"

 Wikipedia:BRD 

In your future dealings with editors on articles please be aware of the above policy that says you should discuss any changes after your bold change has been reverted on the article talk page. In other words: 
 You being bold. (which is great).
 Me Reverting because unless they are resurrected by magic zombies are not paranormal creatures in the traditional sense. 
 You should of Discussed.

Please bear this in mind in future. This is so that you can fully justify your reasoning behind the changes, and are not caught up in pointless edit wars going back and forth and then you yourself cannot be accused of edit warring. Look forward to working with you.   ✉  

 I have read other rules where they say if it is done multiple times, then be discussed. And I have seen several main editors, who I'm sure you would know if named, who dodn't follow BRD at all.
 And I wasn't going to discuss my edit on Warm Bodies the second time round because I put it back with sources I found for it. If you weren't happy with that, then I would have discussed it.
 But as you seem happy with it now, as you haven't reverted it, then there isn't any problem.   

Just because they don't, doesn't mean you shouldn't. Old saying, ""do as I say not as I do"" comes to mind. In other words, do as Wikipedia says, not as other editors do, and you can't really go wrong. 
It's not a case of being happy with it, I just don't want to edit war over it. I do not believe that it is classed as ""paranormal"" the lead needs sorting anyway as there are far too many genre's listed in the opening lead.   ✉  

 The idea of free will also comes to mind. Like I said, if it was reverted a second time I would have said why it should have been included on the talk page. I'm not going to waste my time. I added an edit in and then later found a source for it. Paranormal romance is currently the only genre there with a source. As we are using our own opinions on the page, you don't believe paranormal romance should be included as there are too many genres, l well I personally think ""fantasy"" could go. The story is focusing more on paranormal romance than it is on the fantasy, it is inspired by the love story Romeo and Juliet.   
Good idea. I'll get rid of it. A source isn't usually needed for every genre. I will also transfer a copy of this conversation to the article talk page. Just so other involved can par take.   ✉  
 Woops, just realised I moved this over to my archive. Meant to only move the two dormant posts.   
That's cool. I thought it was something like that so I replaced it.   ✉  

Thor
Yes, I saw the film almost two weeks ago. The walk-and-talk corridor scene where Loki shape-shifts several times. But we all need to cite our sources, and they can't be personal viewing until after the film comes out. You did cite it the second time, so all's well.   

 An RfC that you may be interested in... 

As one of the previous contributors to  or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a [[Wikipedia:Requests for comments|RfC