:The RFC I started lists all three. (There were actually four, but the fourth (first?) was in December.) It does not matter what hypothesis you were/are working under. What you think about other editors matters not a whit unless such thinking spills over into Wikipedia. 

 :Wikipedia reports what the reliable sources says; we do not write those sources. We cannot speak from our own knowledge; there is no way for such knowledge to be independently verified. If you insist that the dialogue had a cultural impact, you must prove it with a reliable source. 

 :Fact: a friend lost a portion of her house because of Play-Doh and stupidity. It was not a famous person, did not burn down a town, get new laws enacted, set any records in awarded settlements, and was not covered by reliable sources outside the immediate area. Even though it affected a dozen lives and was reported by local, reliable sources, it is trivial within the context of an encyclopedia article on Play-Doh. 
 :Fact: Play-Doh was used in a climatic dialogue in a film. Stated that way, it is also trivial. See: 
 :*Editors need to show why any fact is important enough to include in the encyclopedia 
 :*Editors show how a fact is actually an important fact by citing reliable sources discussing the fact 
 :*Because they can use only reliable sources, editors must say what the reliable sources say 
 :**Example: going back to my friend, if the reliable sources only discussed how much it cost to repair the house, that would be all I could add to the article. It does not matter that I know the family was devastated to lose a 400-year-old table and a Colonial-era clock - I cannot prove it as I am not a reliable source. 
 :**Example: say you find a reputable toy-specialty publication that states sales of Play-Doh rose just after the film came out. That is also all the article here can say: sales rose after the film came out. The increase cannot be attributed to cultural impact, nostalgia, or little green men because we cannot prove it with a reliable source. 
 :*If reliable sources cannot be found, the fact does not belong in an article 

 :Since you have read WP:RS you will have also read that news agencies can also be reliable sources. Have you checked any of the major newspapers?