Board Thread:False Info and Speculative Discussion/@comment-4723271-20140716053249/@comment-6383956-20141224223151

Paul.rea wrote: You wish to disregard the GLAAD report. I asked for an alternate scientific report on the subject that backs up your opinion about Teen Wolf. I'm not disregarding the GLAAD Report. I did say that the GLAAD report doesn't do a good job of telling us the quality of characters, since they way they measure quality is based on something more objective than what most of us mean when we discuss it. (Diversty, being their standard, while most of the rest of us talk about well-roundedness.) The GLAAD Report has been known to make mention of something that may be groundbreaking or exceptionally well-written but it doesn't factor into the grading at all.

My opinion is that Danny is too major a character to suddenly have him disappear with no mention and no explanation for an entire season. He's not a minor background character, he's a secondary character and his absence should have been addressed. That is supported by the GLAAD Report which YOU have repeatedly brought up.

My opinion is that by taking him out and having another gay person of color take his place, Teen Wolf is not doing anything to improve representation or break ground -- and since Teen Wolf went from two LGBT secondary characters to one, the next GLAAD Report (which, again, YOU brought up) is going to reflect that.

The only opinion I've expressed in this thread that isn't supported by the GLAAD Report (which, again, YOU brought up) is that you are an offensive, uneducated shoddy-excuse for a Wiki admin who shouldn't be interacting with human beings ever, and while I can't find a scientific study to back me up I did take the liberty of going through Wikia's community guidelines to see what they expect of admins, and you probably ought to do the same because I believe you are falling astonishingly short.