User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-4028641-20170306172600/@comment-95.147.32.223-20170306201902: 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:
'''User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-4028641-20170306172600/@comment-95.147.32.223-20170306201902'''
You have a good point but my question is do these stories make sense without the invalid story although you can say the events happened but not as dipicted in the invalid story one thing about braking the fourth wall if a fix with sontarans is invalid because it broke it then why is the feast of steven or the comic the fourth wall valid as both brak it quite casually
You have a good point but my question is do these stories make sense without the invalid story although you can say the events happened but not as dipicted in the invalid story one thing about braking the fourth wall if a fix with sontarans is invalid because it broke it then why is the feast of steven or the comic the fourth wall valid as both brak it quite casually
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude>
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20170306172600-4028641/20170306201902-95.147.32.223]]</noinclude>

Latest revision as of 15:09, 27 April 2023

You have a good point but my question is do these stories make sense without the invalid story although you can say the events happened but not as dipicted in the invalid story one thing about braking the fourth wall if a fix with sontarans is invalid because it broke it then why is the feast of steven or the comic the fourth wall valid as both brak it quite casually