may utc three comments about npov the second paragraph in this article links to specific and very negative reviews however no positive reviews are provided instead readers are provided to the wiki entries for religious right conservative and creationist since rotten tomatoes was used as a primary source for ratings could this sentence be updated to include at least one link to a positive film critic review as mentioned in wikipedia npov even minority viewpoints cannot be completed ignored and in this case minority viewpoint should not be applied since the minority viewpoint is the thesis of the film there seems to be a large discrepancy between film critic scientific community reception of this film and popular opinion user reviews of this film popular opinion votes on internet websites are not considered a reliable source but in this case since rotten tomatoes was already used as a primary source for this portion of the article could this section be updated to include a reference to popular reception to this film with a link to the rotten tomatoes user reviews reviews positive rating at the time of this edit google user reviews for this film an aggregate largely from epinions com show a similar or positive rating why is this film being treated so much differently than fahrenheit in this entry there is no reference to film critic opinion or popular opinion of the film even though the reception was nearly as extreme except positive not negative at rotten tomatoes