User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-45314928-20200606025128/@comment-45692830-20200607042453

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | Inclusion debates‎ | @comment-45314928-20200606025128
Revision as of 15:18, 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)

...And the facts concerning novelizations of the time that we mentioned?

To reiterate for @User:Shambala108's sake, since I agree that the two parties are unlikely to agree, Target Books at this time had not yet started Novelizations for the new series, so it would have been talks three years prior to the first release new series Novelizations, somewhat longer than is likely. Target Books has never once to my knowledge given a Novelization to a story that hasn't actually been made already, and certainly hasn't done so for a New Series story, where it's only focused on "big name stories".

And if we ignore this and focus on the other alternative for Novelizations at the time, Doctor Who photo novelisations, given the subject matter and the tone, indeed, the literacy level of the story, it's even less likely that these would be the novelizations that Harness is referring to.

So quite frankly the thing Harness is suggesting is absurd, which means we can't take it seriously as anything other than a framing device.

Retrieved from "https://tardis.wiki/w/index.php?title=User:SOTO/Forum_Archive/Inclusion_debates/@comment-45314928-20200606025128/@comment-45692830-20200607042453&oldid=3507247"