Thread:Merlinarthur/@comment-3481504-20140929171319/@comment-5674726-20141004095418

I think that this is an illustration of exactly why any relationships pages need to be fact-based rather than opinion-based.

That Merlin and Arthur have a brotherly relationship is clearly something that you feel very strongly about. Can you see that somebody else might feel equally strongly, or perhaps even more strongly, that theirs was not a brotherly relationship, that it was really a romantic relationship, that Merlin became Arthur's friend because of Kilgharrah's prophecy about them, that it was an abusive relationship, or any number of things?

And that's only one article.

What if one person includes his or her opinion that Merlin was the most important person to Arthur and that Arthur trusted him more than he trusted anybody else on the article for Merlin and Arthur, while another person includes his or her opinion that Guinevere was the most important person to Arthur and that Arthur trusted her more than he trusted anybody else on the article for Arthur and Guinevere?

Both posters might feel very strongly that this is the case but both cannot be true and we would then have a situation where the articles contradicted one another.

There could be as many different views as there are viewers.

Should the Relationships articles be an objective outline of the relationship between characters or should they set out the personal opinions of whoever happened to be the last person to edit an article as facts?

As for the interview you speak of, you could include a link to it under Trivia and let readers make up their own minds about whether Qui tacet consentire videtur applies. Even then, it would be a question of Bradley James' view, not canon.