{{Shortcut|WP:ROTTENTOMATOES}}
{{Infobox
| title = [[Rotten Tomatoes]]
| image = [[File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-en.svg|100px|alt=logo]] ''(not part of original row)''
| label2 = source type
| data2 = foobar ''(not part of original row)''
| label3 = publisher
| data3 = Fooland (state-funded media) ''(not part of original row)''
| label5 = website
| data5 =
| label6 = classification
| data6 = [[File:Yes Check Circle.svg|20px]] Usually reliable for typical purposes
}}
Rotten Tomatoes is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and its news articles on film and TV. 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 Rotten Tomatoes are generally unreliable, as they are [[WP:SPS|self-published source]]s. Reviewers tracked by Rotten Tomatoes are not automatically reliable for their reviews, while there is no consensus on whether their "Top Critics" are generally reliable. There is consensus that Rotten Tomatoes should not be used for biographical information, cast and crew data, or other film and television data, as it is sourced from user-generated and user-provided content with a lack of oversight and verification.
== Prior discussions ==
{{WP:RSPLinks}}
''Please add links to other significant discussions. When in doubt, read and rely on the discussions themselves, rather than the simple summary.''
* Simple summary of prior discussions: '''TBD'''
{{DEFAULTSORT:Rotten Tomatoes, Perennial sources}}
==Notes==
{{notelist}}
==References==
== Original table row for comparison ==
''(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)''
{{Wikipedia:RSPTableHeader}}
|- class="s-gr" id="Rotten Tomatoes"
| [[Rotten Tomatoes]] {{WP:RSPSHORTCUT|WP:ROTTENTOMATOES}}
| {{WP:RSPSTATUS|gr}}
| {{rsnl|411|RFC: Use of Rotten Tomatoes for biographical information|2023|rfc=y}}
| {{WP:RSPLAST|2024}}
| Rotten Tomatoes is considered generally reliable for its review aggregation and its news articles on film and TV. 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 Rotten Tomatoes are generally unreliable, as they are [[WP:SPS|self-published source]]s. Reviewers tracked by Rotten Tomatoes are not automatically reliable for their reviews, while there is no consensus on whether their "Top Critics" are generally reliable. There is consensus that Rotten Tomatoes should not be used for biographical information, cast and crew data, or other film and television data, as it is sourced from user-generated and user-provided content with a lack of oversight and verification.
| {{WP:RSPUSES|rottentomatoes.com}}
|}