User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-5.2.105.85-20170222095120/@comment-1350697-20170227002345

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-5.2.105.85-20170222095120
Revision as of 15:23, 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:

AeD wrote: I haven't, either, which is why I was being vague, but yeah, it seems to.

But we can't just say "The events of DiT are 100% defo a dream." People are going to have their own interpretations, and sometimes secondary narrative claims are too silly to support all the way. What if our readers don't care about the '90s Virgin books?

A secondary book can not be allowed to definitively decide canon like that. The best bet is to include DiT in articles, while adding "According to some sources, this adventure was a dream."

Now, I know you know there's no such thing as canon, and if what TARDIS Wikia readers gave a snot about mattered an iota on here, the Master's dang battle of the bands wouldn't be on [[The Master]] half a dozen dang times.

Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=User:SOTO/Forum_Archive/Inclusion_debates/@comment-5.2.105.85-20170222095120/@comment-1350697-20170227002345&oldid=3507542"