Talk:Cyberon is Back!! (webcast): Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
Tag: 2017 source edit |
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:::::Surely that shouldn't bypass [[Tardis:Valid sources]] Rule 1: Only stories count, right? Are there not instances where sources aren't valid simply because they aren't a narrative? As such this also isn't a story, it's just a Cyberon appearing. [[User:StevieGLiverpool|StevieGLiverpool]] [[User talk:StevieGLiverpool|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:11, 4 November 2022 (UTC) | :::::Surely that shouldn't bypass [[Tardis:Valid sources]] Rule 1: Only stories count, right? Are there not instances where sources aren't valid simply because they aren't a narrative? As such this also isn't a story, it's just a Cyberon appearing. [[User:StevieGLiverpool|StevieGLiverpool]] [[User talk:StevieGLiverpool|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:11, 4 November 2022 (UTC) | ||
Whether or not this particular webcast is narrative is a distinct issue from what is different between this issue and [[Genetics of the Daleks (webcast)]]. The latter is explicitly called a Promo, and thus runs afoul of our rules against trailers. This is not, so it succeeds or fails based on rule 1 irrespective of the comparison to the other webcast. Why don't we think the arguments on this talk page are successful? [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC) | Whether or not this particular webcast is narrative is a distinct issue from what is different between this issue and [[Genetics of the Daleks (webcast)]]. The latter is explicitly called a Promo, and thus runs afoul of our rules against trailers. This is not, so it succeeds or fails based on rule 1 irrespective of the comparison to the other webcast. Why don't we think the arguments on this talk page are successful? [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 01:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC) | ||
: @[[User:StevieGLiverpool]] — "narrative" doesn't mean "three-act structure", it just means "depicting ''in-universe events''". ''Cyberon is Back!'' is narrative: you can summarise things that happen in it. It's night, then a weirdly hollow Cyberon teleports in, then it slowly gets up from its crouching stance. Taking a step back, ''[[The Blue Scream of Death (short story)|The Blue Scream of Death]]'' is also very conspicuously a sequel to its events. This isn't a random moving image of a Cyberon, this is a specific incident with a place in the overall lore. And yes, ''[[Genetics of the Daleks (webcast)|Genetics of the Daleks]]'' is narrative too. As [[User:Najawin]] explained, the issue is that it's a commercial, and that commercials are deemed to break Rule ''4'' regardless of whether they pass Rule 1. <span style="color: #baa3d6;font-family:Comic Sans;">[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']]</span> <span style="color: #baa3d6;">[[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]]</span> 09:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:01, 4 November 2022
Delete/Validity
This is a trailer, not a narrative. It's different then Shadows and that's why I put the delete tag. Never Forget The Day The 456 Arrived ☎ 10:57, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- At worst that means this should be invalid, like Ace Returns! (webcast), but not necessarily deleted. That being said, this page was created as valid by an admin, User:OncomingStorm12th, so I suggest you get your facts right. This has emphatically not been termed a trailer by Arcbeatle, who have instead dubbed it an "overture" in the YouTube description. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 11:00, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- I completely concur Scrooge MacDuck, except I think that this should never be invalid, due to the precedent set by the Tardisode series. Epsilon the Eternal ☎ 11:03, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, brevity in itself is not really reason for invalidity. On top of the great Tardisodes precedent brought by User:Scrooge MacDuck, we have Vrs a (literally) one-sentence story, which has also been created as valid from the beginning. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 17:31, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- "Narrative" just means if things happen with sort of the loosest sense of continuity following them. (Fictional reference works are non-narrative in that things aren't happening, they're describing things that ostensibly already happened.) In this trailer/webcast are things happening? Najawin ☎ 18:25, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, brevity in itself is not really reason for invalidity. On top of the great Tardisodes precedent brought by User:Scrooge MacDuck, we have Vrs a (literally) one-sentence story, which has also been created as valid from the beginning. OncomingStorm12th ☎ 17:31, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- I completely concur Scrooge MacDuck, except I think that this should never be invalid, due to the precedent set by the Tardisode series. Epsilon the Eternal ☎ 11:03, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- A Cyberon appears in a dark, wet alley, it turns, and it attacks something off screen.
- No less narrative than the Tardisodes, Vrs, Untitled, etc. Epsilon the Eternal ☎ 18:46, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- Exactly. (Clarification to my prior comment, a fictional reference work is perhaps better understood as describing "the furniture of the world" than just events that already happened.) Najawin ☎ 19:07, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
- If I may play devil's advocate then, why is this valid but say Genetics of the Daleks, which does pretty much the exact same thing as this, not valid? StevieGLiverpool ☎ 23:24, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- Big Finish explicitly calls it a Promo. Najawin ☎ 23:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- Surely that shouldn't bypass Tardis:Valid sources Rule 1: Only stories count, right? Are there not instances where sources aren't valid simply because they aren't a narrative? As such this also isn't a story, it's just a Cyberon appearing. StevieGLiverpool ☎ 01:11, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- Big Finish explicitly calls it a Promo. Najawin ☎ 23:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- If I may play devil's advocate then, why is this valid but say Genetics of the Daleks, which does pretty much the exact same thing as this, not valid? StevieGLiverpool ☎ 23:24, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly. (Clarification to my prior comment, a fictional reference work is perhaps better understood as describing "the furniture of the world" than just events that already happened.) Najawin ☎ 19:07, September 6, 2020 (UTC)
Whether or not this particular webcast is narrative is a distinct issue from what is different between this issue and Genetics of the Daleks (webcast). The latter is explicitly called a Promo, and thus runs afoul of our rules against trailers. This is not, so it succeeds or fails based on rule 1 irrespective of the comparison to the other webcast. Why don't we think the arguments on this talk page are successful? Najawin ☎ 01:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
- @User:StevieGLiverpool — "narrative" doesn't mean "three-act structure", it just means "depicting in-universe events". Cyberon is Back! is narrative: you can summarise things that happen in it. It's night, then a weirdly hollow Cyberon teleports in, then it slowly gets up from its crouching stance. Taking a step back, The Blue Scream of Death is also very conspicuously a sequel to its events. This isn't a random moving image of a Cyberon, this is a specific incident with a place in the overall lore. And yes, Genetics of the Daleks is narrative too. As User:Najawin explained, the issue is that it's a commercial, and that commercials are deemed to break Rule 4 regardless of whether they pass Rule 1. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 09:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)