Talk:Great Warriors/@comment-5.13.69.251-20160822121349/@comment-26484417-20160828123056

Well, you said profiles, not blog posts, but okay. If you meant the blog posts on the 10 Great Warriors, then you're right, in a way, but those blog posts were released in the context of introducing the 10 Great Warriors.

Well, no one is claiming you said that. Regardless, the latter part of that paragraph is a fallacy of an argument from consequences.

Moving on, so you say that something I address is only my assumption, but when I say that it isn't and suggest you confirm it yourself, you suddenly don't know what I'm talking about? This offers two explanations: (1) You know what I meant, but pretend that you don't so that you can attack my reaction, or (2) you don't know what I meant, in which case you called it an assumption without even knowing what it is. I doubt there is more to say on this.

Finally, I suppose you could call it an assessment, but--however you call it--the fact remains that the other Family Heads were introduced as part of a blog posts segment introducing the 10 Great Warriors. On the other hand, the Lo Po Bia Family Head's introduction lacks any such context or even mention. If you say that he should be one of the 10GW, then you're already assuming that the 10GW context persists. Although not unlike an assumption that the said context doesn't persist, since they're both assumptions--and assumptions aren't to be included on the wiki--the entry indeed should be adjusted.

In any case, since there is no point in changing the entry before we know at least the Lo Po Bia Family Head's name, there is no rush.