Reply
The entire section is based on secondary sources, it isn't me who is reading from Dickens' books and "Cherry picking". The above three and the edit-warrior don't seem to understand this. Dickens wasn't just confirming to the modes of his times, he led the pack, he influenced public opinion, eg. India, eg. Inuits and John Rae the "Scot" for whom truth was no match for Dickens' fiction, and remains to date an "unsung hero". These aspects of Dickens have been mentioned by numerous reliable sources, they aren't wp:FRINGE or wp:UNDUE. What remains to be seen is whether Wikipedia is up to date or its standards are Victorian? I beg permission to repeat my earlier contribution: Metapedia the "alternative encyclopaedia", describes the edits thus "One of the most famous literary figures in the history of English language literature. Yet the legacy section mostly consists of Jewish screeches of “anti-semitism” in relation to the character Fagin in Oliver Twist and Dravidian whining about his comments on dark-skinned killers in British India as the ahistoric canard “racism”." http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Examples_of_propaganda_in_Wikipedia#Literature .