229,659
edits
User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45314928-20200610043202/@comment-45692830-20200610051257 (edit)
Revision as of 23:43, 27 April 2023
, 27 April 2023Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7/-/-)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Let's note that [[Thread:275277]] does not rule that we actually as a wiki must view the alleged novelization and the short story that was released to be one and the same. Rather, it says that because Harness refers to the alleged novelization as being discarded twice we consider it invalid and that neither Scrooge nor I were able to get around this fact. | Let's note that [[Thread:275277]] does not rule that we actually as a wiki must view the alleged novelization and the short story that was released to be one and the same. Rather, it says that because Harness refers to the alleged novelization as being discarded twice we consider it invalid and that neither Scrooge nor I were able to get around this fact. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 20: | ||
Since none of this was ever addressed in [[Thread:275277]], and instead the closing argument was only that we care that Harness said the extract was discarded, these arguments still stand, unaccounted for. Similarly, the only thing that thread resolved was the validity of the story, not whether an attempted novelization ever existed in the first place. Without addressing these arguments it cannot, ''in principle'', do that. | Since none of this was ever addressed in [[Thread:275277]], and instead the closing argument was only that we care that Harness said the extract was discarded, these arguments still stand, unaccounted for. Similarly, the only thing that thread resolved was the validity of the story, not whether an attempted novelization ever existed in the first place. Without addressing these arguments it cannot, ''in principle'', do that. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200610043202-45314928/20200610051257-45692830]]</noinclude> | ||