User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-4028641-20170222073756/@comment-5918438-20170304215037: 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, we don't deem stories invalid simply for discontinuity, and not everything is always explained. We don't ''need'' it to be explained how the Daleks got there, ''necessarily'', for it to be valid, but it would certainly help the case a lot. In this case, though, that's not the only issue. If an episode of ''Doctor Who'' gave us no context for how..hang on, we ''never'' really know how the Daleks show up again after getting defeated and destroyed entirely the season before. :P We don't need answers to how Davros survived his ''Journey's End'' to allow [[season 9]] as a whole to be considered valid. | Well, we don't deem stories invalid simply for discontinuity, and not everything is always explained. We don't ''need'' it to be explained how the Daleks got there, ''necessarily'', for it to be valid, but it would certainly help the case a lot. In this case, though, that's not the only issue. If an episode of ''Doctor Who'' gave us no context for how..hang on, we ''never'' really know how the Daleks show up again after getting defeated and destroyed entirely the season before. :P We don't need answers to how Davros survived his ''Journey's End'' to allow [[season 9]] as a whole to be considered valid. | ||
That said, since this is obviously much more of a fringe case than an episode of ''Doctor Who'', a solid explanation that ''doesn't'' draw on speculation, and is actually given in-story, might give this one better grounds for validity. You do make a good point about other continuities. It ''is'' clearly Voldemort after ''Goblet of Fire'', after all, and by ''Deathly Hallows'', he's dead. While of course none of that is valid to us, and so is only useful for the purposes of comparison, you do make a good case for all these universes being ''LEGO'' universes, specifically, rather than the "originals", or the de facto continuities as seen and written about in books/movies/on TV. In which case, this ''isn't'' Voldemort from Harry Potter's universe travelling to Batman's, but rather ''LEGO'' Voldemort, from LEGO ''Harry Potter'', and in the same way these aren't the Daleks from ''Doctor Who'', but Daleks from ''LEGO Doctor Who''. It's complicated, at this point, because none of this is yet made clear. | That said, since this is obviously much more of a fringe case than an episode of ''Doctor Who'', a solid explanation that ''doesn't'' draw on speculation, and is actually given in-story, might give this one better grounds for validity. You do make a good point about other continuities. It ''is'' clearly Voldemort after ''Goblet of Fire'', after all, and by ''Deathly Hallows'', he's dead. While of course none of that is valid to us, and so is only useful for the purposes of comparison, you do make a good case for all these universes being ''LEGO'' universes, specifically, rather than the "originals", or the de facto continuities as seen and written about in books/movies/on TV. In which case, this ''isn't'' Voldemort from Harry Potter's universe travelling to Batman's, but rather ''LEGO'' Voldemort, from LEGO ''Harry Potter'', and in the same way these aren't the Daleks from ''Doctor Who'', but Daleks from ''LEGO Doctor Who''. It's complicated, at this point, because none of this is yet made clear. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20170222073756-4028641/20170304215037-5918438]]</noinclude> | ||
Revision as of 14:51, 27 April 2023
Well, we don't deem stories invalid simply for discontinuity, and not everything is always explained. We don't need it to be explained how the Daleks got there, necessarily, for it to be valid, but it would certainly help the case a lot. In this case, though, that's not the only issue. If an episode of Doctor Who gave us no context for how..hang on, we never really know how the Daleks show up again after getting defeated and destroyed entirely the season before. :P We don't need answers to how Davros survived his Journey's End to allow season 9 as a whole to be considered valid.
That said, since this is obviously much more of a fringe case than an episode of Doctor Who, a solid explanation that doesn't draw on speculation, and is actually given in-story, might give this one better grounds for validity. You do make a good point about other continuities. It is clearly Voldemort after Goblet of Fire, after all, and by Deathly Hallows, he's dead. While of course none of that is valid to us, and so is only useful for the purposes of comparison, you do make a good case for all these universes being LEGO universes, specifically, rather than the "originals", or the de facto continuities as seen and written about in books/movies/on TV. In which case, this isn't Voldemort from Harry Potter's universe travelling to Batman's, but rather LEGO Voldemort, from LEGO Harry Potter, and in the same way these aren't the Daleks from Doctor Who, but Daleks from LEGO Doctor Who. It's complicated, at this point, because none of this is yet made clear.
