User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-6032121-20200517150418/@comment-45692830-20200522030239

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | The Panopticon/@comment-6032121-20200517150418
Revision as of 00:04, 28 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)

Alright, being back, since so much has been covered, this might be a bit scattered. Apologies for that in advance.

Borisashton, the point I'm making here, to reiterate about including Doctor Who and the Time War and thus the definition dissolving, is that this is official Doctor Who, so Chibnall was involved. We know Chibnall coordinates with Cook on Lockdown! more generally. So it seems bizarre to me to act like the other short stories wouldn't be considered as well.

As for that list DiSoRiEnTeD1, I am, as is Scrooge. You know this. Stop trying to force through consensus when there isn't any. The better question is "let's discuss more objections to this list". And again, there's no need to rush this process.

DiSoRiEnTeD1, why do we think she's talking about the unproduced 2015 television story? Because she's literally responding to someone asking about an unproduced story, rather than the short story he wrote and posted for the event? As Scrooge pointed out to you. And you can't really say "well she meant the unproduced book", because "produced story" isn't exactly how you phrase things about a book, and, as has been explained to you before, the idea that Harness would get a Target Novelization of an unproduced story is bizarre, and because it's bizarre, we should instead take it as a framing device for his short story.

Borisashton , as for the documentary features, DiSoRiEnTeD1 posted the one full of fanart on here and I've been trying to start a discussion about it on Talk:Doctor Who: Lockdown! but he was resistant. I'll reiterate my reasoning as to why it does not belong.

"Let's discuss the subject of this project that was posted on the Lockdown! youtube channel. It's a scene of Vincent and the Doctor (TV story), when Starry Night is being conceived, that leads into a series of fan art, and then the gallery scene with "pile of good things and bad things". Does this merit inclusion on this wiki and inclusion in this series? In my view, clearly not. This does not itself constitute a story, as there's a scene, a harsh cut to montage, and then a harsh cut to another scene, with thematic coherence but no narrative coherence. Even putting that aside, there's no new narrative material here, just reposting clips of an already existing episode, at best you should make a note on the episode page, and this wiki is not the place for fan art. And finally, not everything this youtube page does is noteworthy, as evidenced by other videos existing that aren't being talked about on this wiki."

As for the idea that the BBC jumped onto the publicity of the Lockdown! event, well, now I get to say it. Speculation. :>

And as for "establishing the hashtag means nothing", we established no such thing, you consistently have failed to respond to the "modes of action" response I pointed out, calling it speculation when it is anything but. This is what we'd expect an adult to understand, let alone an adult in her line of work. The burden of proof is on you to explain why we shouldn't take seriously the idea that she can differentiate between talking about official Doctor Who material and fan material.