Talk:Tears of the Kotturuh

A source in it's own right

I disagree that this should be considered part of Monstrous Beauty. While it was released in the supplement of the same name which contained the first part of Monstrous Beauty, it isn't part of the body of the comic, rather placed just before the comic actually begins as a block of prose. Therefore, as much as a hate to say it, this should probably be considered a separate, non-narrative, invalid feature. This page can likely remain, albeit as invalid, with the cited source switched to Tears of the Kotturuh. What does anyone else think? Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

That's a good question. I thought about this for a bit and I think the best analogy here is with a novel. Sometimes novels have a poem or quote preceding chapter 1 but inside the front cover. I think this is no different, as the booklet itself is presented as Monstrous Beauty, with the cover saying Monstrous Beauty. The extract precedes "part 1" and the start of the comic, but it's fully encapsulated within the booklet, which otherwise contains nothing but MB and a few advertisements. Now with such quotes or poems, I'd suggest that we'd consider them valid as a prelude to the story and a part of the novel. I'm not sure if that is policy though, and I can't think of any examples off the top of my head to verify. Danochy ☎ 09:09, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Danochy is correct. This is clearly within the realm of introductions and preludes, not some independent work that happens to be packaged in Monstrous Beauty. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 16:04, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

OK, fair enough, That makes sense and it is, in my opinion, the most desirable outcome as it means that this page can remain valid. Bongo50 (aka Bongolium500) ☎ 18:39, 23 September 2021 (UTC)