Talk:Lust in the Dust

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film: American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Westerns: Film Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Westerns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Western genre on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WesternsWikipedia:WikiProject WesternsTemplate:WikiProject WesternsWesterns articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Film task force.

Untitled

How about adding a spoiler warning??? Dollvalley 10:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rotten Tomatoes score

For older, less popular films, aggregator scores typically fail to accurately reflect the consensus among critics. The MOS:FILMCRITICS guidelines on Wikipedia advise caution when using aggregators and suggest prioritizing the insights of individual critics. Before the 2000s, platforms like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic didn't exist, and reviews were predominantly found offline, so for films predating this era, it's better to use other sources, such as print publications where critical consensus may be documented. Maintaining a neutral perspective involves sampling a reasonable balance of these retrospective reviews, which I was able to do after looking for reviews in archived papers. Note that none of the 8 reviews (both positive and negative) I added are cited on the film's Rotten Tomatoes page, and that the 8 reviews cited were all published 2-4 decades after the film was released. Feel free to raise any objections. Mooonswimmer 23:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]