Cleaning Up Needless References To Reviewers

This DesignatedHero.Video Games entry has to much of Spoony's opinion:

• The protagonists from Final Fantasy XIII, particularly Snow, get utterly torn apart by Spoony for being this during his two and a half hour slamming of the game. Spoony constantly notes how while the protagonists just wholesale slaughter enemy soldiers without hesitation or regret and constantly destroy and blow things up (without caring who's inside, enemy or civilian) without even really knowing why they're doing it beyond vague motivations, while said soldiers are portrayed rather sympathetically as people who are trying to do what they think is right, are genuinely trying to protect Cocoon from a very real threat, have a very valid reason to be trying to stop the protagonists, and even do their best to limit collateral damage and take their enemies alive.
  Spoony: Whatever. The "good" guys have to escape on their own ship because their fight with Bartandelus caused catastrophic damage making the entire place explode, taking with it hundreds of soldiers and innocent technicians just doing their jobs protecting Cocoon from these murderous psychopaths...

The DesignatedHero.Live Action Films needs the Mystery Science Theater 3000 section broken up

For the first, the whole entry seems like complaining. I'm not sure if it can be kept, at least not as written. Maybe a rewrite to remove the Spoony references and make it less complain-y if it is valid (and I don't know much about Final Fantasy so I can't say if it is.)

The second does need to be split up. Maybe I'll get to it sometime, or someone else could. I don't know.

I made a sandbox here. You can help me scrub all of the references to Mike and the bots if you wish.

This is on Extreme Close-Up:

• Many of the major Looney Tunes from Space Jam get an extreme closeup, as do Michael Jordan and Stan Podolak. These closeups are noted by The Nostalgia Critic in his review of the movie, triggering yet another spate of mouth-foaming histrionics.

The second sentence seems irrelevant. Also, it's worth noting that no other example on the page makes any reference to reviewers.

Final Death:

Action-Adventure folder:

• As mentioned by the AVGN, in The Wizard of Oz, if the Lion, Scarecrow, or Tin Man die, they're dead for the rest of the game. Though you can pick up lives for all three of them, they're pretty rare in comparison to Dorothy's.

Are there any references to emgo316 in the Transformers pages?

Seems minor enough to just cut the AVGN reference.

I don't know who that is. The only reviewer I know with some notoriety for Transformers movies is Lindsay Ellis.

Emgo is a reviewer for Transformers toys, not movies.

From OK K.O.! Let's Be Heroes S 1 E 47 Let's Not Be Skeletons:

• Unfortunate Implications: The The Mysterious Mr. Enter goes into this greatfully Especially when the episode was aired two weeks after a real-life shooting.

Even if this counts as a citation, most of the context relies on a weblink. Could the example do with more context, or is "(Reviewer) discusses this here: [weblink to review]" still enough?

Weblinks Are Not Examples, so it needs more context to explain what the implications are. Also, does Enter really think the episode has unfortunate implications, or does he just think it's a Broken Aesop? I know his review of the episode is... quite controversial.

x5 AVGN reference has been removed.

Found this on SoundtrackDissonance.Film:

• According to Schaffrillas Productions, The Rise of Skywalker was quite egregious with this as its score was largely cobbled together from the previous movies^note He went on to point out that the score was controversially nominated for the Best Original Score Oscar and that it may have spurred the Motion Picture Academy to redefine the rules of the category not long after the 2020 ceremony. One example he points out is the mystical Binary Sunset (which he refers to as "the Force theme") playing during Rey blasting Palpatine with the Force.

I think it can be cut since the entry cannot stand on its own without the opinion of Schaffrillas. Or at the very least rewritten.

x4. Unfortunate Implications requires citations to credible sources, while he's just a YouTuber.

From Just Eat Gilligan:

• Captain N: The Game Master: As pointed out by The Nostalgia Critic, it never occurs to Captain N and our heroes that he could teleport to Mother Brain's lair and shoot her with his Zapper, thus resolving the plot and allowing him to go home.

Wasn't that supposed to be a joke within the context of the review?

I think that's valid.

This is on Alvin and the Chipmunks (bit in question bolded):

• Values Dissonance: In the Cinderella dream sequence episode, the Chipettes are shown bathing, seen from the waist up, with nipple dots drawn on. In the 80s no one may have thought much of it but in the modern days with concerns over adults sexualizing & molesting children, more so with the Chipettes looking like little girls, it comes off as a bit disturbing to some viewers. Dorkly Bits was visibly freaked out that the scene even existed when they reviewed inappropriate moments in cartoons. There were also the occasional panty shots of the Chipettes that have the same feel now.

Cut the bolded piece of course.

Bringing up these from C Me Dance:

• Designated Hero: Sheri brainwashes people, but because it's for God it's okay. Diamanda Hagan presents a compelling argument in her review that Sheri is actually evil.

• Fridge Horror: B-movie reviewers Scott Foy and Diamanda Hagan share in their reviews that Sheri's ability to instantly convert people means they aren't making a choice to follow Christ — she's using "supernatural Mind Control". It's a case of the heroes out to conquer The Evils of Free Will. Bonus for basically being the Law ending from Shin Megami Tensei: Strange Journey.

IMO, the second point can be cut. As for the first one, it seems legit if you cut the last sentence.

But then the first one would be a ZCE, wouldn't it?

Bringing up the following examples from Bonekickers and and it's YMMV page:

• Atrocious Alias: As Diamanda Hagan noted in her review of the final episode, the Disciples of Good Use is the "worst name for an evil conspiracy EVER".
• Sinister Minister: Edward Laygass combines this with a plan to take over the United Kingdom and expel non-Christians. Hagan notes in her review that he's a kind of very American-style fundamentalist televangelist that barely even exists in the UK, and one that would probably not even get a TV show like the one he appears in. Oddly enough Society Marches On, and if the series was made even a few years later he would seem like a blatant parody of a mainstream UKIP politician.

• Alternative Character Interpretation:
  • As Diamanda Hagan put it, Dolly Parton is meant to be charming and roguish, but comes off as a middle-aged, alcoholic potential rapist.
  • She also notes that Viv acts like she has two personalities - one with an IQ of 60 and the other with an IQ of 140.