User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20191101112654/@comment-1432718-20191210034245: 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-31010985-20191101112654/@comment-1432718-20191210034245'''
OK, I have to correct a mistake that is pervasive throughout this thread and several others.  
OK, I have to correct a mistake that is pervasive throughout this thread and several others.  


Line 13: Line 12:


These stories are considered invalid, despite having the Doctor in them, but the wiki hasn't ground to a halt. Please do not use character appearance to argue for a story's validity. Posts doing so may be subject to deletion.
These stories are considered invalid, despite having the Doctor in them, but the wiki hasn't ground to a halt. Please do not use character appearance to argue for a story's validity. Posts doing so may be subject to deletion.
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude>
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20191101112654-31010985/20191210034245-1432718]]</noinclude>

Latest revision as of 14:31, 27 April 2023

OK, I have to correct a mistake that is pervasive throughout this thread and several others.

Validity is not determined by appearances. There are several stories that contain the Doctor and/or his companions that are nevertheless invalid. For example,

This is just a small random sample.

These stories are considered invalid, despite having the Doctor in them, but the wiki hasn't ground to a halt. Please do not use character appearance to argue for a story's validity. Posts doing so may be subject to deletion.