Tech, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators
12,465
edits
More actions
Forum:Coverage/validity: In the Domain of the Daleks (edit)
Revision as of 21:13, 17 September 2023
, 17 September 2023→Discussion
No edit summary Tag: 2017 source edit |
Bongolium500 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
:: I actually wonder if Part 3 and Part 4 aren't meant to be two possible outcomes, but you're right that it's a bit fuzzy. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 20:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | :: I actually wonder if Part 3 and Part 4 aren't meant to be two possible outcomes, but you're right that it's a bit fuzzy. [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|'''Scrooge MacDuck''']] [[User_talk:Scrooge MacDuck|⊕]] 20:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | ||
::: This is not the only piece of merch that I think could have an argument for coverage (the "Temporal Blast Combat Set" from [[Character Building]] comes to mind, only because I happen to own it, but there are others that I don't own) and I think the topic would benefit from a dedicated thread to decide on a "theory of coverage". The medium of merch is a plentiful one that I don't think we do enough to cover, but suffers from many of the same issues as multi-path fiction and so I feel another thread would be beneficial to get all of the details straightened out. Outside of those with "stories" or flavour text, some merch could be covered effectively as 3D illustrations, so that's another angle to consider. [[User:Bongolium500|<span title="aka Bongolium500">Bongo50</span>]] [[User talk:Bongolium500|<span title="talk to me">☎</span>]] 21:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC) | |||