Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a24877b63e76b1bb

Jump to content

Talk:Definers Public Affairs

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 8 years ago by DrFleischman in topic Criticism section

Criticism section

[edit]

The Criticism section is currently the largest section of this article. Wikipedia frowns on Criticism sections. It has been suggested in discussions about criticism sections that editors should attempt to move criticisms to the sections that they may apply to throughout the article. My criticisms have been moved (twice) from another section to a Criticism section and I'd like some feedback from our editors. Gandydancer (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

I did not intend to circumvent Wikipedia editorial policy. But there seem to be stand-alone "Criticisms" sections all over Wiki, including Facebook#Criticisms_and_controversies, which was what first came to mind. If consensus is towards greater integration, then by all means...

PvOberstein (talk) 21:33, 19 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Criticism sections are generally frowned upon. See WP:CRITICISM for an explanation. There are indeed a lot of articles with criticism sections--not because they're good, but because they're easy to write. If Wikipedia were a finished project, which of course it's not, then most or all criticism sections would be phased out and integrated into the rest of their articles. There is no reason to have a criticism section in this article. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 07:50, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply