User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-197.86.143.126-20200606192351/@comment-45692830-20200606221450

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-197.86.143.126-20200606192351/@comment-45692830-20200606221450 I think you misunderstand me slightly. With my "Monk comments" I'm not disputing that Hulke and Dicks have authorial intent that The Master and The War Chief are the same person (though I do not cede that point, I really don't care, I merely am not disputing it with this argument here). I'm disputing the idea that comments about it are necessarily binding. And I agree with you on the T:NPOV issue, as it so happens. At least somewhat.

I guess a better way of rephrasing my argument is the following. "If we take these arguments as to be part of the reason why The War Chief and The Master are the same person, we have to include language that suggests that The Monk and The Master are the same person, since The Monk was also a renegade met by The Doctor."

Now we have two options. We can either accept this, and take these as good arguments, then change wording on The Monk's articles, or reject them, and consider the other arguments in a vacuum. I think it's important that the rest of the argument stand on its own. If it does, then we can discuss how to handle The Monk being The Master, since this change would seem to force that one.