User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45692830-20200723133026/@comment-6032121-20200723190302: 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: | ||
Well, that's all that was said ''in the Twee''t. I'd need to read the novel myself to know for sure, but it seemed plausible that it'd list off more features of the in-universe book than Farnell's concise Twitter summary — including its title. | Well, that's all that was said ''in the Twee''t. I'd need to read the novel myself to know for sure, but it seemed plausible that it'd list off more features of the in-universe book than Farnell's concise Twitter summary — including its title. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 4: | ||
I think ''joke book'' will probably have to be included in the page title, anyway, if that is the thing's legal title. (Could someone who owns a copy take a look at the 'legal' paragraph?) We counter-intuitively call the TV Movie's novelisation ''[[The Novel of the Film (novelisation)|The Novel of the Film]]'' for comparable reasons. We use a story's legal title, ''not'' the name most often used for it in conversation. | I think ''joke book'' will probably have to be included in the page title, anyway, if that is the thing's legal title. (Could someone who owns a copy take a look at the 'legal' paragraph?) We counter-intuitively call the TV Movie's novelisation ''[[The Novel of the Film (novelisation)|The Novel of the Film]]'' for comparable reasons. We use a story's legal title, ''not'' the name most often used for it in conversation. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20200723133026-45692830/20200723190302-6032121]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:22, 27 April 2023
Well, that's all that was said in the Tweet. I'd need to read the novel myself to know for sure, but it seemed plausible that it'd list off more features of the in-universe book than Farnell's concise Twitter summary — including its title.
Anyway, yes, User:Epsilon the Eternal mentioned the policy to which I was referring — if the book exists in-universe, it should get the undabbed form, meaning the real book should be dabbed whether or not it's valid.
I think joke book will probably have to be included in the page title, anyway, if that is the thing's legal title. (Could someone who owns a copy take a look at the 'legal' paragraph?) We counter-intuitively call the TV Movie's novelisation The Novel of the Film for comparable reasons. We use a story's legal title, not the name most often used for it in conversation.
