Talk:Reviewers Using Pseuds

I'm not entirely happy with the title for this article. Any better ideas? --Mrs. Potato Head 16:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure this needs an article. This just seems to be a typical use of pseuds and/or anonymity and could go to both pages, that about pseuds and that about anonymity. Sockpuppeting is also related. --Doro 16:57, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Because it crosses both pseuds, sockpuppets, and reviews/feedback, a page on its own may be more efficient (rather than having the info repeated in multiple places). A link could go from each page here. If there must be only one page, the put it on the reviews/feedback page (with a link from the pseud page). 'Reviews Using Pseuds' is the best I can come up with. This was a big issue in the mid-1990s when I entered in fandom as more and more fans started using pseuds both online and in person. --MeeDee 17:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm just not sure what's so special about reviewers using pseuds. Authors use pseuds all the time. Many fans use pseuds without being reviewers or authors. --Doro 17:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree with Doro, (but I do tend in general to find having separate pages on very closely related topics annoying rather than efficient). It's interesting, and I can see you've still got stuff to add, but it really doesn't seem like a separate topic to me, unless you're referring to a particular controversy/event rather than a general historical attitude to pseudonymity (if that's a word)? I would've assumed it was more relevant to the Pseud page too, rather than the review page, but neither page is very long at the moment. MegR 18:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Whether it's it own page or a subsection of one, or more, pages, the historical aspect and change in fannish attitudes about pseuds in relation to reviewing fanworks needs to be addressed. I personally find that having to repeat the same stuff on multiple pages is cumbersome, both in terms of work, but in terms of locating them, and then updating all those "see alsos." I can think of a handful of these articles that drive me crazy. --Mrs. Potato Head 18:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

How about Pseudonymous Reviews or Pseudonymous Reviewing? Or even Fanwork Reviewing and Pseudonymity?--æþel 20:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC)