| other names | GameRankings |
|---|---|
| source type | foobar (not part of original row) |
| publisher | Fooland (state-funded media) (not part of original row) |
| classification | |
Metacritic is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and its news articles on film, TV, and video games. There is no consensus on whether its blog articles and critic opinion pages are generally reliable for facts. There is consensus that user reviews on Metacritic are generally unreliable, as they are self-published sources. Reviewers tracked by Metacritic are not automatically reliable for their reviews. In December 2019, video game aggregate site GameRankings shut down and merged with Metacritic; GameRankings's content is no longer accessible unless archived.[1][2][3]
Please add links to other significant discussions. When in doubt, read and rely on the discussions themselves, rather than the simple summary.
(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)
| Source | Status (legend) |
Discussions | Use | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| List | Last | Summary | |||
| Metacritic (GameRankings) WP:METACRITIC 📌 |
See these discussions of Metacritic: | 2017 |
Metacritic is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and its news articles on film, TV, and video games. There is no consensus on whether its blog articles and critic opinion pages are generally reliable for facts. There is consensus that user reviews on Metacritic are generally unreliable, as they are self-published sources. Reviewers tracked by Metacritic are not automatically reliable for their reviews. In December 2019, video game aggregate site GameRankings shut down and merged with Metacritic; GameRankings's content is no longer accessible unless archived.[1][2][3] | 1Â 2Â | |