to further elaborate besides being inconsistent your criteria are arbitrary and they are your criteria you've got a serious problem with ownership of this article it's very nice that you've done so much work on it but if you want to enforce your own version on everyone else wikipedia is not the place to be publishing how ironic that you're complaining about me removing relevant cited information ie one guy's opinion from the introduction while you are at the same time removing relevant cited information from the body scholars describe it as a genre that is enough you claim that adding this genre makes the list useless to the reader but that's a very silly claim because quite the opposite is true suppressing genres because of the opinion of one writer or really because of the opinion of one editor makes wikipedia a less useful and trustworthy reference in rescue opera we can go into detail about scholars' thoughts on its coherency as a genre but the list structure of this article is not set up to deal with competing theories charlton's opinion that everyone else is wrong has no place here and certainly not pride of place as already explained that's rich you pretend that there was some kind of consensus which i'm violating when the talk archive you link consists of you you and more you indeed when talk rescue opera contains more users supports its description as a genre talk contribs