Bureaucrats, content-moderator, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators, threadmoderator
85,404
edits
Forum:Doctor Who: Worlds in Time: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 82: | Line 82: | ||
So then,how are we to write the pages then? Do we say the same as if there was a page? (See my Zygon quote above, but icnore the link) Or do we icnore the character intirely, claiming it was the Doctor?[[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 17:50, March 23, 2012 (UTC) | So then,how are we to write the pages then? Do we say the same as if there was a page? (See my Zygon quote above, but icnore the link) Or do we icnore the character intirely, claiming it was the Doctor?[[User:OttselSpy25|OS25]] ([[User Talk:OttselSpy25|talk to me, baby.]]) 17:50, March 23, 2012 (UTC) | ||
:You know, I was writing up some proposed guidelines at [[User:CzechOut/Video game policy]], when it struck me that we've long had on the books [[Tardis:Canon policy#What is not considered a valid source, and why?]] | |||
:''Worlds in Time'' is a role-playing game. Sure it's a ''massive, multiplayer online'' RPG, but it's still an RPG. And RPGs were thrown out ''years'' ago. I don't think we can write up ''anything'' about the game in an in-universe way. [[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]], is that how you'd interpret that part of [[T:CAN]]? {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">18:49: Fri 23 Mar 2012 </span> | :''Worlds in Time'' is a role-playing game. Sure it's a ''massive, multiplayer online'' RPG, but it's still an RPG. And RPGs were thrown out ''years'' ago. I don't think we can write up ''anything'' about the game in an in-universe way. [[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]], is that how you'd interpret that part of [[T:CAN]]? {{user:CzechOut/Sig}} <span style="{{User:CzechOut/TimeFormat}}">18:49: Fri 23 Mar 2012 </span> | ||
