 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Original Research
editI am a little uncomfortable with some of the wording that was just put in. If the paragraph regarding Freudian analysis cannot be cited, it is considered original research and should be removed (or reverted to the previous statements directly supported by the original novel). Please comment — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 11:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that the Freudian comment is original research. There is nothing mentioned in the Concordance or any other secondary source I can find supporting that comment. I would support taking it out. --Mus Musculus 14:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. While I find the theory sound, and am certain I had read it in one of the unauthorized compendiums, without having the text available to cite, I'd fully support its removal. I included it only to prevent an excessively long list of differing character traits, feeling that the analogy was strong enough. --Chzimmerman 16:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- I restored the old link (without the redirect tho). Thanks folks. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 18:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. While I find the theory sound, and am certain I had read it in one of the unauthorized compendiums, without having the text available to cite, I'd fully support its removal. I included it only to prevent an excessively long list of differing character traits, feeling that the analogy was strong enough. --Chzimmerman 16:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Rewriting
editI think the entire article needs to be rewritten from the ground up. Lots42 (talk) 04:11, 28 July 2009 (UTC)