Talk:critical reception

RFD discussion: July 2022–January 2023
SOP &mdash; S URJECTION / T / C / L / 20:16, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak keep per the prior knowledge test at WT:IDIOM, since it’s a specific meaning tailored to the arts. Also, side note, but doesn’t seem to cover this as well as it should. AG202 (talk) 23:17, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it is mostly sense 4 "a reaction". I agree this is probably SOP, but I won't be sad if it stays, the phrase is quite set, the concept is almost always expressed in exactly this way, and it would be very easy to misunderstand critical in the "negative" sense. Letter of the law is probably a delete, but I am not going to vote that way. Abstain. - TheDaveRoss  12:27, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * On one hand, this is SOP. On the other hand, it's a rather set phrase. But back on the first hand, reception by itself can also be used with the same meaning (if you talk about the reception of a film by critics, or critics&apos; + reception of it, as alternatives to saying its critical + reception), as can receive (if you talk about how a film was received + by critics). Abstain for now, leaning weakly towards delete. - -sche (discuss) 15:21, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Err on the side of keep if only because "critical reception" as it is usually used disambiguates the adjective: it refers to reception by critics, whether positive or critical. Nor is the reception vital. This fact seems to be a part of a person's lexical knowledge. This argument is fairly weak, though. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:43, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * RFD-kept: no consensus for deletion (WT:VPRFD). --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)