[002]
86.99.197.72
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
But there usually should be some basis to the negativity, otherwise anything could be added. There\'s a reason that there are rules on the Wallbangers and SoBadItsHorrible pages. It should logically be even stricter for a page that\'s mainly used to bash creators (whether that\'s the actually what the page is intended for or not). There\'s even a note at the end saying that entries should only be added if there\'s clear public backlash, and it\'s not just based on your own personal opinion. While Jeph Loeb does get a lot of flak, it\'s not because of this comic. Mentioning that there was critical backlash is a bit of a lie, when it\'s generally well received (and yes there are obviously going to be detractors, but not enough for it to be considered a critical failure), as is saying it was a \
to:
But there usually should be some basis to the negativity, otherwise anything could be added. There\\\'s a reason that there are rules on the Wallbangers and SoBadItsHorrible pages. It should logically be even stricter for a page that\\\'s mainly used to bash creators (whether that\\\'s the actually what the page is intended for or not). There\\\'s even a note at the end saying that entries should only be added if there\\\'s clear public backlash, and it\\\'s not just based on your own personal opinion. While Jeph Loeb does get a lot of flak, it\\\'s not because of this comic. Mentioning that it \\\"flopped horribly\\\" is a bit of a lie, when it\\\'s generally well received (and yes there are obviously going to be detractors, but not enough for it to be considered a critical failure). It\\\'s also one of the most popular recent Batman stories, which should automatically disqualify it, no matter what the critical response is. It was number 10 on IGN\\\'s top Batman stories of all time (and whatever your opinion on IGN is, that still counts for something). The \\\"purge\\\" part is not important, but this entry should definitely be taken off.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
But there usually should be some basis to the negativity, otherwise anything could be added. There\'s even a note at the end saying that entries should only be added if there\'s clear public backlash, not just based on your own personal opinion. ANd while Jeph Loeb does get a lot of flak, it\'s not because of Hush.
to:
But there usually should be some basis to the negativity, otherwise anything could be added. There\\\'s a reason that there are rules on the Wallbangers and SoBadItsHorrible pages. It should logically be even stricter for a page that\\\'s mainly used to bash creators (whether that\\\'s the actually what the page is intended for or not). There\\\'s even a note at the end saying that entries should only be added if there\\\'s clear public backlash, and it\\\'s not just based on your own personal opinion. While Jeph Loeb does get a lot of flak, it\\\'s not because of this comic. Mentioning that there was critical backlash is a bit of a lie, when it\\\'s generally well received (and yes there are obviously going to be detractors, but not enough for it to be considered a critical failure), as is saying it was a \\\"flop\\\" when it\\\'s one of the most popular recent Batman stories. It was number 10 on IGN\\\'s top Batman stories of all time (and whatever your opinion on IGN is, that still counts for something). The \\\"purge\\\" part is not important, but this entry should definitely be taken off.
