Forum:Temporary forums/Validity debate: Scream of the Shalka: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Forum:Temporary forums/Validity debate: Scream of the Shalka (view source)

Revision as of 18:58, 25 April 2024

2,167 bytes added , 25 April

m

Updating links from Series 1 (Doctor Who) to Series 1 (Doctor Who 2005)

Botgo50

Bots, emailconfirmed, Administrators

34,286

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{retitle|{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
+{{archive}}[[Category:Inclusion debates|{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]
+{{big toc}}
 ==Opening post==
 Well, this is the first inclusion debate this wiki has had since the old forums fell (which I wasn't around for). I think the fact that this proposal managed to climb to the top of [[Tardis:Temporary forums#Proposed threads]] anyway demonstrates that, bounded as it is, it reflects an issue where the community feels we need to act, and sooner rather than later.
@@ Line 25: / Line 27: @@
 Separately from the above line of argument, I think the classic line of argument that "by the time ''[[Scream of the Shalka (webcast)|Scream of the Shalka]]'' came out, the BBC had already decreed it wouldn't be the Official Continuation, and therefore Cornell knowingly put it out as something which 'wouldn't count'" is just wrong.
-It might seem strange to believe in hindsight, but no one was sure that [[Russell T Davies]]' [[Series 1 (Doctor Who)|Series 1]] would really work out, even after it entered production. We're talking about late [[2003 (releases)|2003]] here. For reference, ''[[Rose (TV story)|Rose]]'' only started shooting in [[20 July (releases)|20 July]] [[2004 (releases)|2004]]. Even the casting of [[Christopher Eccleston]] hadn't been announced yet — just "Russell T Davies will headline a ''Doctor Who'' revival on BBC Wales". ''Anything'' could have gone wrong yet, and so it's obvious, without hindsight-bias, why the BBC would avoid putting all its eggs in one basket. It downplayed ''Shalka'', yes, because why would you jinx the BBC Wales show before it even started by confusing the branding? But it didn't cast it out entirely, nor immediately cancel the planned sequels.
+It might seem strange to believe in hindsight, but no one was sure that [[Russell T Davies]]' [[Series 1 (Doctor Who 2005)|Series 1]] would really work out, even after it entered production. We're talking about late [[2003 (releases)|2003]] here. For reference, ''[[Rose (TV story)|Rose]]'' only started shooting in [[20 July (releases)|20 July]] [[2004 (releases)|2004]]. Even the casting of [[Christopher Eccleston]] hadn't been announced yet — just "Russell T Davies will headline a ''Doctor Who'' revival on BBC Wales". ''Anything'' could have gone wrong yet, and so it's obvious, without hindsight-bias, why the BBC would avoid putting all its eggs in one basket. It downplayed ''Shalka'', yes, because why would you jinx the BBC Wales show before it even started by confusing the branding? But it didn't cast it out entirely, nor immediately cancel the planned sequels.
 As reported by [[User:JDPManjoume]], who's done a lot of research on this subject: at [[Talk:Scream of the Shalka (webcast)#Note for possible future validity discussion]]:
@@ Line 52: / Line 54: @@
 :: I support the validity of ''[[Scream of the Shalka (webcast)|Scream of the Shalka]]'' and its related works. [[User:Cookieboy 2005|Cookieboy 2005]] [[User talk:Cookieboy 2005|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
-[[Category:Temporary forums]]
 ::: I likewise '''support''' validating ''Scream of the Shalka'' and its related works, both under authorial intent at the time and Rule 4 by Proxy. [[User:Pluto2|Pluto2]][[User talk:Pluto2|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 15:46, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
@@ Line 90: / Line 91: @@
 Supporting this validation too, specifically '''as an outright Rule 4 pass'''. As I did then on the Talk page, I am under continued belief that the contemporary evidence supports it as such. [[User:JDPManjoume|JDPManjoume]] [[User talk:JDPManjoume|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 14:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
+:: I fully support under rule 4 however I will also place my support behind rule 4 by proxy should the need arise.[[User:Anastasia Cousins|Anastasia Cousins]] [[User talk:Anastasia Cousins|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 23:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
+::: I fully support inclusion and feel that it is absolutely fine for whatever gets voted to the top being what's discussed, within mod discretion.  Like OttselSpy, I'll believe a permanent forum will happen when it is live and functional and not a moment before. [[User:Schreibenheimer|Schreibenheimer]] [[User talk:Schreibenheimer|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 11:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
+== Conclusion ==
+<div class="tech">
+Alright, alright. We're around 5 days of closure, and over for a week there have been no further comments. A lot has been discussed about ''Shalka'' in this wiki's past, and it's been, I'd say, fairly summarized in this very thread's opening post.
+[[User:Cousin Ettolrhc]] has made a really solid case under the "Classic Rule 4" argument that ''Shalka'' has always passed our [[T:VS|Valid sources]] requirements, and for that alone this thread's conclusion should be that '''''[[Scream of the Shalka (webcast)|Scream of the Shalka]]'' and its sequels are now to be treated as valid sources'''.
+However, I think there's some beauty in using our recently-codified "Rule 4 by Proxy" to help us solidify '''how''' we're treating these stories: as-of-2023, ''"the"'' [[Ninth Doctor]] of the ''Doctor Who'' universe is, in our collective minds, [[Christopher Eccleston]]. But as [[The Doctor's ninth incarnation]] illustrates, there's also no doubt that he isn't ''the only'' possible successor to Paul McGann's Eighth Doctor, on [[John Hurt|TV ''Who'' itself]]. Therefore, '''[[Richard E Grant]]'s Doctor and companions fall within the realm of "possible futures"''' (applying [[alternate timeline]], [[parallel universe]] or whichever other terminology individual stories may use). [[User:OncomingStorm12th|OncomingStorm12th]] [[User talk:OncomingStorm12th|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 19:17, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
+</div>