User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-1432718-20200505204802/@comment-6032121-20200711195846

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-1432718-20200505204802
Revision as of 13:30, 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)

I dunno about "famously", but yes, Devious is invalid. However, the inclusion debate for the thing (Thread:184791) ruled that we can cover "the preview — as opposed to the film itself, (…) but it's not a story". Hence its continued invalidity. If Devious as released on the BBC DVD had been recut and presented as a completed viewing experience, it very well might have been valid, although there might also have been Rule 4 concerns.

That being said, while I agree that what we should discuss is validity, I don't think it counts as overinterpretation to say that there are people in this thread who were arguing that it was no different from individual fans' Comic Creator creations, and, as such, should not be covered on this Wiki either.

Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=User:SOTO/Forum_Archive/Inclusion_debates/@comment-1432718-20200505204802/@comment-6032121-20200711195846&oldid=3500897"