The Dark Knight Rises reception introduction
Erik, will you please take a look at the discussion at Talk:The_Dark_Knight_Rises#Reception_needs_to_be_changed._Source_not_good_enough.. I would like to get your opinion/advice, especially on covering critical appraisals beyond the British/American sphere, which I feel Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are too dependent on. Betty Logan (talk) 23:58, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film). Since you had some involvement with the Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Jason Quinn (talk) 14:00, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia has a tag called "citation needed."
- Why can you not provide sourced content in the first place? You have experience; you are not just a novice adding content without knowledge of policies and guidelines. Also, it is an especially contentious topic, meaning that the material is likely to be challenged and needs to be clearly verified. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 21:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of White savior narrative in film for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article White savior narrative in film is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White savior narrative in film (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Froglich (talk) 21:17, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Your most recent deletion of material stated the following: "Revert original research; third opinion on talk page agrees it is OR. " In fact, the talk page in question did not state that.
A sentence saying "sources disagree" which is followed immediately by citations of sources disagreeing is not original research. I assume that a lot of Wikipedians have been criticizing you as posting original research. That does not mean that every single sentence in an article is OR. Encyclopedia articles do have topic sentences and summarize material. Skepticalgiraffe (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:32, 23 September 2016 (UTC)