Talk:The Zombie Diaries
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Critical Reaction
This page shouldn't pretend that this movie was critically acclaimed. There has been speculation that a lot of the positive reviews are from people to do with the film, IMDB and Amazon and Rotten Tomatoes pan it. I liked it, but I'm the kind of person that would like anything with zombies and suspense. Earfetish1 (talk) 02:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Right. --84.234.60.154 (talk) 16:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, over at Play.com the customer reviews give it 2.5 stars out of 5. There are currently 63 reviews; 29 of which give it 1 star. 62.31.56.54 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I removed the imdb hype claiming that many reviews were positive. Yes, many were but many were not and gave it very low star ratings. Currently there are 46 reviews using a 10 star rating. 9 reviews gave 1 star. 8 gave 2 stars. 3 gave 3 stars... Does anybody else find it suspicious that imdb's initial reviews all give it high ratings followed by low ratings? It's as though people involved in the film got in early and were hyping it with fake reviews followed by the low reviews of genuine movie goers who had seen the film. The whole Critical Reaction chapter seems very biased in favour of the film. 62.31.56.54 (talk)
The Critical Reaction chapter seems to be being vandalised by somebody removing all the negative comments and adding positive ones. Wikipedia is not an advertising page for the film. 62.31.56.54 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 09:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think you might be referring to my changes. If so, I have never actually seen the film, nor am I involved in any way with it or it's publicity. However, I removed a change that contained uncited speculation about why people voted as they did. It does not belong in an encyclopaedia. I will remove the piece that I do not agree with and leave the rating comment. BananaFiend (talk) 09:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
OK, given the edit-warring and the controversy, I have deleted the critical reaction section. It contained no reliable sources, and much unreferenced opinion. BananaFiend (talk) 11:16, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Zd cover.jpg
Image:Zd cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 16:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)