Talk:Nicholas Pegg

Merge

Disagree with the merge. I think regardless of if Pegg is the only "Watcher" or not, it's fine to rework the page to be about the pseudonym, as we have multiple separate pages for writer pseudonyms. -- Tybort (talk page) 22:45, November 1, 2017 (UTC)

Of course, there is no harm in this. And if there is a suspicion that other "Watchers" exist, then sure, this page must stay. But if Pegg is the only one, the reworked page would be nothing but a glorified redirect. There is little reason to force a reader to make two clicks instead of one if the only information on the page is that The Watcher and Pegg is the same person. Many of the pseudonym pages referenced above do contain interesting information pertinent to the pseudonym, like the explanation of why the pseudonym was taken or how it was chosen. If such information can be provided about this one, I don't mind the reworking option. Amorkuz ☎ 23:21, November 1, 2017 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Clayton Hickman recently confirmed that there has only ever been one Watcher. – N8 ☎ 23:51, November 1, 2017 (UTC)