229,659
edits
User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45692830-20200610235524/@comment-45692830-20200611053155: Difference between revisions
More actions
User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45692830-20200610235524/@comment-45692830-20200611053155 (edit)
Revision as of 23:46, 27 April 2023
, 27 April 2023Bot: 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)
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7/-/-)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
So I took some time to trawl through old threads and found [[Forum:Are Blogs valid sources?]]. There's not that much here different from the actual policy in [[T:UNOFF REF]], but we can make it a little bit clearer as to my argument that the current policy wasn't built to handle the current situation. | So I took some time to trawl through old threads and found [[Forum:Are Blogs valid sources?]]. There's not that much here different from the actual policy in [[T:UNOFF REF]], but we can make it a little bit clearer as to my argument that the current policy wasn't built to handle the current situation. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 4: | ||
But this just isn't the approach taken by About Time or Running Through Corridors, two of the closest analogues. The policy seems designed for a cataloguing, rather than an analysis. Equally, however, it's not the case that the statements made in [[TARDIS Eruditorum]] are those of opinion. While I may object to some bits of scientific inaccuracy in her treatment of alchemy, for instance, I still acknowledge that the particular flaw exhibited is one we'd expect to see in a literary analysis of ''Doctor Who''. It's very much a scholarly work. So it fits none of the categories that currently exist. | But this just isn't the approach taken by About Time or Running Through Corridors, two of the closest analogues. The policy seems designed for a cataloguing, rather than an analysis. Equally, however, it's not the case that the statements made in [[TARDIS Eruditorum]] are those of opinion. While I may object to some bits of scientific inaccuracy in her treatment of alchemy, for instance, I still acknowledge that the particular flaw exhibited is one we'd expect to see in a literary analysis of ''Doctor Who''. It's very much a scholarly work. So it fits none of the categories that currently exist. | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|The Panopticon/20200610235524-45692830/20200611053155-45692830]]</noinclude> | ||