User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-6032121-20191014212726: Difference between revisions
(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: | ||
P.S.: Still pondering what on Earth you're on about regarding publishers and self-publishers, the one vaguely-relevant thing I can find in Wiki policy s at T:OFF REL again: is that what you're thinking of? | P.S.: Still pondering what on Earth you're on about regarding publishers and self-publishers, the one vaguely-relevant thing I can find in Wiki policy s at T:OFF REL again: is that what you're thinking of? | ||
| Line 9: | Line 8: | ||
Apologies if I got it wrong again but if you want us to stop having to resort to guesswork, you should ''make your arguments explicit''. You did so for "official vs. commercial releases" above, allowing me to properly answer that point in what I hope is a satisfactory manner. Can't you do the same for "self-publisher"? | Apologies if I got it wrong again but if you want us to stop having to resort to guesswork, you should ''make your arguments explicit''. You did so for "official vs. commercial releases" above, allowing me to properly answer that point in what I hope is a satisfactory manner. Can't you do the same for "self-publisher"? | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20190928203157-31010985/20191014212726-6032121]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:31, 27 April 2023
P.S.: Still pondering what on Earth you're on about regarding publishers and self-publishers, the one vaguely-relevant thing I can find in Wiki policy s at T:OFF REL again: is that what you're thinking of?
For prose fiction, release date is whatever is given by the publisher as the release date. Even if you get a copy before that date, you cannot write about that story here until the date the publisher gives as the official launch date.
If so, I think you're basically the only person to ever have interpreted "publisher" in that sentence as "what is legally called a publishing company" rather than "whoever is legally publishing the work". This piece of policy is clearly about preventing early leaks and other scheduling hiccups from overruling the official release date, not anything to do with "publishing company" vs. "self-publisher".
(For the last time, as far as non-lawyers are concerned, a "self-publisher" is self-evidently a kind of "publisher". In fact, it is etymologically obvious that this should be so. "Self-publisher" means "publisher of self". The operative words being publisher of.)
Apologies if I got it wrong again but if you want us to stop having to resort to guesswork, you should make your arguments explicit. You did so for "official vs. commercial releases" above, allowing me to properly answer that point in what I hope is a satisfactory manner. Can't you do the same for "self-publisher"?
