Toggle menu
Toggle preferences menu
Toggle personal menu
Not logged in
Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits.

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-27343779-20160109192541/@comment-5918438-20160109195053

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-27343779-20160109192541
Revision as of 14:16, 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)

"Canon" is not an issue here because it does not exist. (T:CANON)

I can't say much for the stage play's validity as a story, but if it was licensed in its 2005 incarnation, it likely merits inclusion as a page, though it would have to be about the 2005 production specifically, as that is the only licensed one.

Even if this play is deemed properly valid—and I can't think of any stage plays we currently deem valid—the 1993 performance most definitely would not be.

Now, I'm just going to guess that no stage plays have ever been deemed valid because they're not going to be exactly the same every night, and they also cannot be revisited. In this case, there was only one performance, which at this point was 11 years ago, and at best all we'd have to go on are some secondary recordings of the show, if those exist at all.

Are you actually suggesting that this stage play should be reconsidered as a valid source, or are we just talking about coverage?

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.