Forum:Temporary forums/Names from novelisations in page titles: Difference between revisions

Forum:Temporary forums/Names from novelisations in page titles (view source)

Revision as of 01:32, 8 February 2023

1,397 bytes added , 8 February 2023

→‎Discussion

Epsilon

Trusted

49,538

edits

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 :::: I '''support''' the proposal [[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]][[User Talk:OttselSpy25|🤙☎️]] 00:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
+::::: While I understand @[[User:CzechOut]]'s rationale, I felt it is undermined by the double standard applied by only applying such a rule to novelisations. I feel, due to this double standard, the rationale while noble in cause has done nothing but frustrate me due to its lack of consistency (and the fact that I disagree with the ruling at all but that's besides the point).
+::::: I also don't understand why ''novelisations'', out of all of "extended universe" sources, were the only ones subjected to this rule, as the recent novelisations, such as ''[[Rose (novelisation)|Rose]]'', has heavily influenced series like ''[[Redacted (audio series)|Redacted]]'', while sources such as old annuals and what-have-you are much more obscure, so how come names from more widely "accepted" sources like novelisations were barred but names from obscurer sources are fair game? What makes this even clearer to me is that @CzechOut has actually named pages like [[Cyber-Leader (A Good Man Goes to War)]] despite the fact that the name ''came from a [[Doctor Who Magazine Special Edition]] despite the fact that it isn't an in-universe source of '''any''' kind''!
+::::: However, even disregarding recent developments that completely resolve @CzechOut's rationale, I think that this double standard should've been overruled years ago. {{User:Epsilon the Eternal/signature}} 01:32, 8 February 2023 (UTC)