Ahh so someone who ignores a plethora of evidence, just so they can play make believe. Gotcha

Does /s mean sarcasm?

Popular culture has the unfortunate habit of presenting Richard as an overall good king BECAUSE he was an effective military leader. However, this presentation is inaccurate because if you take his entire reign into consideration it becomes patently obvious that he greatly struggled in non-military governance, thus making him a poor king.

My original comment was directed at the issues surrounding popular culture because they often present their work as factually accurate or 'based off true events' and as a result the audience will go 'okay so now I have an accurate idea of *insert topic*'

Just in response to your second sentence: Partial truths are still inaccurate. No one is going to be happy with "Well its mostly correct." If you're learning about something you're going to want a full understanding of the subject, not bits and pieces that give you a partial understanding. As a professor once told me, "The devil is in the details, if you don't address the details he'll make an ass out of you and I."

A historically minded viewpoint is one that bases their conclusions and statements off of the available evidence. I'd argue that past historians did present certain figures, like Richard, in a positive light and as a result of that history textbooks present them in the same way. It's only been in the last 20 years that we've a shift in the academic community, a shift which has caused a reexamination of certain points in time (ex. Dark Ages weren't dark) or certain historical figures (Richard II's reputation was largely tarnished by Tutor bias in the historical record).

To briefly touch on your last sentence, would you rather have an interesting conversation or one that is based off of evidence?

My responses may slow, I have class.

Yes, but from a historically minded viewpoint, it's annoying because it's inaccurate. My comment was made to highlight the differences between historical reality and what we are led to believe through pop culture.

What kind of annoys me about the popular presentation of history is that people like William the Conqueror or King Richard the Lion-heart were see as chads. Neither of them were good rulers, outside of warfare.