User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20200505204802/@comment-45692830-20200505212521: 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: | ||
Regardless of the issue of license or intent, I think the idea that the comics were meant to be parody-esque can't be seen as ''inherently'' disqualifying, similar to the discussion taking place regarding ''Curse'' in the other thread. | Regardless of the issue of license or intent, I think the idea that the comics were meant to be parody-esque can't be seen as ''inherently'' disqualifying, similar to the discussion taking place regarding ''Curse'' in the other thread. | ||
The interesting thing I think is that the page says "Doctor Who writers show us their stories created with Comic Maker". This can be read in multiple ways, but it doesn't say something like "new Doctor Who stories made in Comic Maker written by Doctor Who writers, see what you can do yourself". It seems to push the contents of the stories firmly onto the writers themselves, meaning I think I'd agree with Connor on these not being intended to be part of the DWU, but instead being more examples of how the Comic Maker could be used. | The interesting thing I think is that the page says "Doctor Who writers show us their stories created with Comic Maker". This can be read in multiple ways, but it doesn't say something like "new Doctor Who stories made in Comic Maker written by Doctor Who writers, see what you can do yourself". It seems to push the contents of the stories firmly onto the writers themselves, meaning I think I'd agree with Connor on these not being intended to be part of the DWU, but instead being more examples of how the Comic Maker could be used. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20200505204802-1432718/20200505212521-45692830]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 13:29, 27 April 2023
Regardless of the issue of license or intent, I think the idea that the comics were meant to be parody-esque can't be seen as inherently disqualifying, similar to the discussion taking place regarding Curse in the other thread.
The interesting thing I think is that the page says "Doctor Who writers show us their stories created with Comic Maker". This can be read in multiple ways, but it doesn't say something like "new Doctor Who stories made in Comic Maker written by Doctor Who writers, see what you can do yourself". It seems to push the contents of the stories firmly onto the writers themselves, meaning I think I'd agree with Connor on these not being intended to be part of the DWU, but instead being more examples of how the Comic Maker could be used.
