User talk:Gooperman

On Wikipedia, “main protagonist” is a commonly used and well-established term, especially for ensemble works where multiple protagonists exist but one is clearly central. Stranger Things is exactly that kind of show. While several characters function as protagonists across different arcs, Eleven is consistently positioned as the central narrative focus of the series.

The argument that “a character is either the protagonist or not” is more of a literary theory preference than a Wikipedia content policy. Wikipedia summarizes how subjects are commonly described in reliable sources, and many Wikipedia articles across film and television use “main protagonist” without issue, including other ensemble series.

There is also no policy that prohibits the term “main protagonist.” Removing it does not improve clarity and arguably reduces it, since calling Eleven simply “the protagonist” implies a singular-protagonist structure that the show does not strictly have.

Unless there is a policy-based reason or reliable sourcing that contradicts this wording, I don’t see a justification for repeatedly removing “main.” Per WP:CONSENSUS, edit-warring over stylistic preferences is not productive.

Happy to discuss further, but please stop reverting without addressing these points. Overandoutnerd (talk) 02:34, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

User:Overandoutnerd: Even Wikipedia agrees there's no such thing. If you search "main protagonist", it merely takes you to protagonist. A character is either the protagonist or it's not. There are no levels of protagonist. Gooperman (talk) 16:43, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

The fact that Wikipedia redirects “main protagonist” to “protagonist” doesn’t establish that the term is invalid or prohibited. Redirects exist for navigation, not to make normative claims about language use. There is no policy, guideline, or style rule stating that “main protagonist” cannot be used.

More importantly, Wikipedia articles routinely use the term when reliable sources do. This is not hypothetical. Examples include Walter White, Katniss Everdeen, and Jake Sully, all of which explicitly describe the character as the main protagonist. These are long-standing, stable articles that have passed extensive community scrutiny. If the term were inherently incorrect, it would not persist across so many high-visibility pages.

The claim that “a character is either the protagonist or not” reflects a particular literary theory position, not a Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia does not enforce one academic framework over others. In ensemble narratives, sources frequently distinguish between protagonists and a central or main protagonist. Stranger Things fits that model, and Eleven is consistently framed that way in coverage.

Calling Eleven simply “the protagonist” actually introduces ambiguity, because the series clearly features multiple protagonists depending on the arc. “Main protagonist” clarifies her narrative centrality without denying the ensemble structure.

If there is a policy-based objection or reliable sourcing that contradicts this wording, please cite it. Otherwise, repeatedly reverting based on personal definitions of literary theory falls under stylistic preference, not policy enforcement, and per WP:CONSENSUS that’s not a valid basis for edit-warring.

Happy to keep discussing this constructively, but let’s ground it in policy and precedent rather than assertions about what “Wikipedia agrees” with. Overandoutnerd (talk) 17:06, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I’m following up because you haven’t responded to the points raised above, but you continue to remove “main” not just here, but across multiple unrelated articles like Walter White, Katniss Everdeen, and Jake Sully. That establishes a clear pattern of enforcing a personal interpretation of literary theory across articles rather than engaging in article-specific, consensus-based discussion.

To reiterate: there is no Wikipedia policy that forbids the term “main protagonist.” The distinction between protagonist, deuteragonist, etc., comes from literary theory, not from Wikipedia’s content guidelines. Wikipedia’s role is to summarize how subjects are commonly described in reliable sources, not to impose a single theoretical framework.

For ensemble narratives especially, “main protagonist” is widely used on Wikipedia and in secondary sources to distinguish a central figure from other protagonists. Removing the qualifier does not increase precision here. It arguably decreases it by implying a strictly singular-protagonist structure that does not accurately reflect how Stranger Things is written or discussed.

At this point, continued reverting without engaging in talk page discussion or citing policy-based reasons risks crossing from normal editing into edit-warring over style. Per WP:CONSENSUS and WP:BRD, the appropriate next step is discussion, not repetition.

If you believe the wording should be changed, please:

• Cite a specific Wikipedia policy that prohibits “main protagonist”, or
• Provide reliable sources that explicitly contradict this description for Eleven

Otherwise, please stop reverting and engage here first. I’m happy to continue the discussion, but unilateral changes based on personal preference aren’t productive.

Thanks. Overandoutnerd (talk) 03:18, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing a page's content back to how you believe it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree with your changes. Please stop editing the page and use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. Wikipedia provides a page explaining how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can request help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution such as a third opinion. In some cases, you may wish to request page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

If you continue edit warring, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule— if things indicate that you intend to continue reverting content on the page. -- Alex_21 _TALK 05:09, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Joan Osborne, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page.

As I stated in my edit summary, you are new to this platform, and as such, it would behoove you to show a little humility instead of using snide language toward other editors because you don't agree with them. For your information, I'm an English major and a certified copy editor, so perhaps you are the one who needs to take an English course in order to catch up. If you continue to be disruptive on this platform, something you seem to have a penchant for, you may receive an editing block. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 09:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)