Talk:Adam Taurus/@comment-26299202-20150804022500/@comment-24891101-20150805174422

Necessary. Yes, I said that. With the exact same intent as the OP said "All we need now is..." They are equivalent statements. I view such things as obligatory to complete the reference. This is my view, and others can hold differing opinions. But it is the prerogative of all to cleave to their own opinions and to think those of others flawed.

Yes, we have many characters who have been singly referenced from their stories. But when you reference more than one person from a story, it becomes increasingly pleasing to continue to do so. In your examples, we have a Snow White and no Queen, but were we to also have the dwarves and the prince, it would behoove us to also include the queen, as the reference grows in scope. We have a Thor, but were Odin to also be included in a context related to Nora, then we'd also need a Loki. We have an Achilles, and we could add a Hector and be fine, but were we to add Ajax, we should also add Paris, Patroclus, Odysseus and some more, each addition spurring further additions. Given that we have less than a singleton here, we can stop now. But the addition of a Virgil would increase the narrative weight of that story, and so more might be added.

Why presume you that all are familiar with an arbitrary video game? I have heard of it, but I have never had any particular interest in it.