Talk:Verity (short story): Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
: I'm curious about this too, [[Verity (short story)|this]] doesn't seem inherently '[[NOTVALID|non-DWU]]' to me. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC) | : I'm curious about this too, [[Verity (short story)|this]] doesn't seem inherently '[[NOTVALID|non-DWU]]' to me. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 10:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC) | ||
:: It's all because, as to be expected of this Wiki, there was lots of contention with the coverage of ''[[Now We Are Six Hundred (anthology)|Now We Are Six Hundred]]''. After a long Forum thread, it was decided that all the poems would be valid barring this one and one other (cannot remember the name), because they broke the Fourth | :: It's all because, as to be expected of this Wiki, there was lots of contention with the coverage of ''[[Now We Are Six Hundred (anthology)|Now We Are Six Hundred]]''. After a long Forum thread, it was decided that all the poems would be valid barring this one and one other (I cannot remember the name), because they broke the Fourth Wall or something. | ||
:: While this rationale isn't fair, apparently it's on us, the people who want it to be valid, to have the burden of proof to find a statement that it is supposed to be set in the DWU, because we can't re-evaluate a story's validity, or lack thereof, without new evidence, even if the original inclusion debate had illogical decisions. | :: While this rationale isn't fair, apparently it's on us, the people who want it to be valid, to have the burden of proof to find a statement that it is supposed to be set in the DWU, because we can't re-evaluate a story's validity, or lack thereof, without new evidence, even if the original inclusion debate had illogical decisions. | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:: However, none oof this really matters, as we... lemme just check my records... we ''still'' do not have functional Forums for well ''over'' a year at this point. Despite the guy who has adamantly insisted ''he'' restore them drag his heels in the mud and not do a single ''thing'', breaking numerous promises. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>Epsilon</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 14:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC) | :: However, none oof this really matters, as we... lemme just check my records... we ''still'' do not have functional Forums for well ''over'' a year at this point. Despite the guy who has adamantly insisted ''he'' restore them drag his heels in the mud and not do a single ''thing'', breaking numerous promises. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>Epsilon</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 14:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC) | ||
::: But to be clear, while historically I was in favour of this story being valid, I'm not so sure how I feel about it ''now''. I think it would be dependent on the authorial intent. <div style="background-color:#0E234E; border: solid 0.5px gold; display: inline; white-space: nowrap;">[[doctorwho:user:Epsilon the Eternal|<span style="background:#0E234E; color:white"><code>Epsilon</code></span>]][[doctorwho:user talk:Epsilon the Eternal|📯]] [[doctorwho:special:Contributions/Epsilon the Eternal|📂]]</div> 14:05, 5 June 2022 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 14:05, 5 June 2022
Validity[[edit source]]
Is our sole reason for declaring this non-DWU really that it takes place in a universe where Doctor Who is fiction? Because now it's established Doctor Who exists as a work of fiction both in another universe and in N-Space, I see no further justification for this. 86.187.238.24talk to me 17:15, April 18, 2020 (UTC)
- I'm curious about this too, this doesn't seem inherently 'non-DWU' to me. Cookieboy 2005 ☎ 10:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- It's all because, as to be expected of this Wiki, there was lots of contention with the coverage of Now We Are Six Hundred. After a long Forum thread, it was decided that all the poems would be valid barring this one and one other (I cannot remember the name), because they broke the Fourth Wall or something.
- While this rationale isn't fair, apparently it's on us, the people who want it to be valid, to have the burden of proof to find a statement that it is supposed to be set in the DWU, because we can't re-evaluate a story's validity, or lack thereof, without new evidence, even if the original inclusion debate had illogical decisions.
- But do bear in mind, the rule that we have to have new evidence to evaluate a story's validity is generally a rule I stand behind. It would stop people from reopening threads on stories like The Curse of Fatal Death solely on the premise that "it isn't canon!". It's just that in this instance, the rule is frustrating.
- However, none oof this really matters, as we... lemme just check my records... we still do not have functional Forums for well over a year at this point. Despite the guy who has adamantly insisted he restore them drag his heels in the mud and not do a single thing, breaking numerous promises. 14:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- But to be clear, while historically I was in favour of this story being valid, I'm not so sure how I feel about it now. I think it would be dependent on the authorial intent. 14:05, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
