Talk:Let That Be Your Last Battlefield

AV Club and reception section
There needs to be some serious editing going on in regards to "The A.V. Club" getting their reviews under the "reception" section for a number of t.v. shows and movies. Reception is for CONTEMPORARY reviews of THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ORIGINAL WORK WAS PUBISHED/PRODUCED. The A.V. Club wasn't around until 1993, and their "retro reviews" do not count as a "contemporary review" of the content in question. Because I am seeing this happen with more than just Star Trek, it seems to me that the A.V. Club is running a marketing campaign on wikipedia to get free publicity for their reviews. Something needs to be done to clean this bs up. If they reviewed the material when it first came out, then so be it, but unless The A.V. Club has a time machine, any report of their "reviews" in ANY "reception section" of wikipedia are out of place and do not count as a contemporary account of the reception for that day and age. Reception is a VERY CRITICALLY important aspect of understanding how the public at large viewed something during THAT ERA. 2601:280:4480:4810:540D:C4C8:5014:8825 (talk) 05:14, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that and I've remarked in the comments about other episodes that the "Reception" section needs to be pared down, as well as the "Plot" section. It seems to me, as to you, that A.V. Club's "rankings" are post hoc and have little to do with the reception of the episode. I was a Star Trek fan in my teens, and I saw the first broadcast of this and thought it was juvenile and tried to make a point in a silly way. Wastrel Way (talk) Eric