User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Reference Desk/@comment-43874324-20200828130153/@comment-6032121-20200828135104

From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
< User:SOTO‎ | Forum Archive‎ | The Reference Desk‎ | @comment-43874324-20200828130153
Revision as of 00:38, 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)

These really, really aren't the reasons. They were maybe floated around a long time ago, but per the last debates, the reasons are:

  • It's technically a charity work, and it's not clear all the monsters were licensed, even if the use of the Doctor and companions certainly was, so it arguably fails Rule 2.
  • Due to a weird legal quirk, no one actually owns the prints of Dimensions in Time: its only legal release was on that one day in 1993 on television. It is thus awkward to even add image files from the story to the site.
  • Comments from John Nathan-Turner state that he viewed it as "outside the Doctor Who canon if there is such a thing", which, even if canon and DWU are different things, kinda sounds like it fails Rule 4.

So it probably fails Rule 4, but most importantly, it fails Rule 2. It was determined that we couldn't justify calling it a licensed Doctor Who story.

It is, in other words, essentially a rare case of a (basically-)unlicensed story which we still have a page about because it's so very important to Who’s history, much like the Audio Visuals.