User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45314928-20200610043202/@comment-45692830-20200610053243

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45314928-20200610043202/@comment-45692830-20200610053243 So these arguments here establish that there's likely to be no novelization. If this is the case, that would be an argument both in favor of validity as well as an argument in favor of not renaming the article. Since the arguments weren't addressed, they can be transplanted from the issue of validity to the issue of not renaming the article, since they apply to each.

It's as if I were to take a bunch of arguments for "Greeks are good at philosophy", and then argue over whether Plato was good at philosophy. Someone then said, nah, Plato was bad at philosophy without addressing my arguments, but a discussion of Aristotle popped up. I could just transplant my arguments from before and move right along without changing much.