User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45692830-20200723133026/@comment-6032121-20200724165404: 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: | ||
Well I mean, I feel like precedent is broadly in favour of listening to the official sources when we wonder how to define a story. If the author says it's a story, it's a story — emphasis on '''a''' — even if the "how" isn't immediately obvious to us. For a much less extreme example, ''[[War of the Daleks (novel)|War of the Daleks]]'' contains interludes set in other points of Dalek history and featuring different characters — such as a notorious Daleks vs. Mechnonoids rematch — and despite the lack of any kind of direct connection between it and the main storyline, no one's ever questioned the fact that it's all ''a novel'', because that's how it's always been presented to us. | Well I mean, I feel like precedent is broadly in favour of listening to the official sources when we wonder how to define a story. If the author says it's a story, it's a story — emphasis on '''a''' — even if the "how" isn't immediately obvious to us. For a much less extreme example, ''[[War of the Daleks (novel)|War of the Daleks]]'' contains interludes set in other points of Dalek history and featuring different characters — such as a notorious Daleks vs. Mechnonoids rematch — and despite the lack of any kind of direct connection between it and the main storyline, no one's ever questioned the fact that it's all ''a novel'', because that's how it's always been presented to us. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20200723133026-45692830/20200724165404-6032121]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:22, 27 April 2023
Well I mean, I feel like precedent is broadly in favour of listening to the official sources when we wonder how to define a story. If the author says it's a story, it's a story — emphasis on a — even if the "how" isn't immediately obvious to us. For a much less extreme example, War of the Daleks contains interludes set in other points of Dalek history and featuring different characters — such as a notorious Daleks vs. Mechnonoids rematch — and despite the lack of any kind of direct connection between it and the main storyline, no one's ever questioned the fact that it's all a novel, because that's how it's always been presented to us.
