Talk:Ancient Apocalypse: Difference between revisions

:::It's mentioned in the production because [[WP:DUE|reliable sources usually mention it when describing the production]]. What other section would it go in? If a plain statements of facts leads people to believe that those facts are connected, that's not our fault, it's reality's. &ndash;&#8239;[[User:Joe Roe|Joe]]&nbsp;<small>([[User talk:Joe Roe|talk]])</small> 07:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

:::: Most mentions fall under [[WP:RSOPINION]]/[[WP:RSEDITORIAL]], and most sources on Ancient Apocalypse don't mention Sean at all. And it's easy to mislead by juxtaposition of true statements. As written, the article launders innuendo, coincidence, and groundless speculation as relevant fact. And what of Colovito's correction outright rejecting Sean's involvement? Should we include "Sean works at Netflix but was not involved in the production or release"? I think the appropriate place to mention Sean's role is in reception, because that's where op-ed sources most seem to dwell on it. And per [[WP:VNOT]] we need not necessarily include all verifiable info merely because it exists (we aren't robots), especially when it could mislead. [[User:Animalparty|&#45;-Animalparty!]] ([[User talk:Animalparty|talk]]) 12:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)