User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45314928-20200707131140/@comment-39988495-20200707134559: 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: | ||
Understandable, but I believe an admin said it was easier to rule out charity publications altogether than go through them on a case by case basis, determining the legality of the stories. If you could provide evidence that [[Lance Parkin]] (and [[Paul Magrs]] in the case of the [[Iris Wildthyme]] story) and [[Kate Orman]] still have the rights to these stories, then ''technically'' they can be accepted as a valid source. | Understandable, but I believe an admin said it was easier to rule out charity publications altogether than go through them on a case by case basis, determining the legality of the stories. If you could provide evidence that [[Lance Parkin]] (and [[Paul Magrs]] in the case of the [[Iris Wildthyme]] story) and [[Kate Orman]] still have the rights to these stories, then ''technically'' they can be accepted as a valid source. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20200707131140-45314928/20200707134559-39988495]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:19, 27 April 2023
Understandable, but I believe an admin said it was easier to rule out charity publications altogether than go through them on a case by case basis, determining the legality of the stories. If you could provide evidence that Lance Parkin (and Paul Magrs in the case of the Iris Wildthyme story) and Kate Orman still have the rights to these stories, then technically they can be accepted as a valid source.
