that's how the franchise is supposed to work.
I think the page will be uploaded near the end of this week or Monday at worst. In the meantime you and Trevor should try to come up with some good qualities for the page.
"In the meantime you and Trevor should try to come up with some good qualities for the page."
sigh Maybe some. However, I'm going to be on Christmas break, and my family has banned me from the computer at home (if you didn't know, I use a computer at school, and those are two main reasons why I've stopped editing on the weekends for now). Have a good Christmas break, Masson Thief...
EDIT: My family has now unbanned me from the computer at home, but I'm still going to be a little busy.
I doubt I will have a Christmas break from the wikis but thanks.
One other thing, inconcistencies in this movie and between this movie and the prequel have been noted pretty much everywhere on the internet. This is an important flaw in movies and the page has a lot of material about them. Can't remove this type of criticism from the page due to how meaningful it is.
Speaking of Star Wars: The Last Jedi or Evil Tim, Have you seen Paranormal Activity? Why did i say that?
Well, It seems like that you had seen the film. You said that Paranormal Activity is very cheap and poorly made, how can it not belong to this wiki. It is right to have it back here, and you said that the page only needs some tweaks to remove some ranting.
Guess what? I think I editied the diffrent, by removing the rant style words.
Unfortuantley, If I readded it here, Eiji will attack me for this! :(
You already edited it? Is your version in your sandbox? I am eager to review it. I don't think he would attack you, but in any case I will upload it. I am attack-proofed.
Look here, I copied it from the page, and you can see what Eiji said before I editi the WIS.
I can't see anything written by Eiji on that page.
Anyway, after further fixes the page is ready and uploaded. Eiji will have to accept it, this movie is far from being great and the reception from critics is not consistent since they are known to like things just because yes. This is another case of critics liking something only because of its peculiar nature rather than because of its qualities; like it is a freakshow.
Nvm, I got my account back.
It's me. Eiji. I had to use this alt account I made back in January 2019 because 2 days ago, I got my account renamed from IAmEiji to No Face, and while the rename process was happening, the script to rename me broke, meaning I couldn't log in to my account. So could you make me a confirmed user on the wikis?
How would you react if someone told you Greta Thunberg is annoying and she would do well to shut up?
Oh, pity. My little test is useless now.
Can i make a infobox of a Person/Director?
I'll start off with Micheal Bay, and some of the people.
Is it a good idea?
NOTE: Only persons, not movies.
A separate infobox for people here. It is a good idea. Make one, we will set a parameter which we will fill with "actor", "director", "writer" accordingly. Which other parameters are you going to put there? I want a "notable works" parameter.
I'll try, let me draw the concept of the infobox.
Here: I made this in MS Paint of the person infbox! Here's what the concept what the infobox WOULD look like!
Also, we can do that in Greatest Movies Wiki, Best/Terrible TV Shows Wiki and beyond the wikis as well! :)
I think it will do.
The Queen's Corgi is up on this wiki
If we were us, We would've not put it on either wiki.
Despite my lengthy explanation as to why The Queen's Corgi should not be on this wiki, they put it up anyway. And since the reviews for this film are relatively unreliable (most of them only fueled by their hate for Trump and sexual innuendos) and the page itself doesn't seem the best in the world from my point of view, do you think it should stay up?
I put the "Why It Sucks" into "Why It's Supposed To Suck (But In A Good Way)" So it's meant to be bad.
Okay then explain how it's supposed to suck, Stephen?
Even though Matthew The Guy loved the film, thought it was good, Thought it wouldn't been on this wiki, but it's still sucked, but it's supposed to be bad.
And I hate to tell you, If we added it on GMW, and re-added to AMW, We might screwed up, and this movie page will turned into The Last Jedi sandbox like Evil Tim did!
I deleted it. Stephen, Matt gave a lengthy explanation as to why you shouldn't add it. And it's not that he's biased towards it, as you seem to assume.
Let's not add it on either wiki, for goodness sake.
Just wanted to say I agree with its deletion. Could it work as an average movie here if someone can make a good page?
I changed my mind. Yes, we might do it. so we might have it here as long it's perfect enough.
But unfortantuly, IHateShitters is back to spam account again in this wiki.
If it absolutely has to return as an average movie, I hope one of the Bad Qualities are not a generic Trump complaint. And I'm still not understanding how the movie was supposed to be bad as you are claiming.
I thought it was an okay movie.
@Matthew The Guy Would you mind linking to said explanation? Somehow I was completely unaware of it when I created the page.
I'm sorry, I can't seem to find it.
It got deleted by Trevor.
Well, I just saw Sabersparks was talking about it not too long ago. After that I saw the movie and yeah, it's just not bad of a film.
I don't think it's even supposed to be for kids in the first place.
Right, it looked like that from the trailer I saw though.
A troll is vandalizing pages and even wants to know my password. Can you block him?
Holy sh*t. I don't asked for somebody's passwords.
The temptation of giving him a fake mocking password is strong but I can resist.
Trevor blocked him.
Hey here's a fact about me, Stephenfisher2001
Hello there, let me tell ya, tomorrow, it's my first year anniversary of entering of Miraheze's Reception Wikis Family!
Back on FANDOM, Awful Movies Wiki, is a wiki where I was born in, So as the Awful Movies Wiki Miraheze version. :)
And yes, this is the first Reception Wikis Family Wiki that I founded in, and this is a place where i founed when I was searching some What's Up, and I saw this on the link of Awful Movies Wiki on FANDOM, then... It causes the birth of Stephenfisher2001 on Reception Wikis Family on FANDOM, Back in late May 2018, so Tomorrow, It's going to be my first year anniversary of being in Miraheze! :)
You'll see during the day! :)
I discovered these wikis when I was looking up The Emoji Movie on a display computer at the store one time, and I found a link to the Awful Movies Wiki (I didn't click on it). Then, I went onto the Reception Wikis in Summer of 2018, and I mainly went to Terrible TV Shows Wiki on FANDOM. And now, I go here on Miraheze, after FANDOM shut down our wikis there.
I first discovered CGW in mid-2017 when I was watching a video on Ride To Hell: Retribution. Someone in the comments pointed out that the game was so bad that it didn't have a wiki of its own, and someone replied that the only wiki the game belongs to aside from Wikipedia is CGW. That made me look up the wiki wondering if it was even real. I discovered the other wikis about a day later.
2017? Did you create an account immediately or after a while? Also, fun fact: there was a Ride to Hell wiki which was created by Shaq but it was a troll wiki dedicated to make hate pages about our users and pages about how bad games like Ride to Hell are good.
I made my account in November of last year. In fact, my first year anniversary of officially joining is four days from now, which is the 17th.
Uhm, that's a lot of time after you first visited us. Many users joined our wiki after limiting themselves to read our articles. In fact I didn't remember you from 2017, which is the year I joined these wikis. I can't forget the first thing I did was playing a major role in saving Greatest Movies Wiki, and now that wiki is no more. The Toptenners can say what they want but they don't know how it feels to have a wiki closed because of bigotry.
The reason why I made my account more than a year later was because I wasn't all that interested in editing pages at the time.
Even if I did join in 2017, I probably would've hardly made any edits because I find FANDOM's editing system to be overly-restricted and pretty slow.
Yes, this one is better and the wikis have a lot more functions both for users and for admins.
He now apologized for what he had done.
Protect mah userpage pl0x
You-know-who tried to vandalize my userpage multiple times and won't stop so pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease protect it for only autoconfirmed users I'm so sad :(
Oh, come on.
I protected it.
Thank you :D