231,276
edits
(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/-/-)) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
No rule is perfect. But this is a pretty good one. It doesn't depend on judging the quality of the work. It doesn't depend on whether you or I feel the narrative elements clash with other stories. It only depends on assessing authorial intent. The question, "Did the BBC or the copyright holder intend for the work to be a part of the continuity or not?" is a perfectly fair question that helps establish whether we should allow something into our articles that are written '''from an in-universe perspective'''. It works in most cases, and it certainly works in the case of DiT. | No rule is perfect. But this is a pretty good one. It doesn't depend on judging the quality of the work. It doesn't depend on whether you or I feel the narrative elements clash with other stories. It only depends on assessing authorial intent. The question, "Did the BBC or the copyright holder intend for the work to be a part of the continuity or not?" is a perfectly fair question that helps establish whether we should allow something into our articles that are written '''from an in-universe perspective'''. It works in most cases, and it certainly works in the case of DiT. | ||
Line 7: | Line 6: | ||
Using our [[four little rules]] is hardly imposing some great barrier to admission. It still lets in all but <.01% of all stories ever produced or licensed by the BBC. | Using our [[four little rules]] is hardly imposing some great barrier to admission. It still lets in all but <.01% of all stories ever produced or licensed by the BBC. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20130319195443-5442547/20130401030922-188432]]</noinclude> |