::::No one said you were POV pushing. I said you were violating NPOV by giving a fringe theory undue weight. The authenticity of the film is a separate issue from whether the boy died — whether exactly as described or differently — and to the best of my knowledge, despite the various legitimate questions, that he did not die remains a fringe theory. Talking about his "alleged death" and how he "appeared to be shot to death," particularly in the lead, violates NPOV (and "shot to death" is odd writing). If you want your writing to imply that he may not have died, you'll have to show that reliable published sources are maintaining that position.  (talk)