User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20190809230951/@comment-6032121-20190810204708

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-1432718-20190809230951
Revision as of 13:27, 27 April 2023 by SV7 (talk | contribs) (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))
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

According to the page itself, I get the impression that the books consisted of short stories packaged together with some additional info on the topic being featured. As the summaries present on all of the short stories' individual pages show, these are clearly narrative as anything. See Stamp of Approval (short story), for example.

I suppose by the Wiki's policies, the additional info provided around the short story would probably be invalid, but I think it's plain that this should have no bearing on the status of the featured stories, any more than the fact that any given Doctor Who Magazine issue is filled with non-narrative material of no validity at all, without its endangering the validity of a comic story printed within.

(All that being said, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but there arealso circumstances where a story has an encyclopedic format yet is still considered valid by the Wiki. The Book of the War (novel), say. Where exactly Tardis draws the line is something I'd quite like to know myself, but there are objectively encyclopedias that fall on the right side of it.)

Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=User:SOTO/Forum_Archive/Inclusion_debates/@comment-1432718-20190809230951/@comment-6032121-20190810204708&oldid=3500724"