User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20200505204802/@comment-45314928-20200709000456: 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: | ||
these were not officially released anywhere. they were published to the site like any other fan story, but were promoted. if that is all that it takes for it to be "officially released" then how are the promoted fan stories only a tenuous link if they too were promoted? | these were not officially released anywhere. they were published to the site like any other fan story, but were promoted. if that is all that it takes for it to be "officially released" then how are the promoted fan stories only a tenuous link if they too were promoted? | ||
i argue that the Who writers were acting as fans here too, no proof of being commissioned or payment. | i argue that the Who writers were acting as fans here too, no proof of being commissioned or payment. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20200505204802-1432718/20200709000456-45314928]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 13:29, 27 April 2023
these were not officially released anywhere. they were published to the site like any other fan story, but were promoted. if that is all that it takes for it to be "officially released" then how are the promoted fan stories only a tenuous link if they too were promoted?
i argue that the Who writers were acting as fans here too, no proof of being commissioned or payment.
