Talk:Princess Cadance/@comment-1416077-20150522151917/@comment-1416077-20150523122217

"Besides, the sentence that immediately follows ("She is Twilight Sparkle's sister-in-law after marrying Shining Armor in A Canterlot Wedding - Part 2") makes it pretty unambiguous."

Actually, it doesn't:

1) In-text, nothing indicates that "A Canterlot Wedding Pt. II" is the same episode she is introduced in.

2) Even assuming that it is the same episode, the wedding could have happened "off-camera" before either of the two characters are introduced.

It is not at all clear or "unambiguous" to anyone that has not seen the episode.

Wikia articles must be written in such a way that they are absolutely clear and unambiguous to readers that have no knowledge of the subject of the article.

If I had not seen the episode in question, based on the sentence as written, I would have no doubt whatsoever that A) Candace and Shining Armor are married when first introduced, and B) they are introduced together in the same scene.

Since both A and B are untrue, the sentence should be corrected accordingly. I don't understand why there is so much resistance to this.