Talk:TARDIS Teaser (game)

Validity

Is there actually a reason this is invalid apart from discontinuity? As per T:VS — "Our methods have long stressed the need to include as many different tales as possible, even if they are in explicit narrative contradiction." — the fact that this contradicts the television series is not reason enough for invalidity, especially as Dr. Ninth also contradicts the television series and is valid.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

19:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Upupup. I'm sorry, but we have Forums now, albeit Temp ones. If you want to argue this, argue it in an inclusion debate. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 19:12, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes but no, it has been stated that inclusion debates aren't being accepted right now due to not being a priority! Especially as this story may not even necessitate an inclusion if its invalidity is a mistake based upon a misconception of T:VS, which has happened a lot before! And surely it'd be better to work out if this even needs an inclusion debate, here, first, rather than clogging up the proposed threads with yet inclusion debate that has no chance of being accepted currently.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

20:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

No Epsilon, it said that they're unlikely to be accepted as they have narrow focus and we have a large backlog.

specific validity debates about specific stories or series may not be selected for discussion in the immediate future

May, not will. With that said, given that we have six slots and have never used more than four at one time, I don't see a reason why we don't have a perpetual slot dedicated to inclusion debates. The issue was discussed at Tardis talk:Temporary forums/Archive 1, and a suggestion to there being 2 inclusion debate slots was taken seriously. Najawin ☎ 20:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)