This is getting really shady, Black Panther's wikipedia article is a 'view source' page, and the 'critical response' section list's absolutely zero criticisms of the movie, instead going on about how inspiring and influential it is already
en.wikipedia.org
How can you possibly criticize the most important thing in black history?
Reviewers, media, wikipedia, google, social media, youtube, rotten tomatoes... all these people live in the same bubble in which they're convinced that a Russian joint op with US alt right is underway to sabotage the ratings. Thats the world they live in.
Who gives a fuck? Imagine getting mad over a fucking Wikipedia article that anyone can edit.
Why don't you just edit the article and add the criticism instead of whining about it on Sup Forums
Imagine in 50 years our kids will be learning about this capeshit in their mandatory white guilt class
>really good reviews
>all the blacks in america go to see it
>disney pat themselves on the back
>forget that blacks are still a minority
>movie bombs
It's just a fucking superhero film, I feel like everyone's lost all sense of reasoning
To be fair, there is almost always some guy editing "WE WUZ KANGS" into everything.
what does having a view source page mean
Just a bunch of random retards on Sup Forums and twitter and buzzfed blogposters seizing the opportunity. People in the real world don't give a fuck about agenda, they just want to eat up marvel garbage.
>all these people live in the same bubble
I got your (picrelated) bubble right here. Feel free to look it up if you have any doubt.
See also
Afrofuturism in film
LOLLOLOLOLOOLLLL!!!
>the most important thing in black history
>a fucking capeshit movie
LMAO
Fun Fact: The page is LOCKED
To be fair, there were also organized "feminist edit-a-thons" where groups of feminists mass edited wikipages and Wikipedia refused to do anything about it, even though that sort of thing goes against their rules.
Yep. The "Neutral Point of View" policy is one of their biggest jokes.
If all critics praise it then all Wikipedia can do is cite the praise. It's shady if criticism does exist but is not being mentioned.
It would be a good policy if it were actually enforced. Unfortunately, it's only enforced on opinions they don't agree with.
I prefer the vanilla panther myself :^)
>This is getting really shady
They were already shady when they refused to list anything about how The Last Jedi had poor audience scores.
Yup. Check the talk history of any controversial subject (esp jew related - e.g. Leo Frank) Wikipedia is a pretty good reference for technical things like machinery, technology, or mathematics, but any subject with political/social undertones should always be taken with a grain of salt.