User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-4028641-20170222073756/@comment-25117610-20170224230542

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-4028641-20170222073756
Revision as of 14:46, 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)

OttselSpy25 wrote: It was declared invalid because of the minor RPG elements of the game. The narrative itself was deemed entirely valid, and since it is part of the LEGO canon, it is very important to deciding if non-video game Doctor Who products in this range are valid.

Once again: Just because we declare something invalid doesn't mean that we get to pretend that it doesn't exist in discussion. Non-valid doesn't mean non-canon.

But that the problem is that "only valid stories can be used to describe an "in-universe" topic". It doesn't matter why LEGO Dimensions was deemed invalid on this wiki. It isn't a valid source for any in-universe article. I must admit I am much more inclined to accept "The LEGO Batman Movie" as a VS now than when this thread began, be we can't do it because of something stated, explained or mentioned in LEGO Dimensions.

Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=User:SOTO/Forum_Archive/Inclusion_debates/@comment-4028641-20170222073756/@comment-25117610-20170224230542&oldid=3505435"