" 
 : Hi Lembazza, just dropping you a note to say that I agree WALL-E is a an animated adventure with romantic overtones and a sci-fi theme (whereas by contrast Space Jam is a ""comedy"").   

 : Not just any website will do  has to be something wiki-reliable, which passes the wiki-rules.  With movies, for instance, you would want a source like Roger Ebert.  Here we go:   
 :::*  
 : Thus, we can say with a straight face (in wikipedia's voice) that WALL-E is in fact a family-oriented animated adventure film, a tale of science-fiction.  It is not, in short, a comedy (nor a ""comedy"").  Reading further and deeper, this is no accident: Ebert never mentions humour/humor, laughs/laughing, jokes/joking, funny/amusing, or comedy/""comedy"" ... anywhere in the review.  He talks about many other things, but never strays from his basic stance that WALL-E is a sci-fi adventure film with romantic undercurrents.   
 :   Now of course, there *are* other WP:SOURCES out there, which *do* say the WALL-E is a comedy, flat out.  The movie is pretty humourous, so you can see where these other sources got it wrong.  But the question for wikipedia, is not which sources got it right, and which got it wrong  wikipedia should simply reflect what the sources say.  And in this case, some sources say animated adventure, and some say animated comedy.  The correct outcome is for the article to explain to the readership that, according to Roger Ebert the film is an adventure with a sci-fi story,(ref#1) but according to SomeOtherSource the film is a comedy with a sci-fi story.(ref#2)  Make sense?   
 :   Technologically, there are some limits on how categories work on-wiki, so it is not always possible to make them nuanced, and in particular, films which are in more than one category (""intersecting"") are very hard to get right, and cause a lot of drama and reverting.  WALL-E is a funny movie, so maybe it belongs in the comedy-category, but it is also undeniably an adventure movie, so it certainly belongs in the adventure-category, and because categories are a weak-spot in our server programming this is not always possible to accomplish (cf Category:list of $nationalityGoseHere $ethnicityGoeshere $genderGoesHere $historicalEraGoesHere $genreGoesHere novelists ... which is a HUGE problem nowadays because people are over-categorizing like crazy).   
 :   Sometimes one source is not enough, to convince the other wikipedians.  Holler at them?  Nah, just get more sources.  Adventure.  Epic.  Saga.  Romance?  Well, maybe the sources are contradictory, and this film is many things.  It will take some time before wikipedia gets this right, because it is complicated.  But eventually, the goal is for wikipedia to get it right.  So take the time to get it right, but do it right, nicely not screamy.  
 
 : In any case, you seem to be a sensible wikipedian, with some good ideas, so I hope you'll consider sticking around.  p.s. Of course, your block by Kudpung was not really incorrect:  you have been warned a few times, and you were not listening to the warnings.  ""Indef"" means simply, until you are willing to listen.  The specific generic rational of 'not here' was obviously wrong, Kudpung probably meant 'not here AT THE MOMENT' but we have a specific wiki-jargon for that, which is to block for 'general disruptiveness'.  Deleting stuff in anger, namecalling, that stuff... not wiki-kosher.   
 :   If you wanna be a wikipedian, you gotta be polite.  To everyone, at all times, even when (especially when) they are NOT being very civil to you.  It is easy once you get the hang of it.  Just stick to commenting on the sources and the contents of