User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-28743561-20190216032054/@comment-28743561-20190607162718: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(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\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Some have argued that the vulture is essentially a background prop made of flesh and blood, but I personally see no reason to say that sentient DWU characters should be more valid then non-sentient DWU characters. | Some have argued that the vulture is essentially a background prop made of flesh and blood, but I personally see no reason to say that sentient DWU characters should be more valid then non-sentient DWU characters. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 4: | ||
And the name drop of the Doctor should not go overlooked. Both peices of evidence provide a good case for validity in my book. | And the name drop of the Doctor should not go overlooked. Both peices of evidence provide a good case for validity in my book. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20190216032054-28743561/20190607162718-28743561]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:22, 27 April 2023
Some have argued that the vulture is essentially a background prop made of flesh and blood, but I personally see no reason to say that sentient DWU characters should be more valid then non-sentient DWU characters.
If this story concerned a non-sentient alien (or even a robot) that originated in a DWU story, I would expect much more support. So I see no reason to descriminate based the sentience of the characters.
And the name drop of the Doctor should not go overlooked. Both peices of evidence provide a good case for validity in my book.
