Trusted
49,586
edits
User:Epsilon/Opening posts/Non-narrative fiction (edit)
Revision as of 22:44, 3 February 2023
, 3 February 2023Crud it's messing stuff up
No edit summary Tag: Reverted |
(Crud it's messing stuff up) Tag: Manual revert |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<div class="tech"> | <div class="tech"> | ||
{{First pic|Weight of a Dalek.jpg|See this? This innocuous factoid about the lightness of the metal used for Dalek casings?<br>This is one of the '''''leading factors to all non-narrative fiction being flat-out invalid'''''.}} | {{First pic|Weight of a Dalek.jpg|See this? This innocuous factoid about the lightness of the metal used for Dalek casings?<br>This is one of the '''''leading factors to all non-narrative fiction being flat-out invalid'''''.}} | ||
For around the past decade-and-a-half, this Wiki has drawn a Line in the Sand about what fiction can be [[T:VS|a valid source]] for writing [[Tardis:In-universe perspective|in-universe]] articles, by essentially judging a given source — aka a piece of fiction — based on a set of essentially four pieces of critera. But for a small amount arbitrary of arbitrary reasons, non-narrative fiction has been on the Other Side of the Line in the Sand, as it is treated as an "invalid source". | For around the past decade-and-a-half, this Wiki has drawn a Line in the Sand about what fiction can be [[T:VS|a valid source]] for writing [[Tardis:In-universe perspective|in-universe]] articles, by essentially judging a given source — aka a piece of fiction — based on a set of essentially four pieces of critera. But for a small amount arbitrary of arbitrary reasons, non-narrative fiction has been on the Other Side of the Line in the Sand, as it is treated as an "invalid source". | ||