...that the presence of subtext is completely inconsequential if it isn't combined with other factors that make it clear that the subtext is intended to be read as queer

I'm starting to understand how important the distinction is. The subtext may be nice but when it comes to actual portrayals of sexuality it's, inherently, useless unless it's backed up with textual evidence to support that reading.

I'd be really interested - if you wanted to share - about why you feel Merlin can be read this way. As far as I could tell it's all just subtext too?