I came across Wikipedia's article on Wikia Search today, while trying to find information on the site.

The article is pretty much useless. It has hardly been edited, is out of date, offers very little information and looks terrible.

How's that for a coincidence?

Well, at least it is honest.

Almost all admins worth their salt have a COI in it (as they use it for sekrit lists, as we all know).

On the flip side, your having written this means it will be improved. :/

I want to know what's wrong with saying the site was "roundly panned"?

Mebbe it sounds too much like a 360° panorama shot.

It's the first step in toning down the criticism. Eventually, it will say "glowingly extolled".